Why do we have people who are clearly les than experts in charge of very important departments? Do not try to tell me that this is a D or R issue as this happens with both parties:
Here is the latest example:
http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/blogs/politicalticker/2006/12/incoming-house-intelligence-chief.html
2006-12-11 06:21:15 · 11 answers · asked by onlineseeker 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I am not suggesting they need to be experts but at least have a working knowledge on their field. This is consistant with how corporations select officers.
2006-12-11 07:26:39 · update #1
bc both parties tend to pick their friends for these jobs and not care if their really qualified or not
2006-12-11 06:24:03 · answer #1 · answered by TJ815 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The people in charge are leaders, not experts. An expert can't necessarily lead a team. The leader will get experts on the team to give them necessary information.
It's the same way in the corporate world. The head of our Information Technology department has a degree in English, but he's a great leader and has learned a lot about I.T. over the last 5 years.
.
2006-12-11 06:25:12 · answer #2 · answered by MelBright 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's a cost and a benefit of civilian control over government.
The people appointed to these positions are supposed to be outsiders so that no department or agency becomes a fiefdom. The agencies provide the expertise, but the leadership comes from the electorate & the leaders that are appointed by elected officials are supposed to be leaders, not experts.
It's not a perfect system, but there isn't a perfect system out there which we could choose to implement.
2006-12-11 06:34:10 · answer #3 · answered by Dave of the Hill People 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably because Pelosi doesn't know much about intel either. In fact "Congressional intelligence" is an oxymoron.
What REALLY scares me is having a convicted bribe taker ON the committee.
2006-12-11 06:24:52 · answer #4 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i imagine u . s . a . of america desires to commence vote casting libertarian haha... appears like they arise for freedom even as different activities are status up for in spite of their particular pastime communities and lobbyists tell them too. yet truly, i only opt for human beings to somewhat imagine, and make a range about what they imagine is optimum, without being impacts with techniques from those type of communities and promotion. only look a the data and make a choise about what's optimum. in the journey that they imagine about each and each and every difficulty and make up their personal ideas about it, i imagine we can see so a lot more advantageous human beings gravitate in the route of the middle. those activities pushing diverse agendas are tearing this us of a aside... A us of a divided can not stand.
2016-11-30 10:45:41 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Another example of the wonderfully effective American government.
2006-12-11 06:25:24 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Slim pickings?
2006-12-11 06:31:59 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably cus politicians like to be told what they want to hear
2006-12-11 06:31:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You can't find available experts in everything.
2006-12-11 06:23:33 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
All politicians are crooked and don't care about the people.
2006-12-11 07:27:57 · answer #10 · answered by cynical 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋