Apart from his being on the Baker Commission, and having advance notice of what their report is likely to say, why, people are wondering, appoint a CIA type, a former spookmaster, as the WOT enters a new phase? Personally, I think the question almost answers itself. But for reporters for whom everything is political, that may be a puzzler, I guess.

I was rather dismayed by the choice, but I’m a sufferer of Bush the First derangement syndrome. Ever since “Read My Lips” and his signing that tax increase dooming the economy to recession and his chances of re-election…which led to CLINTON, fer crap’s sake!…nothing touching him pleases me. And BAKER…don’t get me started.
I hope GWB is making a good choice, but I just don’t know.
Heck, he just recently became “Robert” Gates. Up to just recently he was known as “Bobby” Gates. Using the diminutive form of his name made him seem even less threatening, I suppose, while he was running the CIA. And heck, after being president of Texas A&M he won’t even break a sweat knocking over Iran and North Korea in 2007. The real question is what he’ll be doing during 2008 – conquering Mars or turning China into a multiparty democracy?
If you read Novak’s article you’ll get the impression that Gates might not be qualified, and Bush may prefer it that way. It’s quite obvious to me that Bush only wants someone who will push forward with his personal agenda… and Gates may just be the perfect guy for the job.
http://www.bobgates.net/index.php/2006/11/09/will-lack-of-experience-be-a-problem/