Dayton v. Kennedy

Returning Senator Mark Dayton to the Ranks of the Idle Rich in 2006


Lest We Forget

For all the talk about Kennedy, Klobuchar, Gutknecht, Ciresi, Grams or anyone else, remember we still have 625 more days with Senator Mark Dayton (and that’s just until November 7th).

Dayton has weighed in recently on newly appointed National Intelligence Director John Negroponte, releasing the following statement:

“I voted against Ambassador Negroponte’s previous nomination because of his former public record. I will consider this nomination based upon that record, which now includes his service as Ambassador to Iraq, and his qualifications for this new position, which is critically important to our national security. I will not decide whether or not to support his nomination, until I have completed that review.”

So Dayton thought Negroponte’s record was insufficient, ill qualified, or for whatever reason, not appropriate to be the Ambassador to Iraq. Now with Negroponte’s further promotion since his days at the United Nations, Dayton has said he will re-review the record that he felt disqualified Negroponte for such advancement but will not automatically make the same conclusion.


Maybe my priorities are screwed up, but I think Director of National Intelligence is a little more important a position than Ambassador to any country. If Dayton feels Negroponte isn’t qualified to be either, fine (although why being the Ambassador to the UN makes one unqualified to repeat the role in Iraq I don’t understand). But then why is Dayton hedging on his vote? ”I will not decide whether or not to support his nomination, until I have completed that review.” He admits he reviewed Negroponte before and found him wanting. Why is a second review necessary? Is Dayton suggesting that Negroponte’s work in Iraq impressed him enough to warrant a second look? Or is Dayton simply playing games with Negroponte’s nomination, pretending to be giving him a fair personal review?

--Posted by First Ringer


Post a Comment

<< Home