Times: Put Darth Cheney Out To Pasture

The 11/8/05 editorial from the New York Times (cut and pasted below) is a model of objectivity. The Times calls for Bush to send Cheney on a three-year-long wild goose chase while Bush asserts his leadership, shows he's in control and crafts better policy.

Okay, do we laugh now or later?

In fairness, The Times is a conservative, rational publication that bases its opinions on facts in order to maintain its stature and credibility. It does not print opinions based on gut feelings.

I, however, can say what I like. I'm not bound by reputation. And my gut has told me this for a long time:

Bush isn't a leader and he's not in control. He wouldn't know good policy if God appeared to him and pointed it out. Anti-Christs Cheney and Rove tell him what to do, get his agreement on things they want to further their agendas and tell him - especially Rove tells him - how to present it to the American people.

Have you ever listened to Bush and gotten the feeling he doesn't quite understand what he's saying? That he doesn't quite grasp his own reasoning?

It's because he's the puppet, the rich boy along for the ride as a figurehead to play golf, fly in that big ol' jet and act important. He doesn't understand the ramifications of anything he's done or is doing.

I admire the Times. Usually they get it right. But just as Bush backed down on Rove and Libby, Bush is not about to tell the real leader of this nation - Darth Cheney - to spend his time attending funerals and leave policy formulation to him (Bush). If Bush did, he'd be totally at sea, because Bush is not a leader.

If someone doesn't tell Bush what to do, he doesn't know what to do. We saw that when he continued reading to gradeschoolers after he was informed of the attacks on New York City. He waited until someone came and got him and told him what he was supposed to do.

Bush has dropped the ball more times than the worst fielder. He's caused more suffering for more people than any President since Truman dropped the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

And, quite frankly, since we were looking at a potential minimum of another 250,000 dead GI's in trying to take over Japan in hand-to-hand combat (because Japan had no intention of surrendering, but fighting to the death of every citizen) Truman's actions were far more justifiable. Also, don't forget a key fact. Unlike the war in Iraq, we didn't start the war with Japan. Japan did.

Bush has, therefore, caused more STUPIDLY unnecessary suffering and death. And not just abroad in Iraq - where he's made that country into a nightmare - but here at home.

Just look at all the cuts to the poor. He's anti-union and seems in favor of killing the Middle class. Witness the increased bankrupcies. Look at the nightmare he's made of the schools, enacting legislation whose real agenda is to kill our public schools. Meanwhile teaching time is diverted to "test them to death" time.

Then look at all the bad policy decisions in regard to gutting FEMA and failing to prepare levees and coastlines for the predicted Category Hurricane that every expert said would destroy New Orleans whenever it struck.

The only explanations for the latter example in terms of all he's done and not done - other than stupidity, incompetence and callousness - is that there really has been a silent conspiracy in which certain powers were hoping for that "big one" to clear out all the slums and public housing.

So much of the suffering in this country and abroad that has occurred never had to happen. It's not so much God made, as Bush et al made.

So my prediction is we're looking at three more years of hell and there's no getting around it. Our country will continue spiraling further down the tubes while Bush/Cheney et al fight for tax cuts for the rich and torture for those detained.

Rome will burn while Nero fiddles and the world waits, straining at the bit, for a day in November 2008 when this fool and his callous and dangerous entourage will be turned out of office.

But you decide. Below is the Times editorial.

By the way, I still predict that, at the end of his term, Bush will pardon Libby and anyone else in his administration that's convicted of wrong doing. Look for him to pardon DeLay and Abramoff too, should either see jail time.

---

November 8, 2005
Editorial
President Bush's Walkabout
After President Bush's disastrous visit to Latin America, it's unnerving to realize that his presidency still has more than three years to run. An administration with no agenda and no competence would be hard enough to live with on the domestic front. But the rest of the world simply can't afford an American government this bad for that long.

In Argentina, Mr. Bush, who prides himself on his ability to relate to world leaders face to face, could barely summon the energy to chat with the 33 other leaders there, almost all of whom would be considered friendly to the United States under normal circumstances. He and his delegation failed to get even a minimally face-saving outcome at the collapsed trade talks and allowed a loudmouthed opportunist like the president of Venezuela to steal the show.

It's amazing to remember that when Mr. Bush first ran for president, he bragged about his understanding of Latin America, his ability to speak Spanish and his friendship with Mexico. But he also made fun of Al Gore for believing that nation-building was a job for the United States military.

The White House is in an uproar over the future of Karl Rove, the president's political adviser, and spinning off rumors that some top cabinet members may be asked to walk the plank. Mr. Bush could certainly afford to replace some of his top advisers. But the central problem is not Karl Rove or Treasury Secretary John Snow or even Donald Rumsfeld, the defense secretary. It is President Bush himself.

Second terms may be difficult, but the chief executive still has the power to shape what happens. Ronald Reagan managed to turn his messy second term around and deliver - in great part through his own powers of leadership - a historic series of agreements with Mikhail Gorbachev that led to the peaceful dismantling of the Soviet empire. Mr. Bush has never demonstrated the capacity for such a comeback. Nevertheless, every American has a stake in hoping that he can surprise us.

The place to begin is with Dick Cheney, the dark force behind many of the administration's most disastrous policies, like the Iraq invasion and the stubborn resistance to energy conservation. Right now, the vice president is devoting himself to beating back Congressional legislation that would prohibit the torture of prisoners. This is truly a remarkable set of priorities: his former chief aide was indicted, Mr. Cheney's back is against the wall, and he's declared war on the Geneva Conventions.

Mr. Bush cannot fire Mr. Cheney, but he could do what other presidents have done to vice presidents: keep him too busy attending funerals and acting as the chairman of studies to do more harm. Mr. Bush would still have to turn his administration around, but it would at least send a signal to the nation and the world that he was in charge, and the next three years might not be as dreadful as they threaten to be right now.



Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company