The Vice Presidency of Dick Cheney: His No Regrets Legacy of Disgrace and Dishonor

The Philadelphia Inquirer has written an editorial on the soon to be former Vice President, Dick Cheney. Vice President Dick Cheney was the experienced Washington pro whose decade’s long familiarity with the corridors of power in our nation’s capital was supposed to serve as the mentor to the newly elected, younger, more charismatic, but less experienced compassionate conservative George Bush. At least that’s how the media touted Cheney’s own recommendation of himself to serve as Bush’s Vice President. George Bush was touted as a bipartisan leader whose governing style would bring Americans together for the greater good of the nation. The oddity of all the hype was that nothing ended up working like it was supposed to. Bush viewed the presidency much as a CEO who headed up a corporation and he ended up delegating many of his powers away to those who served under him. Bush decided and others governed; at least that’s what the American people have come to understand from the masses of books written so far about the Bush Presidency. But instead of offering advice and guidance; Cheney saw an opportunity to take advantage of Bush’s lax leadership style and assumed powers far beyond any other vice president in American history. In fact, Bush and Cheney acted with such indiscretion that they quickly assumed powers that superseded the Constitution. The Bush Administration, under advisement by its own Justice Department and with the support of an acquiescing Congress that was firmly controlled by the Republican Party, made the legal distinction that the Constitution intentionally allowed for a hierarchical, unified executive branch of the federal government that placed the President at the apex of the nation’s government. Bush and Cheney effectively gave themselves complete control over the government and they governed for eight years with those principles in mind. Now, however, the eight years of Bush rule are nearly over and the administration; suffering from pitifully low public opinion ratings and soon to be displaced by a Democratic President and Congress, have launched a “Legacy Project” to smooth over the rough edges of public sentiment by giving the administration their own opportunity to define the first draft of the historic record of the Bush Administration. Bush went to bat first to give an overview that would define the shape and fill the contours of history from Bush’s ‘first hand’ knowledge of what really happened. Later, other administration officials would fill in the details to provide the administration with an exemplary record of accomplishment. Enter Cheney. The Vice President who never bothered with telling the truth in the past, because governing, from Cheney’s point of view, didn’t mean that his take on events needed to line up with the facts. For Cheney, truth was a commodity that he used to construct a reality that always placed the Bush Administration in the most unassailable position possible, thus protecting the administration against criticism. This practice of switch and bait that was played with the truth worked well enough for Bush to gain a second term in office before the frequency of telling lies could no longer outpace the truth. And once the truth about the Bush Administration’s deceptions gained general acceptance among the citizenry, Bush lost the trust of the vast majority of the American people. Now all we are left with is farce: “In an interview just before Christmas with the administration-friendly Fox News, Cheney offered no regrets about the invasion of Iraq, the illegal tapping of American citizens' phones and e-mail by government agents, or the torture of terror suspects. He defended former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and said he "did a good job" - despite the failures in Iraq. In an earlier interview with ABC News, Cheney suggested the administration would have invaded Iraq even without the bogus intelligence claiming Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. That certainly conforms with what former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill said took place at the very first National Security Council meeting 10 days after the inauguration - eight months before the Sept. 11 terror attacks. At the meeting, O'Neill says, the main topic of discussion was regime change in Iraq.” To add justification to going to war with Iraq after the terrible events of September 11th, 2001, the Bush White House forged documents, twisted intelligence reports and spread false claims that Saddam Hussein controlled stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction that he was prepared to unleash on America and its allies. When former ambassador Joseph Wilson “accused the administration of doctoring prewar intelligence on Iraq in a New York Times commentary, it was a top aide to President Bush and Vice President Cheney, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby who outed “the name of Wilson's wife, CIA official Valerie Plame,.. to reporters in 2003. After years of denying the torturing of terrorist suspects; “Cheney said recently that he approved of the administration's use of coercive interrogation tactics, including waterboarding - which is illegal under the Geneva Conventions. But Cheney doesn't think rules apply to the White House. He seemed proud of the broad expansion of executive power that he helped craft and implement... So much for checks and balances, let alone the Constitution.” The time for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney has long passed with just days left in their terms of office. But it is not too late, nor should it be overlooked that once out of office, Bush, Cheney and other suspected lawbreakers in the administration be investigated with all appropriate dispatch and if found.

The Bush Years: It’s Been a Rough Eight Years, No Question

The Philadelphia Inquirer editorial on the Bush years comes up short in its half-hearted attempt to go along with the current White House spin that Bush “is betting history will be kinder to him than any possible present-day assessment of his tenure.” Too many missteps and failures to lead will accompany Bush’s trip through the pages of history yet to be written. As for the numerous assessments of the Bush Administration that have found their way to print; they all share a common theme of disappointment. The Inquirer admits: “Bush departs the White House as one of the least popular presidents in recent times, with some critics confident enough in their historical perspective to nominate him in various "worst" categories.” The editorial writer tries to produce an acceptable reason for such a lackluster record: “Maybe that's because Bush is viewed widely as having stumbled so badly on key policies. By now, it's a familiar litany: Bush led the nation into an unnecessary war in Iraq; eroded core freedoms by snooping on Americans without court approval; squandered global goodwill with the harsh interrogation and open-ended detention of terror suspects; undermined environmental protections; favored the rich with tax cuts; and botched the Hurricane Katrina rescue.” It’s a very formidable task the writer takes on to make so many major blunders sound even slightly less disastrous when judging a president’s tenure in office. After eight years of portraying the tough, decisive commander in chief who was hell bent of doing what he felt was right; without regard to historic consequences because, Bush boasted, I’ll be long gone before the history can accurately judge my administration. Tough sentiments: but recently, a different Bush has emerged, one who is suddenly concerned that his legacy is accurately portrayed. This new, more reflective Bush is actually voicing his hope that historians will write their tombs in accordance with Bush’s own memories of how and why events happened as they did. He’s taken great care to lose unimaginably huge numbers of e-mails that might have given historians valuable insights into what actually occurred over the past eight years. He has also launched a “legacy project” that consists of talking points designed to put the Bushies in the most favorable light possible. The most salient and often quoted talking points boast that Bush "kept the American people safe" from further danger after the September 11th, 2001 World Trade Tower tragedy. Bush also claims to have “revived the post-2001 economy with his tax cuts” as well as maintaining "the honor and dignity of his office." What a crock! The Inquirer editorial admits that: “Only after 2,975 were killed on his watch in the worst-ever terrorist attack did Bush respond with stepped up antiterror measures. The Iraq insurgency - a veritable demonstration project for terrorists - never would have happened had U.S. forces not gone after Saddam Hussein on the basis of faulty claims that the brutal dictator had weapons of mass destruction.” The Inquirer further admits that: “The Bush military intervention in the Gulf, coupled with Abu Ghraib abuses, could make Americans less safe, to the extent that they fuel Islamic fanatics' anger. That's an especially grim future for the already suffering families of the more than 4,800 troops killed and thousands more wounded in the Iraq and Afghanistan fighting.” Bush also took measures that laid the groundwork for the worst economic conditions in decades: “As for priming the economy with hefty tax cuts that benefited the wealthiest, that maneuver heralded the end of balanced budgeting while shifting to the states the burden for many domestic needs. Then there's the current economic crisis: Bush leaves office with nearly two million more Americans looking for jobs as a result of the recession, two million-plus facing mortgage foreclosures, and untold numbers looking at smaller retirement nest eggs.” And as far as “preserving the honor and dignity of the office, that has to be about more than just avoiding the sex scandal that marred Bill Clinton's presidency,” the Inquirer admits. Finally, at the end of their assessment of the Bush record, the Inquirer makes some laudatory remarks: “There should be less debate about other bullet points from the Bush record: his stellar leadership on fighting AIDS in Africa, his smart focus on school achievement through the No Child Left Behind Act, the groundbreaking achievement of a prescription-drug benefit for retirees and other Medicare recipients, and Bush's unsuccessful call for sweeping immigration reform.” Yes, the Inquirer is right: “It's been a rough eight years, no question.” Now it’s up to Obama to mix Bush’s mess.