re: "Curious, Strange, Whatever -- Victoria Nuland is Officially Announced as New State Dept Spokesperson"

Domani Spero at Diplopundit ("Just one obsessive observer, diplomatic watcher, opinionator and noodle newsmaker monitoring the goings on at Foggy Bottom and the worldwide available universe") provided a run-down on issues relating to this appointment.

Money quote(s):

"The Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs is the head of the Bureau of Public Affairs within the United States Department of State. Typically, the Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs is also the official spokesperson of the State Department. The Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs reports to the Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs ("R").

On May 26, 2011, the State Department announced the appointment of Ambassador Victoria Nuland as State Department spokesperson. She takes over PJ Crowley's old gig at the podium but unlike PJ, she will not be dual-hatted as Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs."

Those two jobs probably should be kept separate, if they're going to be done competently and without burning the office-holder to a cinder.

"(C)an you really say "no" if POTUS or VPOTUS asks you to serve in such and such a position? And if you say "yes" does that mean you're also saying goodbye to your career as a professional diplomat when a next administration is sworn in?"

It's nice to see a career officer not being tarred by the faithful execution of their sworn professional duties under a different presidential administration.

As of last month (if not earlier), Amb. Nuland was on the job as spokesperson.

re: "P.J. Crowley: I stand by what I said about Bradley Manning"

Joshua Keating at Wikileaked ("Inside the State Department's Secret Cables") observes life after government employment.

Money quote(s):

"(R)ecently fired State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley is making a transition to media pundit in record time."

It's kind of an obvious next move for former A/S Crowley. It's not like he's microphone shy.

"Crowley starts by arguing that Manning is" rightly facing prosecution" and "if convicted, should spend a long, long time in prison." But, perhaps since he's already been fired for them, doesn't walk back his previous comments at all"

&

"(I)f your own previously reliable spokesman is calling a government policy "stupid" in public, you probably have a policy in need of urgent review."

re: "Report: State Department Spokesman PJ Crowley Resigns"

Drew M. at Ace of Spades HQ notes a personnel change at the State Department.

Quote(s):

"Normally not that big of a deal but this guy is a real tool, even by the low standards one generally has for professional mouthpieces and people who work at the State Department."

Now, that's just mean. Like shooting a man's suit.

"Crowley's comments got lost in the bigger news of Libya and then Japan but his fate was pretty well sealed on Friday when Obama was asked about them and Manning's treatment in general."

"(P)utting the President in that spot is not a career enhancing move."

Drew's dislike of Crowley goes back to 2009, as he explains:

"If you follow the link, you'll see that I was not amused at the use of the word "debate" to describe the slaughter of peaceful protesters. My language was a tad bit harsh and somewhat unprofessional but I was infuriated at the time. In retrospect if I could do it over again...I"d use even harsher language.

Not that the next mouthpiece will be better or the policy they will be spinning for will be any more coherent but I'm happy to see this guy go."

A/S Crowley resigns

As my esteemed colleagues at The Skeptical Bureaucrat, Life After Jerusalem, and Diplopundit have noted, Philip J. Crowley, the Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs (and the Department of State's spokesman), has resigned as a result of some remarks he made recently at what was, I think, supposed to be an off-the-record venue.

That'll happen.

Just the other day, I mentioned how "A/S Crowley (Colonel, U.S. Air Force Retired) has an unenviable job."

And that "I wouldn't take it at gunpoint. Well, not that anyone's likely to ever offer me any job anywhere near the assistant secretary level, but he has to walk a very fine line between needing to put lipstick (our lipstick) on a pig (our pig) and uttering any actual untruths.

Diplomacy can be like that."

Make of my remarks what you will.

(And I can confirm that no one has offered me the job.)

Now, if they were looking for a spokes-model....

re: "PJ’s Poor Judgment"

Greg Gutfeld at Big Hollywood is experiencing an increasingly common symptom of distust.

Money quote(s):

"(W)hen I hear of an act of terror, an internal clock starts clicking.

I wonder, how long before we find out the suspect is a radical Islamist.

And then, how long before that affiliation is rejected as vital to the crime.

Witness the murderous acts against our military in Frankfurt: it was only a matter of hours before the killer’s links to radical Islam were exposed.

And it was only a few hours later, that we saw an Administration official dismiss that notion."

A/S Crowley (Colonel, U.S. Air Force Retired) has an unenviable job. I wouldn't take it at gunpoint. Well, not that anyone's likely to ever offer me any job anywhere near the assistant secretary level, but he has to walk a very fine line between needing to put lipstick (our lipstick) on a pig (our pig) and uttering any actual untruths.

Diplomacy can be like that.

Remember that we don't want the GWOT to devolve into an actual civilization-level all-out total war between the West and Islam. That's what UBL and Al-Qaeda would like.

(After all, an ideology designed to thrive in the 7th century might be just the thing to dominate the rubble remaining after such a conflict.)

Pres. Bush (43) got that (and several other big things) right.

"(A) killer can shout Allahu Akbar – just like at Ft. Hood – and the Administration still won’t “commit.” They only see a man with no affiliation–because decades of ingrained political correctness have taught them to be fearful of pointing out that affiliation. It’s bigotry, after all.

Look, making no mention of terror won’t make terror go away."

This is one of our American cultural blindspots, and it's something we can't afford to persist as a mental default position. At this point, short of firing squads the most effective remedy for this sort of knee-jerk political correctness is to ridicule it. Hold it up to the light and laugh at it; once enough comedians are poking fun at it and enough Americans realize what a laugh-line it is, it's bound to change.

WT - Grassley calls for more visa screeners. GOP senator writes to Clinton.

From my archive of press clippings:

Washington Times

Grassley calls for more visa screeners


GOP senator writes to Clinton


By Nicholas Kralev

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

A senior Republican senator urged Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Monday to drastically increase the number of specialized units at U.S. embassies around the world that screen visa applicants for security concerns, including ties to terrorists or other criminal groups.

Read the whole article here.

Snippet(s):

"In a letter to Mrs. Clinton, Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa decried the slow pace of setting up visa-security units — only at 14 of more than 220 U.S. missions abroad so far - and blamed the State Department for putting "roadblocks" to efforts by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to boost its presence at several consulates."

"Congress directed DHS when it was established in 2002 to create the units in question to help State Department consular officers abroad in screening visa applicants."

"After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the U.S., there were calls in Congress for the State Department to be stripped of its visa-issuing responsibilities, but the secretary of state at the time, Colin L. Powell, managed to keep that function in his agency. The visa-security units were created as a compromise."

"State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley confirmed Monday that there are 14 visa-security units in 12 countries, including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, Egypt and Venezuela, but he rejected Mr. Grassley's accusations."

&


continued

"While some critics blame the State Department, which has full authority to cancel visas without permission from other agencies, others say the intelligence community should have recommended revocation based on information it had — but the State Department did not."