Why the IC goes PC
Why has the intelligence community gone politically correct? Because it’s a huge bureaucratic organization that’s fighting for relevance as determined by mission, manpower, and money.
Who provides the missions, manpower, and money?
Politicos, to include progressive politicos. The politicos of the left view the military, the schools, and anything “they” (via the taxpayer and/or borrowing) fund, to include the intelligence community as their own experiment in liberal social engineering:
For the first time in its history, the Central Intelligence Agency is actively seeking recruits from a new demographic – the lesbian, gay, bi-sexual and transgender community.
There’s the answer to the Petraeus meltdown: he should have said he was bi-sexual in his mea culpa (or given the beating he suffered anyway, at least make Obama fire him for effectively doing what Bill Clinton was doing. That would have put Barry in a spot…).
But what about the effectiveness of the intelligence community’s mission (and let’s just ignore its efficiency)? Based on the record, it isn’t good. Technical surveillance and contractor created tools to lash things together (and then using them to kill bad guys) may be awe-inducing, but what about the longer term analysis? Who in the IC saw the “Arab Spring” coming? While I’m sure some did, I’d also bet their analysis never reached the “senior leader” level.
There, the issue is one of filtering. My hypothesis is that our nation’s intelligence products are filtered, dumbed-down (or turned into a crisis, if that’s the desired outcome), and/or politicized by our senior leaders and “public servants” until it’s no longer recognizable as the truth. And for what it’s worth, the intelligence community doesn’t really have all that sterling a record when it comes to (for example) the revolution in Iran, the collapse of the Soviet empire, 9/11, found WMD in Iraq, etc.
In the meantime, others—domestic U.S. law enforcement (including the FBI and Homeland Security)—want to read all your texts, e-mails, and anything you’ve perused on the internet.
Where is the outrage? There is none, because it seems by mutual agreement, senior leaders in the intelligence community and their corresponding politicos have decided it would be better to support one another, regardless of the detrimental effect on national security, let alone the truth.
Why? Because otherwise, people’s careers might get off track or the budget might be cut. Has the IC (some, much, almost all?) become the fabled self-licking ice cream cone?