A long setup, but I have to admit I do like the punchline.

Lecondel sounds like a perfectly cromulent word.

Hmm. I'd always kind of hoped she'd just fade off into obscurity. Unfortunately, this is by far the worst administration EVER and will probably be in future history books as a "This is not what a government should be run like".

Sounds like most "Corporate America" meetings in general. Still amusing.

+1
Much as I'd like to say the administration is putting more emphasis on diplomacy, and give Dr. Rice credit for that, it seems the change is mostly cosmetic - which means that instead of making Rice or the administration look good, all it does is underscore how far out of the loop Colin Powell was when he had the job.

Rice hasn't performed nearly as poorly as I expected her to (back when I withdrew from the State Department hiring process), but just because State is one of the best-run departments in this administration doesn't mean it's run well (as the current Blackwater controversy demonstrates rather amply). And the emphasis on diplomacy is, I suspect, more a matter of our newly-acquired military impotence than reflective of any philosophical shift in the Cabinet.

Still, Rice managed to outmaneuver the Cheney-Rumsfeld Axis better than Powell did, but again, I think that was at least partially because she was more conciliatory. Her strategy seems to have been just to give them enough rope to hang themselves with. If that is the case, it's worked - but what makes for a successful turf war in the White House hasn't made for a successful foreign policy.

I still get the feeling that she and (to a greater extent) Powell got roped into the position by promises that they would have more influence with the administration than they ended up having. Powell essentially left in disgust even being made a fool of at the UN and having his name attached to some of the worst diplomacy in the history of the US. Rice has, as you point out, been more or less completely ineffectual - even letting bride-of-Satan Karen Hughes take the lead on face to face interaction with Middle Eastern governments while Rice did..... who knows what? Maybe I'm just biased because she's an academic with some fairly impressive credentials, but I don't necessarily believe that she's drank the Kool-aid along with the rest of the gang, just that she's either done nothing to stop them or tried and failed.

I'm in agreement with legionnaire. That's the impression I've gotten anyway.

When Hamas attacks civilians as a means to advance their agenda it's called "terrorism." When Israel and the US do it, it's called "foreign policy." The only difference I can see is the scale and the fact that Israel and the US are governments.

The line in the sand between the two definitions is when you get F-16s.

Some rag called the NY Times. Check the link.

I think that's a fair assessment - though one change in the Cabinet that may have helped Rice's turf war was the departure of Rumsfeld. Bob Gates is more adminstrator than policy-maker, and like Rice is a protege of Brent Scowcroft, so he seems to defer to her rather than Cheney.
(My understanding is that Gates is far more popular with the troops, too, but that's off topic.)
Rice may (or may not) have considerable talents, but they're either wasted or hidden in this administration.