Yes, I think this is true.

Having varied perspectives into things is always a good thing, so long as one has the good judgement to recognize the good ideas and reject the bad ideas. Sometimes, it takes someone who disagrees with you on many things to spot the hole in your theory.

And look at what America got when it was staffed with nothing but yes-men. Later historians will refer to it as "Beating around the Bush".

Diversity, good. Clones, bad.

I agree darkeforce. Being surrounded by nothing but 'yes' men may allow you to get what YOU want done, usually only to the satisfaction of a handful of people. But having opposition refines your ideas to meet the requirements of a much broader range of people.

I'm not sure if the Bush administration was staffed with Yes-men or if Bush is Cheney's yes-man. Anyway, I like the idea of having a staff of people who have different points of view. Obama promised to include everyone - I just see this as part of his goal to bring us all together.

Me, too - and I've been realizing how very elemental to progressive thought that is, and how anathema to right-wing conservatism. I suspect the problem wasn't so much that Bush was non-intellectual, but that the right wing see themselves as virtuous and others as evil. Naturally, diversity would be an enemy. And words we think of as useful - like "compromise" - they use as labels for the degraders of their supposedly Christian nation's purity.