Our Enemies Closer: More On Pelosi

Following up on Nancy Pelosi: Nixguy wants to know what I'm smoking, and lays out some very clear criteria for determining whether or not her visit to Syria is productive. And every one of his objectives is on the mark - supporting a free Lebanon, halting the state sponsored terror, leaving Israel alone - these are the primary interests of the United States before anything else.

But I still cannot see how Nancy Pelosi is doing anything to endanger these objectives. And, to be honest, I'm not entirely clear on how the Bush policy of ignoring and isolating Syria is helping achieve these goals either. Can somebody enlighten me on any great successes that have been achieved in these areas by the Bush policy of closing down diplomatic channels? The mere act of communicating does not signal a tolerance for Syria's categorically unacceptable behavior.

Yes, Pelosi's visit makes the Bush doctrine look shoddy, small-minded, and isolationist - and that's not an entirely fair picture. But they (the Bush team) have opened themselves up to this kind of political move from the Democratic party by allowing our diplomatic relations to deteriorate. We're no longer speaking softly and carrying a big stick. The Bush doctrine has been half wrong: Avoid speaking entirely ... and carry a big stick.

And yes, culture does matter. To preserve ours - the liberal West, founded on liberty, democracy, free markets and individualism - we need to engage theirs very forcefully, in dialogue. As Americans we place a premium value on products and concrete objectives (the goals as articulated by Nixguy) - but in that region of the world, relationships are more important. You might have tea many times before trading camels - and if they prefer you to wear a scarf in their tent, by all means, observe the custom.

It should have been Condoleezza.