The Fine Paw of Karl Rove?

Bush has just named Gen. Michael Hayden to be head of the CIA. Several Congressmen, Democratic and Republican, have registered their unease with the idea of a military man heading a civilian agency. The Democrats can be expected to fight it, and are practically salivating at the chance to get themselves and Hayden in front of TV cameras at his confirmation hearings. They will be able to grill him in public on his role in the warrentless wiretapping program.

I don't think that is a good idea. If I were the Democrats I would just say nothing and vote against him, or not. Hayden was not named without careful consideration by Rove and others of the political fallout. It is a trap. Go after Hayden, get the headlines, the TV coverage, and once again Democrats bring up the issue of national security in a way that the White House can picture as unpatriotic. They want to handle our enemies with kid gloves! They're soft on security! Etc, etc, etc.

Now this may be nonsense (unfortunately it isn't, at least not entirely), but that isn't the point. The hearings will burn up air time, hog headlines and newsprint, and divert attention from the issues of the fall election, like how bad this Republican White House really is. The resulting fog will be enough for the Bush administration and the Republican party to hide behind. The motor to this will be two things the Bushies can depend on from the Democrats: hatred for whatever Bush proposes, and their own egos. As long as national security is the topic, Democratic opposition to the proposed CIA head for any reason other than sheer incompetence will play to the Bushies.

It is a work of genius.

By the way, have you ever noticed that genius is a thoroughly amoral attribute?