Bush, Cheney did things ‘their way’
(AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)
History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it.
— Winston Churchill
In fact, he wrote 74 books. George W. Bush and Dick Cheney may wind up writing a couple themselves, but the president and the vice president have approval ratings in the high 20s, and neither is known for Churchhillian prose, much less candor and publishers aren’t lining up.
Still, they’ve been busy in recent days trying to put the best spin possible on the last eight years in a series of exit interviews and speeches. Think of Frank Sinatra singing “My Way”: It always was about protecting and promoting freedom, and while mistakes might have been made, if they had it to do over again, they would.
They see an America that has been free of terrorist attacks since 9/11, an America that leads a 90-nation coalition against terrorism, a nation protected by a swifter, more tech-savvy military. They achieved this by restoring the rightful constitutional prerogatives of the president, by cutting taxes to reinvigorate an economy brought to its knees by two wars against terrorists, an economy that has buckled, albeit temporarily, under the strain of trying to provide freedom for too many people at home and abroad.
In the charitable spirit of the season, we will say only that that’s one way to look at it.
“Any regrets?” ABC’s Charles Gibson asked Mr. Bush.
“I don’t know — the biggest regret of all the presidency has to have been the intelligence failure in Iraq. . . . And, you know, that’s not a do-over, but I wish the intelligence had been different, I guess.”
Not a word there about tailoring intelligence to order within the Pentagon. Not a word about ignoring Richard Clarke, the White House anti-terorrism adviser, when he said — three times — that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
Those pesky intelligence problems have been addressed, Mr. Bush told an audience at the Army War College on Dec. 17. “We’ll leave behind a revamped intelligence community that has new tools for staying one step ahead of our enemies,” he said, citing programs to “interrogate key terrorist leaders” and “monitor terrorist communications around the world.”
Plus, the president said, the U.S. military is now “more mobile and more agile, and better positioned now to deploy to trouble spots around the world.”
Not a word about illegal eavesdropping, torture, Guantanamo, denial of habeas corpus or the fact that the men and materiel of the newly-mobile military are so burned out from six years of fighting in
Afghanistan and Iraq that it will take years to bring them back to full combat readiness.
Nothing there about having ceded the moral high ground, the loss of U.S. prestige overseas or the fact that one of our key allies — Pakistan — may be impeding the fight against al-Qaida and the still-fruitless search for Osama bin Laden.
Appropriately, it was Mr. Cheney who identified the administration’s signal achievement. In an interview with Chris Wallace on (of course) Fox News last Sunday, Mr. Cheney said, “We have exercised, I think, the legitimate authority of the president under Article 2 of the Constitution as commander in chief in order to put in place policies and programs that have successfully defended the nation.”
This means “you’re fully justified in setting up a terror surveillance program” and installing “a robust interrogation program with respect to high-value detainees.”
You can call it “torture”; they call it a “robust interrogation program.” You can call it “warrantless eavesdropping”; they call it “terrorist surveillance.”
The question is what history will call it.
Mr. Bush is fond of the Harry Truman precedent: a president who was deeply unpopular when he left office, but whose reputation has been burnished by history. As Mr. Bush put it, characteristically, in an interview with a reporter for the German newspaper Bild in May 2006: “You never know what your history is going to be until long after you’re gone.”
“What a smorgasboard of douchbags all around.”
Is there no end to this unimaginative ax grinding?
===
Interesting that you conveniently IGNORED all the items that were listed before that final comment…how typical to selectively choose what you put forth–do you by chance work for Fox News as a “fact checker?”
LMAO
Only three weeks left for you guys to find some new material that is if the PD is still in business.
Well that would certainly leave a VOID in your sad little life, wouldn’t it? You routinely troll these message boards and drop your little “nuggets of wisdom” for all of us to ooh and aaah over. If this went away, you might actually be forced to DO something with your spare time…other than waste it defending the indefensible and championing buffoons like Dick and Dubya.
Oh wait! You wouldn’t be talking about the same Richard Clarke who failed to get bin Laden during the Clinton Administration which led to 9-11 which gave Cheney an excuse to take out Saddam and liberate its people would you?
http://www.e-thepeople.org/article/30736/view?viewtype
r u kidding me - unlike the dopey kool-aid drinkers on the PD editorial board, I opposed the invasion of Iraq BEFORE we went in. I knew it was a bottomless hell hole then as it is an ungrateful hell hole now. I truly believe that all the Democrats who supported the Iraq war secretly knew this would end up destroying Bush and America in the end and would usher in a Democrat Congress as the media attacked Bush/Cheney for invading Iraq - even though they always fail to mention that we thankfully took out Saddam and his two gross sons and liberated millions of ungrateful Iraqis who have used the occasion to kill one another and show us to be fools.
Looks as though Eddie R. sent word out to all the angry KosKiddies… anything to puff up the web page clicks.
Good business plan. Have another donut.
===
> In short, they will surely be viewed as one of the worst administrations
> in history-and their cast of thugs, lackeys, and idealogues are just as
> hideous
Boring and gratuitously unpleasant comments like this are sure to drive away thoughtful readers. I didn’t think this was a place that welcomed posted comments in the form of childish insults.
“They see an America that has been free of terrorist attacks since 9/11, an America that leads a 90-nation coalition against terrorism, a nation protected by a swifter, more tech-savvy military.”
And what does the Post Disgrace “editorial board see differently?
“under the strain of trying to provide freedom for too many people at home and abroad.”
Tell us, oh great and knowledgeable “editorial staff”, how many people should have freedom before we reach that mystery number you use “too many people”.
“I don’t know — the biggest regret of all the presidency has to have been the intelligence failure in Iraq. . . . And, you know, that’s not a do-over, but I wish the intelligence had been different, I guess.”
Not a word there about tailoring intelligence to order within the Pentagon. Not a word about ignoring Richard Clarke, the White House anti-terrorism adviser, when he said — three times — that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.”
And not a word from the “editorial board” about every other intelligence agency in the world coming to the same conclusion, the same conclusion that the previous administration had come to, that Iraq had or wanted WMDs. You also fail to mention that from the outset of the war on terror, President Bush made it very clear; it did not start or end with one country or group. Iraq had a long history of supporting terrorism, as well as violating the terms of the cease fire from the previous war. No one except libtard moonbats says Iraq had anything to do with the attacks of September 11, but they were supporters of terrorism.
“Not a word about illegal eavesdropping,”
Illegal according to who? The know it all blowhards at the Post Disgrace “editorial board”?
“torture,”
You mean cutting off heads on camera? Or making them stand for a long time?
“Guantanamo,”
What, exactly, is the Post Disgrace “editorial board’s” idea with dealing with enemies caught on the field of battle?
“denial of habeas corpus”
What American citizen has this been denied to?
“ or the fact that the men and materiel of the newly-mobile military are so burned out from six years of fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq that it will take years to bring them back to full combat readiness.”
But they can still fight! And without interference from libtards, “editorial boards” and congress critters, WIN!
“Nothing there about having ceded the moral high ground,”
How did we lose the high ground to an enemy that blows up buildings, uses suicide bombers as a weapon, basing attacks from civilian houses, hiding amongst civilians, using the mentally disabled as suicide bombers? A more accurate description of what happened is the Lame Stream Media has played the “moral equivalence” card at every turn.
“ the loss of U.S. prestige overseas”
Are you saying it is more prestigious to be attacked than to defend against attacks?
“or the fact that one of our key allies — Pakistan — may be impeding the fight against al-Qaida“
Maybe they are just playing a little game, see who can impede the war on terror more, Pakistan or American libtards.
“and the still-fruitless search for Osama bin Laden.”
He is still dead.
“You can call it “torture”; they call it a “robust interrogation program.” You can call it “warrantless eavesdropping”; they call it “terrorist surveillance.”
And you can call it something else, effective and legal.
They went against the Geneva Convention. I will always hold this against them.
Thank you Post Dispatch for getting this one right. Amazing that the 14% who still think Bush and Cheney are good men still find their way onto these forums. I thought they only tuned in to FOX, Limbaugh, Hannity and all the other fools of this free nation. There is absolutely no fact that can be cited to present Bush and Cheney as anything other than evil, incompetent and contemptuous of any American that questions or differs with them. They live in the wrong century. Medieval Europe would have suited them much better, and with their support from the religious right, Medieval Catholicism is what they tried to revive in this nation. Thank God enough citizens woke up in this last election and reversed this damning trend that they launched. But alas, the 14% still find ways to make noise, silly noise. They have become irrelevant, just like FOX, Limbaugh, Hannity and the religious right.
Hey Kisoff the facts, Americans (unlike you) are a generous people. We can’t help saying Bush is a loser when he so overwhelmingly is a loser. So, we toss in Congress, too!
The problem with Congress is too many Republicans! Every time something good can happen, there’s a filibuster in the US Senate! When we have the likes of Mitch McConnel and his race baiting, union busting Southern cohorts representing the “best” of the GOP, what’s to like?