Listening to George Tenet's self-justifying tirade on last night on CBS 60 Minutes was even more evidence for a thesis I've found forming in my mind over the past six months, in the course of reading well over a dozen books on post-WWII U.S. foreign policy: It's time to shut down the CIA.

Our larger culture tells us that "facts are facts."  Joe Friday asks for "Just the facts, Ma'am."  Many current Democrats pride themselves on belonging to the "reality-based community," which in turn rests on their presumably keener recognition of "facts."  When it comes to Iraq, we're told, solutions have to turn on "the facts on the ground."  We're told that "facts are stubborn things," that they exist in the real world and don't bend to mere will or belief.

The Rockridge Institute offers an ongoing, in-depth discussion of progressive values.  Here is the most recent round of that discussion, an exploration of how progressives must reclaim key words and phrases, so that we can talk openly about our values.

This is the third essay in a series: Condemned to Repeat It: Myths and Lessons of the 20th Century.  The previous essays addressed Die Dolchstoßlegende and the decisions that led to Stalingrad.  The series is based on George Santayana's axiom:

Those who do not study history are condemned to repeat it.

December 7, 1941.

September 11, 2001.

There is a lot of noise surrounding the recent firings of eight U.S. Attorneys (USAs).

On the right, we're told again and again that USAs are presidential appointments and thus their firings are a presidential prerogative.  The right says there is no underlying crime and thus no reason for an investigation.  They argue, to quote Gertrude Stein, "There is no there there."

Thank y'all for your support this past week.

At this point you're probably wondering what you did.  You were just ... you ... here ... conversing.  It helped a lot.

As it turns out, I had a raging double ear infection.  I won't go into the icky details, but it was bad enough that I didn't sleep for four nights, even after I'd seen the doctor.  So I spent a lot of time just trying to distract myself, to think about anything except the firecrackers exploding in my ears every time I yawned, chewed, swallowed, or turned my head.

In his latest article in the New Yorker, veteran reporter Seymour Hersch explores the complex geopolitical calculus in the Middle East.  The article is long and deep, and I had to read it twice to follow Hersch's underlying narrative.  That narrative might be summarized as:  the Bush Administration's new strategy in the Middle East is to use Iran, and the Shi'a, as a convenient foil.  If true, this marks the advent of a third phase in the U.S.

[Several months ago I began what was to be a series of essays about myths and lessons of 20th Century history, based on George Santayana's axiom that "Those who do not study history are condemned to repeat it."  I've neglected it but here is Part II.]

I've written at some length about the need for a coherent, long-term vision of the United States and her role in the world.  And I do believe that is essential.  However, we must always remember that it is all too easy for "long-term vision" to become "tunnel vision," and thus to solve one set of problems by creating others.

A repeated meme of the GOP House members, echoing a frequent Bush theme, has been that "we're fighting the terrorists in Iraq so we don't have to fight them here."  As a GOP memo outlined, their strategy is to avoid discussing whether any our objectives in Iraq are attainable.  They know they will lose, because every informed source including the recent NIE says those obje