Comments on: The Threat of Bipartisanship for the Sake of Bipartisanship http://blog.psaonline.org/2006/05/04/the-threat-of-bipartisanship-for-the-sake-of-bipartisanship/ Wed, 08 Feb 2012 08:45:45 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: anal under age girl force ass rape video http://blog.psaonline.org/2006/05/04/the-threat-of-bipartisanship-for-the-sake-of-bipartisanship/comment-page-1/#comment-2514490 anal under age girl force ass rape video Fri, 30 Dec 2011 02:53:22 +0000 http://blog.psaonline.org/?p=26#comment-2514490 <strong>ass rape videos...</strong> bdsm rape pics... ass rape videos…

bdsm rape pics…

]]> By: SteveinVT http://blog.psaonline.org/2006/05/04/the-threat-of-bipartisanship-for-the-sake-of-bipartisanship/comment-page-1/#comment-13 SteveinVT Sat, 06 May 2006 12:09:31 +0000 http://blog.psaonline.org/?p=26#comment-13 As someone who has worked to implement US foreign policy for more than a decade, I am intrigued by the premise of this new blog. There most definitely needs to be a space where common ground among dems and reps can be explored. Perhaps this blog will address this need. While I appreciate the need for bipartisanship in foreign policy, I would take exception with the statement that, "With bipartisanship – I mean true bipartisanship – our country has an unlimited, unfiltered source of ideas from which to choose the best and brightest." I think we need to cautious about such sweeping statements. The statement suggests that by removing the lens of partisanship we can somehow become more objective about policy decision-making and that great ideas will stand on their own merits. It suggests the bi-partisanship is the equivalient of objectivity, which it is not because there are a variety of filters still in place. Filters include bureaucracy/institutions and Beltway conventional wisdom (DC is a case-study in herd behavior) . Both of these filters are at least as powerful filters as partisanship. As someone who has worked to implement US foreign policy for more than a decade, I am intrigued by the premise of this new blog. There most definitely needs to be a space where common ground among dems and reps can be explored. Perhaps this blog will address this need.

While I appreciate the need for bipartisanship in foreign policy, I would take exception with the statement that, “With bipartisanship – I mean true bipartisanship – our country has an unlimited, unfiltered source of ideas from which to choose the best and brightest.”

I think we need to cautious about such sweeping statements. The statement suggests that by removing the lens of partisanship we can somehow become more objective about policy decision-making and that great ideas will stand on their own merits. It suggests the bi-partisanship is the equivalient of objectivity, which it is not because there are a variety of filters still in place. Filters include bureaucracy/institutions and Beltway conventional wisdom (DC is a case-study in herd behavior) . Both of these filters are at least as powerful filters as partisanship.

]]> By: Mike http://blog.psaonline.org/2006/05/04/the-threat-of-bipartisanship-for-the-sake-of-bipartisanship/comment-page-1/#comment-9 Mike Fri, 05 May 2006 03:51:38 +0000 http://blog.psaonline.org/?p=26#comment-9 This fails to convince me. It fails to take fully into account the most irrational factor of all and that is human nature. Human nature is fallen and "Houston has a problem" precisely when we fail to see that multinational corporations and government both are equally susceptible and vulnerable to the irrational persuasions of their participants. That the blueprint doesn't take this into account only proves that in any large organization, practical experience trumps rational theory every time. As an airport security official myself, Congress was right to block the ports deal because there are vulnerabilities in security that are poorly covered in that area and intuition of apprehension in that area can and indeed may have saved thousands of lives. This fails to convince me. It fails to take fully into account the most irrational factor of all and that is
human nature. Human nature is fallen and “Houston has a problem” precisely when we fail to see that multinational corporations and government both are equally susceptible and vulnerable to the irrational persuasions of their participants. That the blueprint doesn’t take this into account only proves that in any large organization, practical experience trumps rational theory every time. As an airport security official myself, Congress was right to block the ports deal because there are vulnerabilities in security that are poorly covered in that area and intuition of apprehension in that area can and indeed may have saved thousands of lives.

]]> By: Daniel W. Drezner http://blog.psaonline.org/2006/05/04/the-threat-of-bipartisanship-for-the-sake-of-bipartisanship/comment-page-1/#comment-7 Daniel W. Drezner Thu, 04 May 2006 18:39:27 +0000 http://blog.psaonline.org/?p=26#comment-7 <strong>New bipartisan foreign policy blog</strong> I'm very, very, very close to finishing some time-consuming copyediting, so posting will be light in the next 24 hours. In the meantime, go check out the Partnership for a Secure America's new foreign policy blog, Across the Aisle. I... New bipartisan foreign policy blog

I’m very, very, very close to finishing some time-consuming copyediting, so posting will be light in the next 24 hours. In the meantime, go check out the Partnership for a Secure America’s new foreign policy blog, Across the Aisle. I…

]]>