Accuracy
Polistra hates mislabeling and mis-description more than anything else in this world. Any step that leads to accurate descriptions and accurate perceptions is a good thing, regardless of its other consequences.
For instance, Democrats taking Congress is a good thing because Congress has been acting in a purely leftist direction. The alleged Republicans, especially George W. Vichy, have been intentionally confusing the voters by doing exactly what Teddy Kennedy would do, then claiming to be 'conservative'. The voters weren't fooled. If Teddy Kennedy is going to be emperor, we need to have his name (or his party's name) on his decisions, so voters can see who stands for what.
And in today's news, Bolton resigning as UN ambassador is a good thing, because it explodes Vichy's peculiar delusion that the UN can be reformed, or that the UN can be used for our purposes. What did Bolton accomplish? He did say some things that need to be said, but in the end he didn't change the UN by even one millimeter. The only thing we should do with the UN is ignore it and de-fund it. Let it rant and rave without our support.
= = = = =
In a war for the survival of civilization, we cannot base our actions and strategies on delusions.= = = = =
Later: The new SecDef Gates seems to appreciate accuracy. His statement that we are "not winning in Iraq" is refreshingly accurate, after all the nonsense we've been hearing from the Vichy Government. I found another of his statements, less publicized, to be even more interesting. He observed that the intelligence community under Negroponte is still functioning poorly; that several heads still need to roll within CIA; and that he (Gates) would work with the President to "help" Negroponte in rolling those bad heads. Since Gates was formerly head of CIA, he speaks with considerable authority on this subject. About damn time.