Porter Goss: A Closer Look

The New York Times looks at the political and intelligence ramifications of nominating Porter Goss. Republicans are already trying to paint any Democrats who oppose Porter as endangering national security; Democrats are already backing off. It's pretty simple: at the heart of the C.I.A.'s problem seems to have been a politicization of intelligence (Cheney stepping in and demanding he get unfiltered data; Bush making a decision to invade and then demanding the intelligence be cut to fit; Tenet telling Bush what he wanted to hear rather than asking the hard questions; the C.I.A. giving briefings to Congress that avoided grey areas and presented faulty or even contrary evidence in black and white.) The head of the C.I.A. is historically non-partisan (as opposed to the Attorney General, which often is). Bush chose a nominee that is extremely partisan that he knew top Democrats objected to. But instead of coming out swinging and saying Bush is endangering national security by choosing a nominee he knows doesn't have broad bipartisan support, they are already heading for cover.