Dual Presidency

A thought I have more and more each day that has absolutely no chance of happening, but what the hell....

We should have two presidencies: one foreign policy and one domestic.

First off there is the fact that the executive branch has aggregated to itself (as Noah Feldman has persuasively shown) so much power especially since WWII: the entire National Security, Intelligence, and Military Industrial apparti, not to mention since Bush the entire new wing of judicial and extra-judicial mechanisms.

The Presidency has gone from being a domestic executor to a full-time global position of influence. As such it is by definition (more than) a full time gig. Which leaves out entirely the US domestic sphere. Clinton stayed at home and the economics did mostly well, but his foreign policy (minus Yugoslavia) left something to be desired I would say. Bush has almost totally abandoned US domestic policy for foreign adventurism.

Nobody is smart enough to handle both of these simultaneously. Not at the level they deserve. That is why I think there should be a dual presidency. Of course in practice there are elements where the two overlap, so my hypothetical would require some means whereby to adjudicate those areas.

I've been very displeased with the Democratic sway towards withdrawal. I tend to favor the Biden-Gelb plan of decentralized soft-partition. I think it is heading that way no matter what. Where some Dems, like Jim Webb, are correctly pounding the Republicans is on the lack of a diplomatic surge to equal the military one. (Webb for VP?--suggested to me by my buddy, bold prediction. I like it.)

The Saudis are filling in the vacuum, which is going to cause more violence in the short term but maybe in the long term is a good thing. The Iranian briefing yesterday, as one commentator said, made Colin Powell's UN Speech look like it was accurate.

If this war widens to Iran, as per Vladimir Putin's statement this week, Russia (and likely China) will be off the grid for a generation to buy in to a world governance (military and political) rule set model. And what has been gained?

The talk is to refer to "moderate" Arab regimes. There is nothing moderate about Saudi Arabia or Egypt. Get real. These moderates versus the evil radical Syrians and Iranians. Get a f'in grip. They are all hardcore it is just that Iran's will fall apart from within in a decade if we just let them have their moment of adventurism---Bush ought to know about how quickly empires end--how southern Shia Iraq will play Poland to Iran's Soviet Russia. Get them in the WTO, send them McDonald's fast and watch the implosion. 70% of the population under 30, major brain drain, women leaving not having children and becoming hookers throughout the Middle East---sounds like a defunct political order ready for a fall.

Minus of course a rallying point of attack.

Moderate my ass.