A Strong Push From Backstage
By Jo Becker and Barton Gellman
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, June 26, 2007; Page A01
Air Force Two touched down at the Greenbrier Valley Airport in West Virginia on Feb. 6, 2003, carrying Vice President Cheney to the annual retreat of Republican House and Senate leaders. He had come to sell them on the economic centerpiece of President Bush's first term: a $674 billion tax cut.
Cheney had spent months making sure the package contained everything he wanted. One thing was missing.
The president had accepted Cheney's diagnosis that the sluggish economy needed a jolt, overruling senior economic advisers who forecast dangerous budget deficits. But Bush rejected one of Cheney's remedies: deep reductions in the capital gains tax on investments.
The vice president "was just hot on that," said Cesar Conda, then Cheney's domestic policy adviser. "It goes to show you: He wins and he loses, and he lost on that one."
Not for long.
As the Republican lawmakers debated in a closed-door session at the Greenbrier resort, the vice president revived the argument, touting his idea as a way to energize a stock market battered by scandals such as Enron. House allies inserted Cheney's cut into their package. But that came at the expense of one of Bush's priorities: abolishing the tax on stock dividends.
Cheney has changed history more than once, earning his reputation as the nation's most powerful vice president. His impact has been on public display in the arenas of foreign policy and homeland security, and in a long-running battle to broaden presidential authority. But he has also been the unseen hand behind some of the president's major domestic initiatives.
Scores of interviews with advisers to the president and vice president, as well as with other senior officials throughout the government, offer a backstage view of how the Bush White House operates. The president is "the decider," as Bush puts it, but the vice president often serves up his menu of choices.
Cheney led a group that winnowed the president's list of potential Supreme Court nominees. Cheney resolved a crisis in the space program after the Columbia shuttle disaster. Cheney fashioned a controversial truce between the legislative and executive branches -- and averted resignations at the top of the Justice Department and the FBI -- over the right of law enforcement authorities to investigate political corruption in Congress.
And it was Cheney who served as the guardian of conservative orthodoxy on budget and tax matters. He shaped and pushed through Bush's tax cuts, blunting the influence of Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, a longtime friend, and of Cabinet rivals he had played a principal role in selecting. He managed to overcome the president's "compassionate conservative" resistance to multiple breaks for the wealthy. He even orchestrated a decision to let a GOP senator switch parties -- giving control of the chamber to Democrats -- rather than meet the senator's demand for billions of dollars in new spending.
On the home front, the vice president is well known for leading a secretive task force on energy policy. But in a town where politicians routinely scurry for credit, Cheney more often kept his role concealed, even from top Bush advisers.
"A lot of it was a black box, and I think designedly so," said former Bush speechwriter David Frum. "It was like -- you know that experiment where you pass a magnet under the table and you see the iron filings on the top of the table move? You know there's a magnet there because of what you see happening, but you never see the magnet."
A 'More Effective Role'
When Bush tapped Cheney to be his running mate seven years ago, he chose a man who had put a great deal of thought into how a vice president can transform himself from a funeral-trotting figurehead into a center of real power.
As President Gerald R. Ford's chief of staff in the 1970s, Cheney saw firsthand how White House policies got shaped -- and how a vice president such as Nelson Rockefeller could become so marginalized as to be dumped from the ticket. Former Army secretary John O. Marsh Jr. said Cheney knew that he needed to control the process by which the president makes choices to ride "the rushing river of power" that winds through the West Wing to the Oval Office.
"Dick's major concern, one of them was, and I agree, that there needs to be a greater and more effective role for the vice president," Marsh, a longtime Cheney friend, said in an interview. "He holds the view, as do I, that the vice president should be the chief of staff in effect, that everything should run through his office."
In Bush, Cheney found the perfect partner. The president's willingness to delegate left plenty of room for his more detail-oriented vice president.
"My impression is that the president thinks that the Reagan style of leadership is best -- guiding the ship of state from high up on the mast," said former White House lawyer Bradford A. Berenson. "It seems to me that the vice president is more willing to get down in the wheelhouse below the decks."
When the space shuttle Columbia disintegrated over Texas on Feb. 1, 2003, for example, Bush was consumed with concern for the families of the seven dead astronauts. That left Cheney to make the first critical decisions about the future of manned spaceflight.
Even as the vice president and others were grappling with the invasion of Iraq, Cheney crafted a solution to the most pressing problem facing the space program, said former NASA administrator Sean O'Keefe, a Cheney protege.
With its shuttle fleet grounded, the space agency had no way to resupply the crew aboard the international space station, including two Americans. Russia was demanding $100 million to take up the slack. But Congress had barred space-related payments to Moscow unless the administration could certify that the Russians were not transferring banned technology to Iran for nuclear, biological or chemical weapons. Getting the law changed would take time, and could "open up a can of worms" with no guarantee that the result would be to the administration's liking, O'Keefe said.
The vice president's solution, he said, was to get around the law by cutting the deal as a barter. The Russians wouldn't charge the United States for the costs of flying to the space station, and in return, the Americans wouldn't charge the Russians for their share of some operating and equipment costs.
The vice president then took the lead in persuading the State Department to go along with the plan, which never came to public attention. "He helped frame how to do this without a major diplomatic dust-up," O'Keefe said.
Last year, Cheney was behind another unprecedented and controversial deal that inserted the White House into an ongoing criminal probe.
When the FBI seized files from the office of Rep. William J. Jefferson (D-La.) as part of a bribery investigation, House Republican leaders erupted. With a number of their own members under investigation for other matters, they charged that the search violated the Constitution. They demanded the return of the files.
Cheney quickly gravitated toward the House's position, aides said, but Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales; his top deputy, Paul J. McNulty; and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III threatened to resign if forced to hand over evidence they believed had been properly collected under a warrant.
White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten called a meeting on May 25, 2006, to resolve the political and legal crisis. The president's lawyers and congressional liaison were in the room, and so was Cheney. Once again, it was the vice president who came up with a solution, according to a participant. Cheney's plan met his goal of keeping the files from federal investigators. The files would be placed under seal for 45 days. Within hours of the meeting, Bush made Cheney's recommendation official. As often happens in government, delay was decisive. Jefferson was indicted earlier this month on 16 counts of bribery, racketeering, fraud, money laundering and obstruction of justice. But nearly half of the files remain off-limits, tied up in legal disputes.
Taking Options 'Off the Table'
Cheney's influence is manifested not just in crisis but also through his extraordinary involvement in the daily machinery of the White House.
The vice president chairs a budget review board, a panel the Bush administration created to set spending priorities and serve as arbiter when Cabinet members appeal decisions by White House budget officials. The White House has portrayed the board as a device to keep Bush from wasting time on petty disagreements, but previous administrations have seldom seen Cabinet-level disputes in that light. Cheney's leadership of the panel gives him direct and indirect power over the federal budget -- and over those who must live within it. [Read then-OMB Director Joshua Bolten's memo about the review board.]
Mitchell E. Daniels Jr., who served as Bush's budget director from 2001 to 2003 and is now governor of Indiana, said that during his tenure the number of times a Cabinet official made a direct budget appeal to Bush "was zero," which aides from previous administrations found "stunning," he added.
Daniels said he chalked that track record up to "the respect people had for the vice president." Cabinet members, he said, recognized that if the board didn't agree with them, "then the president wasn't likely to, either."
It is well known that Cheney is usually the last to speak to the president before Bush makes a decision. Less so is his role, to a degree unmatched by his predecessors, in steering debate by weighing in at the lower-level meetings where proposals are born and die.
Cheney, Bolten said, is a vocal participant at a weekly luncheon meeting of Bush's economic team, which gathers without the president. As the most senior official in the room, Cheney receives great deference from Bush's advisers.
Wise officials vet their proposals in advance. White House budget director Rob Portman, for instance, sought Cheney's counsel as he was putting together the budget for the upcoming year, using him as a "sounding board" on issues as varied as defense spending and tax reform.
"He never, ever has said to me, 'Do this.' Never. Which is interesting, because that might be the perception of how he operates," Portman said. "But it is 'What do you think of this?' Well, he's the vice president of the United States -- and obviously I'm interested in his point of view."
Perhaps more important than Cheney's influence in pushing policies is his power to stop them before they reach the Oval Office.
When Edward P. Lazear, chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, broached the idea of limiting the popular mortgage tax deduction, he said he quickly dropped it after Cheney told him it would never fly with Congress. "He's a big timesaver for us in that he takes off the table a lot of things he knows aren't going to go anywhere," Lazear said.
Lazear, who is otherwise known as a fierce advocate for his views, said that he may argue a point with Cheney "for 10 minutes or so" but that in the end he is always convinced. "I can't think of a time when I have thought I was right and the vice president was wrong."
But Cheney is careful to choose which issues deserve his attention, preferring not to dissipate his influence. "Dick Cheney learned early on to say no to things that were peripheral to his primary interests or assignments," said his longtime friend David Gribbin.
Current and former White House officials say that the vice president has largely steered clear of hot-button issues such as stem cell research and Bush's "faith-based" initiative to funnel more federal money to religious groups. He is also savvy enough, they say, to retreat when the president expresses strong personal views.
Cheney sided with conservatives who wanted to urge the Supreme Court to reverse a landmark ruling that permitted affirmative action. But, former officials said, he did not press the case when the president, who as governor of Texas had run a state university system, made it clear that he intended to take a more limited and nuanced legal position.
Word of a Cheney loss seldom leaks, a trait that has further endeared him to Bush -- and that has served to exaggerate his influence. Former Cheney and Bush aides described several domestic policy defeats that never reached public notice.
Cheney shared conservative trepidations about the president's signature education initiative, the No Child Left Behind Act, which gave the federal government more control over K-12 education. He has griped privately to confidants, such as economist and CNBC host Lawrence Kudlow, about the administration's failure to control spending. And in robust internal White House discussions, he raised concerns about the cost of the administration's decision to expand Medicare to include a new multibillion-dollar drug entitlement, but bowed to the political reality that the president had to fulfill a campaign promise.
"At least in my area, he didn't have a 100 percent batting average," said Conda, the former domestic policy adviser.
In each case, however, Cheney was a loyal soldier, instrumental in helping to sell the president's policies on the Hill and to the Republican base.
"Dick once told me that our president is a 'big-government conservative,'" said former senator Phil Gramm (R-Tex.), in a recollection disputed by Cheney's office. "Now, Dick keeps his opinions to himself whenever he disagrees with the administration, as he should. But I believe that Dick is a small-government conservative."
'A Spine Quotient'
When Sen. James M. Jeffords (Vt.) threatened to bolt the GOP during negotiations over the president's 2001 tax package, senior Bush advisers and Republican senators were deeply split over whether to buy him off. It was a momentous decision -- a Jeffords defection would toss the Senate to Democratic control for the first time since 1994.
But in a contentious internal debate, the vice president forcefully argued that the administration should not capitulate by giving Jeffords the billions of dollars in special-education funding he sought, recalled O'Keefe, at the time deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget.
O'Keefe said Cheney argued that the White House should not sacrifice conservative principle in the face of Jeffords's threat by scaling back tax cuts dear to the GOP base in order to create an expensive new mandate. Gramm, who confirmed that account, said there would have been no end to such demands if the president had caved.
"The principle was 'Hell, we can't go around funding programs based on what some individual might do,'" said Gramm, who worked closely with Cheney during the negotiations.
By the end of the critical meeting, O'Keefe said, the divided group presented Cheney's view as the consensus recommendation to the president. Bush's $1.35 trillion tax cut passed, and Jeffords defected as promised.
Such stands by Cheney were not uncommon, said Bolten, the White House chief of staff. Cheney often stepped in if he sensed the administration was softening its commitment to Republican "first principles," Bolten said, and he was "a pretty vigorous voice for holding the line on spending and for holding the line on tax cuts." Longtime Cheney adviser Mary Matalin said the vice president brings a "spine quotient" to internal debates.
Cheney's power derives in part from meticulous preparation paired with a strong will to prevail. He knows what he wants, and as one rival put it, Cheney and his staff are "just ferocious negotiators."
The vice president regularly convenes a kitchen cabinet of diverse outside economic experts, often before the president is about to make a major decision. Members of the group describe a man who enjoys the nitty-gritty of economics, poring over charts of obscure data such as freight-car loadings and quizzing experts on the subtle ways the government can influence the economy.
"With the president it was much shorter. It's 'Marty, what do you think of where we stand today?'" said Martin Feldstein, a Harvard economics professor and the president and chief executive of the National Bureau of Economic Research. "It's also a less technical presentation."
R. Glenn Hubbard, Bush's former chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, said of Cheney: "I'd have conversations with him that were at a level of detail that those with the president were not."
In the weeks following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, as the White House was putting together an economic recovery package, Cheney gathered his kitchen cabinet, frequently interrupting the experts as he furiously jotted notes on a stack of cards embossed with the vice presidential seal. What kind of tax cuts are needed? Cheney wanted to know. How big?
A few days later, Cheney was "on fire" when he met with the president, Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, later told Conda. Cheney had decided that the best way to shake business leaders out of their post-attack paralysis was to let them immediately write off the cost of new plants and equipment. After hearing him out, Bush made Cheney's idea a centerpiece of his plan.
In previous administrations, such initiatives typically have been generated by the Treasury Department or the White House economic team. But Cheney has made the vice president's office a hub of tax policy, enabled by the fact that "this president appears to want to have Treasury take the orders from the White House," said John H. Makin, an economist and an informal Cheney adviser.
All this put Cheney in a position to outflank some of Bush's top advisers, and even his old friend Greenspan, to shape the administration's signature tax package: the 2003 cuts that Cheney sold at the Greenbrier resort in West Virginia.
'The President Made the Call'
As far as Greenspan knew, the vice president agreed with him on the danger of the tax package Bush was contemplating. The Federal Reserve chairman worried that the sheer size of the cuts would drown the federal budget in red ink.
Cheney and Greenspan met regularly, far more often than the Fed chief met with Bush, according to interviews and Greenspan's calendar. And when the president did meet with Greenspan, Cheney was nearly always in the room.
The vice president and the Fed chairman had formed a close bond when both served in the Ford administration. The Fed chief saw the vice president as a conduit to a president he did not know nearly as well, someone he could trust to fairly present his views to Bush.
So Greenspan sent Cheney a study by one of the central bank's senior economists showing that big deficits lead to higher long-term interest rates, according to a person with firsthand knowledge. Higher rates, Greenspan believed, would wipe out any short-term benefit from a tax cut.
In subsequent meetings with the Fed chief, Cheney never took issue with the study. What Greenspan did not know was that, behind the scenes, the vice president took steps to undermine an argument that could threaten the big tax cut he favored. Conda, the vice president's aide, said Cheney asked him to critique the study. Conda attached his own memo arguing that the Fed's analytical model was flawed. He said "it wasn't my job to know" what Cheney did with the paperwork, but noted that Greenspan's study did not gain traction inside the White House.
Aside from Greenspan, Cheney had faced down opposition from many of the administration's senior economic voices, including Daniels, Treasury Secretary Paul H. O'Neill and Commerce Secretary Donald L. Evans. They believed that the economy was recovering and that a deep tax cut wasn't needed. Daniels said he worried that it would undermine the GOP message of fiscal discipline.
Cheney, however, pressed his argument that the economy needed a jump-start. He wanted not only to reduce the tax on dividends but also to cut the capital gains tax and accelerate income tax breaks for top earners, according to Daniels, Conda, Hubbard and others. Conda said Cheney subscribed to the view of supply-side economists that when government cuts taxes the economy grows, generating additional tax revenue that largely offsets the losses from lower tax rates.
The standoff came to a head in late November 2002, during a meeting in the Roosevelt Room.
O'Neill continued to oppose the tax cut on grounds that the government was moving toward "fiscal crisis," irritating Cheney. "The vice president really got a sense of where O'Neill was coming from and surmised it was a problem," Conda said. The following month, Cheney would demand O'Neill's resignation.
Bush sided with Cheney on the dividends tax but thought it would be better to eliminate it altogether. The president was cooler on the capital gains tax, according to Conda and others. And having campaigned on a platform of compassionate conservatism, he expressed doubts about giving another income tax break to the wealthiest Americans, particularly because they would benefit the most from the elimination of the dividends tax, Hubbard said.
But by the time Bush publicly announced his tax package on Jan. 7, 2003, Cheney lost on only one major count. The president included no reduction in the tax on capital gains. [Read the legislation: As first introduced in the House | As passed by Congress.]
"There was a question of priorities and how to fit things in," said Karl Rove, Bush's chief political adviser. "And ultimately the president made the call."
It was then that Cheney doubled back at the Greenbrier retreat.
"We were deciding how to proceed," recalled Rep. Adam H. Putnam (Fla.), now the third-ranking Republican in the House. "Are we going to put all our eggs in the dividends basket, or are we going to move on capital gains? As I recall, he was a very strong advocate on both counts, but particularly capital gains in terms of its potential to unleash the economy."
In the end, the House decided against eliminating the dividends tax cut, as Bush had wanted, choosing instead to just reduce the rate to make room for a capital gains cut.
Bill Thomas, the California Republican who guided the final bill to passage as chairman of the House tax-writing committee, said he and Cheney go way back and "use each other in the best sense," with the two men deciding which one will make a proposal and which will speak up in its support.
In the case of the capital gains proposal, Cheney pitched it to the Greenbrier gathering. Thomas pitched it to the White House, and he credited the vice president with persuading Bush to go along. "That," Thomas said, "is why the administration changed its position."
The vote in the Senate was 51 to 50. Cheney, exercising his only formal power under the Constitution, cast the tie-breaking vote.
Staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.
Sidebars
Cast of Characters
Read about the important people in and out of government who have had an impact on Vice President Dick Cheney's career.
Cheney's Personality
Dick Cheney's colleagues, friends, and acquaintances shared stories with Post reporter Bart Gellman.
Cheney's Life & Career
Starting as a junior aide on Capitol Hill, Dick Cheney built an unmatched Washington resume as White House chief of staff, House minority whip and secretary of defense.
Posted by: uberblonde | June 25, 2007 10:24 PM
Oh well, this only confirms our President is a mere cherrleader and not a leader. Or should I just say our president is a scock puppet and our vice president his his hand up his @@@.
Posted by: snman37922 | June 25, 2007 10:26 PM
I simply do not know what to say.
I feel like the 'Miracle at Philadelphia' is well and truly dead.
It was a nice place.
Posted by: nealkas | June 25, 2007 10:45 PM
Last night I felt angry after reading the second installment. Tonight I'm feeling sadness that our country has come to such a sorry pass. I've always thought the team of Bush-Cheney had no business in the White House, but the element of schadenfreude I expected to feel when the rest of the country caught on is totally absent tonight.
Never have I been so ashamed and so afraid for my country. What were people thinking?
Cheney needs to go now.
Posted by: sherirogers | June 25, 2007 11:02 PM
Last night I felt angry after reading the second installment. Tonight I'm feeling sadness that our country has come to such a sorry pass. I've always thought the team of Bush-Cheney had no business in the White House, but the element of schadenfreude I expected to feel when the rest of the country caught on is totally absent tonight.
Never have I been so ashamed and so afraid for my country. What were people thinking?
Cheney needs to go now.
Posted by: sherirogers | June 25, 2007 11:04 PM
Cheney has his own kitchen cabinet and makes major decisions considering advice from his own "experts." And he rejects the advice of the Bush's cabinet and other appointed officials, all senate approved officials. He decides who shouldn't be on Bush's team and gives out pink slips.
Why even have a president if the shadow presidency controls the reins of our government? This is not my America and not the government I want.
Posted by: rosejjohnson | June 25, 2007 11:12 PM
The blame rests on two groups. The evangelical right. They believe the cr*p in the Bible, they'll believe anything, and they ate up the plateful Rove and Bush fed them. The Republican party, which is just now coming to realize the full implication of their support of the Bush Crime family. Any possibility that they believed in constitutional principles, a strong defense, balance of power, balanced budget...it's all been revealed as a sham to get power. Not power for average Americans, power for the wealthy elite, the Haliburtons, the Enrons. They are responsible, more than half the country knew it in 2000 before Bush was installed. The rest kept quiet and let it happen. It's their shame.
Posted by: thebobbob | June 25, 2007 11:18 PM
Dick Cheney is Dr. Strangelove.
And you were worried about Karl Rove.
Posted by: ncf109 | June 25, 2007 11:31 PM
Why not call him what he is. The President of the United States.
Posted by: sbundley | June 25, 2007 11:34 PM
Disgraceful...this is not a good man. (Quoting the Dick's wife)
Posted by: cooltx75 | June 26, 2007 12:02 AM
This is a great series... and very scary.
Our Executive Branch is severely dysfunctional. At this time in history we don't have the luxury of coasting and just waiting for the Bush Administration to be over...
Congress should take action.
Posted by: stswork | June 26, 2007 12:07 AM
It had to come. Two days of unrelenting shredding of the Vice President. Day three?
He becomes the savior of all that is good and right.
Posted by: rareinc3 | June 26, 2007 12:11 AM
This is a dispassionate description of how Cheney is the powerful nexus of the Cheney administration. We can admire someone who knows how to get government to act. But our admiration evaporates when we realize that Cheney is rewarding the rich and powerful at the expense of the future.
Cheney's legacy will be $3.5 TRILLION in new debt over the two terms of the Bush administration. This is not a first principle of small government. To put that in perspective, the federal debt was under $6 trillion when Bush took office.
Have you no shame, Mr. Cheney?
Posted by: boscobobb | June 26, 2007 12:27 AM
cheney's stooge found that the study from the federal reserve was "flawed" ... how convenient.
Posted by: chefwiggum | June 26, 2007 12:34 AM
cheney's "complaints" about the administration's spending, when he controlled the budget with his leadership of the budget review board, are just too amazing -- i trust that the authors included this tongue-in-cheek
Posted by: chefwiggum | June 26, 2007 12:37 AM
"Cheney's power derives in part from meticulous preparation paired with a strong will to prevail. He knows what he wants, and as one rival put it, Cheney and his staff are "just ferocious negotiators.""
why all the nonsensical pyschoanalysis? your series establishes pretty well how he prevailed -- its because he was given the portfolio of the entire federal government and everyone either knew it, or were cut out of the loop so entirely that their voice didn't matter.
bingo, his voice "prevails" in policy disputes. wow, how amazing his will must be.
Posted by: chefwiggum | June 26, 2007 12:41 AM
The Democrats are too whimpy and weak-kneed to take action on impeaching either of these liars and theives. At this rate the will loose the 08 election and we will be stuck with this bunch of neo-nazi, faith-based, illogical miscreants for all time. Hiel Cheney!
Posted by: craiggger | June 26, 2007 12:58 AM
This evil piece of sh*t should be sent to gitmo to rot for the rest of his miserable, worthless little life. People like the current administration have proven time and time again throughout history to have destroyed thier own nations.
Posted by: craiggger | June 26, 2007 01:01 AM
This evil piece of sh*t should be sent to gitmo to rot for the rest of his miserable, worthless little life. People like the current administration have proven time and time again throughout history to have destroyed thier own nations.
Posted by: craiggger | June 26, 2007 01:01 AM
This evil piece of sh*t should be sent to gitmo to rot for the rest of his miserable, worthless little life. People like the current administration have proven time and time again throughout history to have destroyed thier own nations.
Posted by: craiggger | June 26, 2007 01:01 AM
This evil piece of sh*t should be sent to gitmo to rot for the rest of his miserable, worthless little life. People like the current administration have proven time and time again throughout history to have destroyed thier own nations.
Posted by: craiggger | June 26, 2007 01:01 AM
This evil piece of sh*t should be sent to gitmo to rot for the rest of his miserable, worthless little life. People like the current administration have proven time and time again throughout history to have destroyed thier own nations.
Posted by: craiggger | June 26, 2007 01:01 AM
This man is a war criminal; that he seems perhaps to lessen Bush's responsibility for what these neo-cons have done is no surprise to anyone who's been paying attention, but it doesn't change the fact that all these people and their minions have perverted the course of justice and spat upon the our constitution. Impeach for High Crimes against our nation.
Posted by: emervyn | June 26, 2007 01:03 AM
Investigate, Impeach, Imprison.
Posted by: craiggger | June 26, 2007 01:12 AM
These "Angler" articles are really wonderful. Six and a half years too late, for some aspects, but then again, what could any of us
have believed that long ago.
We will only be able to read them in The Washington Post, as
no other media outlets will "pick them up," or report on them in any way, shape, or form. So, let us enjoy ourselves in our outrage
and real and true patriotism.
We can hope that some people in Congress actually read the
WaPo with a sense of seriousness. But, don't count on them
saying anything other than, oh well, who reads the WaPo except us and we already knew this administration was entirely corrupt and we have been going along with it all along.
The American people don't care, after all, 41% of them believe that Saddam did 9/11 (Har har, ain't that the beatinest come-off??? Ho HO)
Neverthless, I really and truly thank the reporters who did all
this work. You have provided a service to the country in it's
greatest time of need. Thank you, thank you, thank you.
I will continue to read you.
Posted by: cms1 | June 26, 2007 01:36 AM
In celebration of Vice Cheney's wise and guiding hand being also involved in domestic policy issues, the Mayor of San Francisco has just recently signed 2 Executive Orders aimed at 'global warming.'
FOLLOWING PRECEDENT SENT IN THE ABOVE ARTICLE, THE MAYOR OF SAN FRANCISCO HAS ANNOUNCED THE ISSUANCE OF TWO EXECUTIVE ORDERS AIMED AT HELPING THE ENVIRONMENT.
1. The first E.O. issued SERIOUSLY RESTRICTS the distribution and availability of BOTTLED WATER in San Francisco, due to issues surrounding disposal of millions of empty plastic bottles in land fills in the San Francisco area.
'Unnamed sources' have confirmed, however, that medical studies undertaken by several Russian scientists that were recently published in The Moscow Journal of Medicine, CONFIRM that when marijuana users are denied access to 'pure' bottled water and must instead rely on 'fresh' tap water, use of marijuana can be expected to increase 'exponentially.' So while it appears that bottled water producers will be adversely impacted in San Francisco, the Marijuana Growers and Distributors Association of California [MGDAC] advised that they were happy with the Mayor's decision, the equities considered.
2. The second E.O. addressed the frequency of both licit and illicit sexual activity in San Francisco and again its focus was on 'global warming.' Recently released studies undertaken by the Sam Huston Institute of Technology [S.H.I.T.] surprisingly revealed that the heat dissipated into the atmosphere from sexual activity, in some instances, could be so considerable that it is now believed that the basis for extended periods of SMOG around the San Francisco area, is the result of automobile exhaust, heat generated from sexual activity as well as possibly political verbiage.
Accordingly, for married couples and those otherwise living in a committed relationship, sexual activity is henceforth to be restricted to no more than once per week. For single individuals, who were presumed to be 'somewhat' more sexually active, sexual activity was restricted to no more than once daily.
WE CONCLUDE THAT SAN FRANCISCO'S TWO NEWLY ENACTED EXECUTIVE ORDERS WILL HAVE A POSITIVE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.
Posted by: brucerealtor | June 26, 2007 01:39 AM
In celebration of Vice Cheney's wise and guiding hand being also involved in domestic policy issues, the Mayor of San Francisco has just recently signed 2 Executive Orders aimed at 'global warming.'
FOLLOWING PRECEDENT SENT IN THE ABOVE ARTICLE, THE MAYOR OF SAN FRANCISCO HAS ANNOUNCED THE ISSUANCE OF TWO EXECUTIVE ORDERS AIMED AT HELPING THE ENVIRONMENT.
1. The first E.O. issued SERIOUSLY RESTRICTS the distribution and availability of BOTTLED WATER in San Francisco, due to issues surrounding disposal of millions of empty plastic bottles in land fills in the San Francisco area.
'Unnamed sources' have confirmed, however, that medical studies undertaken by several Russian scientists that were recently published in The Moscow Journal of Medicine, CONFIRM that when marijuana users are denied access to 'pure' bottled water and must instead rely on 'fresh' tap water, use of marijuana can be expected to increase 'exponentially.' So while it appears that bottled water producers will be adversely impacted in San Francisco, the Marijuana Growers and Distributors Association of California [MGDAC] advised that they were happy with the Mayor's decision, the equities considered.
2. The second E.O. addressed the frequency of both licit and illicit sexual activity in San Francisco and again its focus was on 'global warming.' Recently released studies undertaken by the Sam Huston Institute of Technology [S.H.I.T.] surprisingly revealed that the heat dissipated into the atmosphere from sexual activity, in some instances, could be so considerable that it is now believed that the basis for extended periods of SMOG around the San Francisco area, is the result of automobile exhaust, heat generated from sexual activity as well as possibly political verbiage.
Accordingly, for married couples and those otherwise living in a committed relationship, sexual activity is henceforth to be restricted to no more than once per week. For single individuals, who were presumed to be 'somewhat' more sexually active, sexual activity was restricted to no more than once daily.
WE CONCLUDE THAT SAN FRANCISCO'S TWO NEWLY ENACTED EXECUTIVE ORDERS WILL HAVE A POSITIVE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.
Posted by: brucerealtor | June 26, 2007 01:40 AM
It just gets scarier and scarier. Impeach NOW.
Posted by: taid | June 26, 2007 01:44 AM
Billions in tax cut, earmarks for religious charities, tax moneys to church establishments - hey, seems like they got everything they wanted. The weapons makers are having a hay-day, too. That's what happens when you let people pick their buddies to fill positions of influence. I am in utter confusion about why Cheney and Gonzales are still part of government and demand respect? Where is the spirit of JUSTICE?
Stem cell research cannot be funded, but wholesale slaughter is morally justified? These contradictions are signs of the great American Mental Disorder.
Posted by: NMremote | June 26, 2007 02:11 AM
One wonders what brand of "Christianity" this man professes.
The missing keywords here are: Katrina, Iraq, Katrina, Iraq...
Cheney's devotion to the rich makes it clear that, in the VP's twisted mind, there is no room for average and poor Americans, or for the casualties sustained in Iraq by our troops and their families, or the Iraqis. For Cheney, they just don't exist.
It is terrifying to think that this man's influence will be felt long after he has gone to the place he deserves. The three most recent decisions emitted by the Supreme Court effectively give corporations even more deciding power in elections, evaporate the division between church and state, and provide one more gag on freedom of expression. Oh, and before that, The Supreme Court agreed that humble healthcare providers--the ones who sit by our elderly, bathe, wash and feed them--aren't entitled to overtime...
Dear God, what does the future hold for this country?
Posted by: FedUp1 | June 26, 2007 02:52 AM
Re Cheney and the Supreme Court: Don't forget to read, Taking on the Supreme Court Case," also in this issue. That's when my hands started to shake.
Posted by: FedUp1 | June 26, 2007 03:06 AM
Blah, blah, blah.
You're four years late and billions of dollars short.
Find something else to write about. You're boring me to death!
Try some unbias reporting sometime.
Posted by: writeaway777 | June 26, 2007 03:48 AM
I just feel - all we felt is right - BUSH is an idot! How do you American election system get such a supid guy becoming your president?
Be careful of your next election, get someone have BRAIN and good heart!
I am not American but USA does have great impact to all other countries and I do care! I wish you all the best for a good leadership in next turn.
Posted by: CHENTING71 | June 26, 2007 04:03 AM
Somehow this seems to just to me to be a series to take the blame off the Bush family and try to pin everything that's gone wrong on Cheney. Well, the Bush family has been responsible for policy matters for years. I'm not buying this tripe.
Cheney may be a total jerk, but he's just the fall guy. It's just too convenient to say that all the wrongheaded policy of this administration originated with Cheney.
NO SALE.
Posted by: Perry3 | June 26, 2007 04:15 AM
The article and comments about Cheney are very interesting. For me the worst thing about Cheney is his part in the 9/11 cover-up of the prior warning of the 5th September 2001 which should have prevented 9/11 happening. To me it is either Dick Cheney or Rupert Murdoch are the most disloyal and dangerous people on the planet. The use of Tony Blair in the UK (also involved in 9/11 cover-up) for various projects is difficult to understand.
Posted by: mikexxxxnolan | June 26, 2007 04:29 AM
A critical question millions of Americans must now be puzzling over is, "HOW HAS IT BEEN POSSIBLE FOR VICE PRESIDENT DICK CHENEY TO ARROGATE UNTO HIMSELF SUCH AUTHORITY AND POWERS THAT NORMALLY ONLY THE PRESIDENT CONSTITUTIONALLY SHOULD EXERCISE?"
The simple answer must be that because President George W. Bush was a neophyte unfamiliar with the workings of the Federal bureaucracy when he assumed the presidency, Dick Cheney, exactly the opposite of George W. Bush because he had spent most of his adult life in government and was therefore a master in the workings of that government, took advantage of George W. Bush by practically taking over in matters and issues that needed thorough and serious presidential consideration and decision.
Dick Cheney may not always have had his way, but it is now plain for all to see that he had his way most of the time on many vital and critical issues--domestic and foreign-- that came before George W. Bush for decision.
That Dick Cheney was able to deliberately put then Secretary of State Colin Powell and then National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice completely "out of the loop" on a matter over which by law they had jurisdiction--and that George W. Bush supinely allowed him to do so!--is a good measure of the nature and extent of Dick Cheney's influence then on George W. Bush.
That influence has been evil and pernicious. It has led to several momentous catastrophic missteps, misjudgments and mistakes, such as the preemptive and unilateral invasion and occupation of Iraq, the torture of "combatants" at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, the "rendition" of "combatants" to several European countries, the warrantless (and therefore illegal) spying on Americans on US soil, the selection of Halliburton to perform "contract work" in Iraq which has resulted in corruption and the loss of billions of US taxpayer dollars, the unprecendented aggrandizement of power by the President at the expense of the Congress, and the packing of Federal courts by "strict constructionist" and "originalist" Republican justices like John G. Roberts, Jr. and Samuel Alito.
The list goes on and on.
Posted by: MPatalinjug | June 26, 2007 04:57 AM
A critical question millions of Americans must now be puzzling over is, "HOW HAS IT BEEN POSSIBLE FOR VICE PRESIDENT DICK CHENEY TO ARROGATE UNTO HIMSELF SUCH AUTHORITY AND POWERS THAT NORMALLY ONLY THE PRESIDENT CONSTITUTIONALLY SHOULD EXERCISE?"
The simple answer must be that because President George W. Bush was a neophyte unfamiliar with the workings of the Federal bureaucracy when he assumed the presidency, Dick Cheney, exactly the opposite of George W. Bush because he had spent most of his adult life in government and was therefore a master in the workings of that government, took advantage of George W. Bush by practically taking over in matters and issues that needed thorough and serious presidential consideration and decision.
Dick Cheney may not always have had his way, but it is now plain for all to see that he had his way most of the time on many vital and critical issues--domestic and foreign-- that came before George W. Bush for decision.
That Dick Cheney was able to deliberately put then Secretary of State Colin Powell and then National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice completely "out of the loop" on a matter over which by law they had jurisdiction--and that George W. Bush supinely allowed him to do so!--is a good measure of the nature and extent of Dick Cheney's influence then on George W. Bush.
That influence has been evil and pernicious. It has led to several momentous catastrophic missteps, misjudgments and mistakes, such as the preemptive and unilateral invasion and occupation of Iraq, the torture of "combatants" at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, the "rendition" of "combatants" to several European countries, the warrantless (and therefore illegal) spying on Americans on US soil, the selection of Halliburton to perform "contract work" in Iraq which has resulted in corruption and the loss of billions of US taxpayer dollars, the unprecendented aggrandizement of power by the President at the expense of the Congress, and the packing of Federal courts by "strict constructionist" and "originalist" Republican justices like John G. Roberts, Jr. and Samuel Alito.
The list goes on and on.
Posted by: MPatalinjug | June 26, 2007 04:58 AM
So now we know who is actually running the country-it's not Bush, who seems to be the "silent partner" in all these meetings and policy making.
Guess that the election was actually for re-electing Cheney.
Does it get any worse? When do the American people actually get to vote for a President, not his VP?
Because Cheney has gotten away with this stuff for 6 years, I doubt that anyone who comes into the office from now on will not have the same powers-seeing how Cheney expanded them to exclude the President.
Now I know why I didn't vote for either of them at any time.
Posted by: maryhilton | June 26, 2007 04:59 AM
This is truly terrific reporting.
WHERE WAS THIS KIND OF REPORTING BEFORE THE 2004 ELECTION?!!?
Cheney has been working our government to his own advantage ever since he ran out of Vietnam deferments. I guess he learned a whole heck of a lot more than we knew, working in Dick Nixon's adminstration.
Posted by: freespeak | June 26, 2007 05:24 AM
this is nothing new; it has been known for years- a book on Cheney was written years ago.
why is the WashPo just starting to wake up now?
Posted by: inedal | June 26, 2007 05:25 AM
this is nothing new; it has been known for years- a book on Cheney was written years ago.
why is the WashPo just starting to wake up now?
Posted by: inedal | June 26, 2007 05:26 AM
this is nothing new; it has been known for years- a book on Cheney was written years ago.
why is the WashPo just starting to wake up now?
Posted by: inedal | June 26, 2007 05:26 AM
this is nothing new; it has been known for years- a book on Cheney was written years ago.
why is the WashPo just starting to wake up now?
Posted by: inedal | June 26, 2007 05:26 AM
this is nothing new; it has been known for years- a book on Cheney was written years ago.
why is the WashPo just starting to wake up now?
Posted by: inedal | June 26, 2007 05:26 AM
this is nothing new; it has been known for years- a book on Cheney was written years ago.
why is the WashPo just starting to wake up now?
Posted by: inedal | June 26, 2007 05:26 AM
I wonder, have Rove and Cheney ever clashed on an important issue? It would be like Alien vs Predator.
Posted by: roger.antaya | June 26, 2007 05:27 AM
The redoubtable, previously voluble Mrs. Lynne Cheney, uncompromising and sanctimonious right-wing presence on talk shows, has long been suspiciously silent. I don't miss her, but is that the shadow of a pterodactyl I see circling above us lo these past six years? This may be an airborne administration spotter, or her absence may signal Rovian strategy to keep more provacative, troubling expressions of right thinking out of public view of all but the most reflective or paranoid among us.
Posted by: jstonewp | June 26, 2007 05:46 AM
I realize many view Dick Cheney's powers with alarm, but to anyone with knowlege of Texas' political history, it's not all that surprising.
When Reconstruction ended, after the Civil War, the "liberal Yankees" were thrown out of office and a new, conservative constitution was drafted. This said that the real power in government rested with the lieutenant governor, NOT the governor.
I know . . . it seems odd, but a lot of things about Texas are odd; that's the way it was set up, tho.
As regards the strange case of Mr. Cheney:
The neocons really wanted Dickie to head the ticket (after Dole's 1996 run) but, let's face it -- he just didn't have the right charisma. So, pliable, marketable, George W. was summoned to fill the head of the ticket spot, with the understanding that Dick would be running the ship and making ALL the key decisions. Dubya would merely be the guy they pushed out for photo-ops and schmoozing the public.
You see, it was all set up to work just like the Texas model -- George out front, selling the product, while Dick choreographed everything from the background, out of sight, and out of control.
Karl Rove and Karen Hughes remain as the key marketeers in this constitutional scam, but make no mistake, Dick makes the calls, they just sell the product.
None of this is at all mysterious to me. I'm both amused and disillusioned that it has taken over 6 years for anyone in the MSM (or anywhere) to bring these facts to light.
And I'm not so sure the authors of this series have connected all the dots yet, either. Cheney IS and always HAS BEEN the prez, and everything we see regarding his arrogance and eff-you attitude reflects his confidence in his position as such.
I guess the real question is, what are we going to do about it? Wait until he declares a national emergency and grab the dictatorial powers set out in Bush's May 2007 memo (reminds one of 1933 Germany -- yikes!), depend on the gutless wonders in Congress to finally rein these spoiled brats in, or do we, the people, have to rise up and have a revolution?
Posted by: nads1 | June 26, 2007 05:54 AM
Clearly Bush is nothing more than a figure head, and not a good one at that. Bush and Cheney are reviled everywhere they go in the world. As for Republicans, they're a bunch of cowards and traitors - cowards because they refuse to stand up to this administration, traitors because they put their party above the Constitution and welfare of the country. Shame on them. These last six years have been a nightmare, and there's no relief in sight. I fear for what kind of country is being left for my children and whether we'll be able to undo so much damage.
Posted by: ggwalt123 | June 26, 2007 06:03 AM
How about a follow up series that George Bush Jr. has been the most effective Vice President since Dan Quayle?
Posted by: rook01 | June 26, 2007 06:12 AM
The vice-president is a "partner"? If what you describe is accurate, and I believe it is, then Bush is the vice-president, and Cheney is the president. Bush's naivete and lack of subtlety make him a perfect target for Cheney's byzantine mind. Bush hasn't had a chance, has he? And Cheney hasn't been satisfied to stay in one area and undercuts the president on so many issues that it is dizzying to comprehend. So little time left, Dick, so many plots to hatch and guide to fruition. So many people to intimidate.
I have always been suspicious of a group working by consensus--this process is ripe for intimidating others and shaping their cooperation, especially when they know the person has the president's ear, and head, and heart, and, oh, yes, his soul. While Bush runs around looking into the soul of Putin and getting money to faith-based initiatives, Cheney stays focused on policy and has shaped the "Bush policies" to his philosophy.
Any discussion of Bush's administration in the future must include Cheney's secret machinations. If Powell called Rumsfeld the rubber glove man, then Cheney must be the proctologist.
Posted by: Hannahjones | June 26, 2007 06:24 AM
Americans should be saying to Cheney: "You're with us, or you're with the enemy".
Posted by: 489362 | June 26, 2007 06:44 AM
In the end we all die so I guess it is justice served. I only hope that God grants me one wish and that is to watch as these false Christans try to enter into heaven and God asked them what part of free will did you not understand, and then sends them to their reward. I just want to see there faces then he can do to me what ever he wants all my dreams will have come true.
Posted by: antonio3 | June 26, 2007 07:07 AM
It is curious how the press gathers its skirts and sashays their
sweet opinions as well as calculated inuendo about Cheney as
legislative particulars come into view. It seems all too convienent,
my dear Horatio, and yet the feeling is- he's a swashbuckling
pirate hero to the silent minority that still thinks stealthy surges can win the day for the media war. I see nothing but deciet and
illegal behavior coming from the White House, overshadowing
the greed and avarice of these transplanted CEO's, and it is so unsavory that impeachment is considered. Resigning is my personal path of choice, yet the joy boy's have enough fear threat to keep reality from the door. Every word of defense of this administration is contrived to echo buzz words and
hidden cues for capitalist dogma, extracted from biblical example, without the moral implications. The American Family
needs to budget and dole out monies for infrastructure, secuity and social stabilty and curb the war spending and the spying
on its citizens, as well as projection of energy for the future,
rather than planning on the mini armageddon that will relieve
the complexity of governing 'All the People, All the time'.
Industry certainly needs NO tax cuts, and neither do the people. We need more balanced laws in the bankruptcy, investment, insurence, lending and mortgage industries, laws that do not
eliminate the bottom tier of peoples for the profit of operators.
In my youth it was commonly held that the profit margin was a set figure, a constant, rather than "get what you can" which is
like kill them all and we'll sort it out later... Now IS later, and the capitalist penchant for competition is the very illusion
that needs repeal. we are unique beings on a unique planet
and should be making the most of the ride.
Posted by: bebeyond49 | June 26, 2007 07:10 AM
As with Iraq, Cheney's legacy in the Bush tax cut will live long after he departs. He helped grow our national debt in order to keep the good times rolling on Wall Street. Soon it will be time to pay the piper. But don't worry Republicans; Dick has so poisoned the political waters that it will be a Democratic President who will have to clean up the mess.
Posted by: fultonda | June 26, 2007 07:17 AM
To Becker, Gellman and the WaPo: It is not enough to simply thank you for these pieces. This sort of journalism is the very life's blood of our republic, and we cannot survive without it. I know it took a huge commitment to produce, but our very lives depend on this. We have been hovering in grave condition for too long now; I am angry, as are so many others, that this was not written earlier, but I am so grateful that we are now getting the transfusion of truth that we must have to survive. Now our leaders must be truthful and brave and face what must be done to protect our democracy from people who would usurp it for their own agenda, however right and patriotic they see themselves.
Posted by: joydavid22 | June 26, 2007 07:28 AM
I wish people would read this article as it is written and not put their own bias slant to it. The article says "Word of a Cheney loss seldom leaks, a trait that has further endeared him to Bush -- and that has served to exaggerate his influence."
Cheney is not the President and the article gives many examples where Bush made decisions that Cheney was against (i.e. No Child Left Behind).
Cheney is more conservative than Bush and he has used his Washington connections and experience to try to cut through the bureaucracy and get things done. He may have used the rules to his advantage and the courts may not agree with his lawyers interpretation of Constitutional law, but there are no impeachable offenses here, and the Dems know it, and their lawyers know it, and that is why they will never pursue it.
The same mindset that believes the US was behind the 9/11 attacks is the same kind of liberal conspiracy mindset that believes Cheney is some kind of a monster. He is a conservative, which I guess to the left makes him a monster since they wanted to impeach Reagan and every other Republican president.
I regret that Cheney is not going to run for President in 2008. The interrogation issue alone would get him elected. Americans are in favor of using whatever means possible to protect the innocent from those that are truly evil, the terrorists.
Posted by: jayh63 | June 26, 2007 07:41 AM
Ask cheney two questions, Why weren't there any jets scrambled on 9/11 when Norad's sop is when any commercial jet goes off course jets are scrambled right away to see what the problem is.
Secondly, Why when the pentagon has at least 100 cameras surrounding it were there no "good" pictures of the "plane" hitting it ?
Posted by: timechange28 | June 26, 2007 07:49 AM
Supply side voodoo economcs. Cheney was given the info that tax cuts for the very wealthy would cause a longer term downside. So he sits on this info, supresses it or tries to swiftboat it because it goes against his belief in suppy side voodoo economics or because it does not reward the wealth class enough. Have we ever seen this with the CEOs of our employees? There is almost a religion that believes that only the few chosen shall have any power and thus we must give everything to these chosen ones and they then get to shower crumbs to the dogs that lick their hands. Well I know that 99% of the work done out in the real world is done by 99% of the employees of our self annointed lords. In something that professes to be a democracy we should never tolerate CEO types at the helm of government. The contempt Cheney has for the common man is self evident.
Posted by: ricinro85212 | June 26, 2007 07:51 AM
Isn't it time to ask what the point of all of this has been? The man's facility as a tactician is obvious and he's no doubt been highly effective to his own ends.
But what are the ends? America has not recovered its legitimacy and is perceived as exercising it, not to any principled end--including at this stage, a neo con end, but convulsively; it has not brought democracy to the middle east; its economy is structually flawed and this group, the Bush group, has not been able to institutionalize its ideology in the American system.
At this time, except for decay until times and the Administration have changed, nothing more can be done; and with that vacant and doomed policy and governmental end, the Vice President's continuing, cunning exercise of his situational skills, in any historic sense, resembles nothing so much as the fabled, febrile sound of one hand clapping.
In a way, the pathos is tragic.
Posted by: tantallon1 | June 26, 2007 08:04 AM
I do not recognize my country now. The Constitution and Bill of Rights are trashed by this administration. If I were to visit another country, I would be ashamed to admit that I am American.
Being from the United States of America used to be something to be proud of, but no more. No longer are we leaders of the free world. We have sunk to the level of countries we once derided as being under the leadership of a dictator.
In 70 years I never thought once that we could sink so low. Now I feel that if we do not call for the impeachment of both Cheney and Bush, we will never rise above their evil thoughts and deeds.
Posted by: Utahreb | June 26, 2007 08:09 AM
The blackest mark on American History, the most corrupt and morally banrupt politician to ever darken the Aermican Government. Impeach is too good and I hope that his health fails and he has nightmares for the pain, suffering, blood and death he has inflicted on the world for his own gain. If he is human, highly doubtful, I hope he suffers for the rest of his life.
Posted by: lndlouis | June 26, 2007 08:09 AM
The blackest mark on American History, the most corrupt and morally banrupt politician to ever darken the Aermican Government. Impeach is too good and I hope that his health fails and he has nightmares for the pain, suffering, blood and death he has inflicted on the world for his own gain. If he is human, highly doubtful, I hope he suffers for the rest of his life.
Posted by: lndlouis | June 26, 2007 08:09 AM
The blackest mark on American History, the most corrupt and morally banrupt politician to ever darken the Aermican Government. Impeach is too good and I hope that his health fails and he has nightmares for the pain, suffering, blood and death he has inflicted on the world for his own gain. If he is human, highly doubtful, I hope he suffers for the rest of his life.
Posted by: lndlouis | June 26, 2007 08:10 AM
The blackest mark on American History, the most corrupt and morally banrupt politician to ever darken the Aermican Government. Impeach is too good and I hope that his health fails and he has nightmares for the pain, suffering, blood and death he has inflicted on the world for his own gain. If he is human, highly doubtful, I hope he suffers for the rest of his life.
Posted by: lndlouis | June 26, 2007 08:10 AM
Another yawn day of comments from the liberal left.
I know the concept that people of good conscience can have differing opinions never seemed to occur to the pea brain left, but guess what, good people can have different opinions than the liberal left.
To liberals, for someone to get elected that is not from the left must be proof that the American public is stupid, or the election was stolen, or,,, or,,,, or. Always an excuse on why nobody listens to them and why they are marginalized.
Guess what liberal left, YOU SHOULD BE MARGINALIZED for your simplistic notions on how things should be!
Under difficult circumstances Bush and Cheney have done a remarkable job. Mistakes have been made, as have been accomplishments in seven years.
Who knows what style the next President and VP will have. Will it be a hand in every minor and mundane detail like Carter, a poll a day like Clinton to make decisions, or a CEO managerial style like Bush and Reagan. Who knows?
The only truth is the liberal left will still be whining about something!
Posted by: bcarte1 | June 26, 2007 08:11 AM
GEORGE HERBERT HOOVER BUSH: Dick, the entire country is clamoring for your resignation. I'm not sure I'm going to be able to fight them all off.
DICK CHENEY: You better, bubbie, or you can forget about any support next election from the American National Socialist Party. And the Klan, too.
GHH BUSH: Well, I'm open to any suggestions, of course...as usual.
DC: To be honest, I've noticed the same annoying rash of complaints you have, and I've given the matter considerable thought. This is a simple problem with a ready solution.
GHH BUSH: I hope your solution includes getting rid of that "What Would Machiavelli Do?" T-shirt you wore at the last barbecue.
DC: Be serious now, bubbie. Here's what we have to do. You write a presidential signing statement deputizing all Halliburton employees. We'll call them the Liberty League, and divide them into Patriot Platoons, which will broken down into Security Squads. The Patriot Platoons will patrol state and city government meetings and report any suspicious Liberal and anti-war activity. The Security Squads will administer "America-enhancing Attitude Adjustments" to any suspicious detainees, and also any actual perpetrators if we catch them. The Security Squads will also be responsible for book burnings and Pre-Schooler America-enhancing Attitude Adjustments, which will exclude water boarding. Probably. All the Halliburton CEOs who were deputized will have special duties related to Funding--can't do all this on the tax dollar, sorry bubbie. The funding will be divided into Friendly Funding which will include voluntary donations from all our good petrochemical and pharmaceutical associates, and Unfriendly Funding or extortion. I know--but our "Tune in to America Initiative" will require installing video surveillance software in every household TV and infrared fencing around every Democrat residence. Big bucks there, bubbie. Razor wire's not cheap, either. I calculate it will take at least three years for the Liberty League to achieve its primary objectives in the US, then another two years for Mexico and three more years for Canada. We're calling it the "Enhanced Security and Prosperity Partnership for North America." The "enhancement" is the extra troops North Viet Nam is supplying, and the tactical nukes we're getting from Iran. Well, there it is, bubbie. What do you think?
GHH BUSH: It's pretty awesome, Dick. I have to admit I'm really impressed. But I don't see how we can keep working on all this after the next election.
DC: What election?
Posted by: valleyforge | June 26, 2007 08:26 AM
WHEN THE DEMS BECAME THE MAJORITY, SPEAKER PELOSI SAID IMPEACHMENT WAS OFF THE TABLE, NO DOUBT BECAUSE "KICK START DICK" WOULD HAVE BECOME PRESIDENT IN NAME AS WELL AS IN FACT. HOWEVER AT THAT TIME SHE MADE NO MENTION OF IMPEACHMENT OF THE VICE PRES. BEING OFF THE TABLE AND IF ANYONE EVER DESERVED IMPEACHMENT IT IS DEFINITELY DICK CHENEY......OR DOES HE HAVE TO GET AN "AIR START" IN HIS OFFICE TO STIR CONGRESS INTO ACTION?
Posted by: J102343 | June 26, 2007 08:30 AM
C'mon folks!
What's with all the bleating? You voted for this team...twice!!
Is it Dick's fault that Bush isn't bright enough to be able to focus on the myriad details in numerous policy areas?
Is it Bush's fault that he got elected president even though he was manifestly unqualified....and then even after 4 years of seeing what he had to offer, we decided to torture the poor fellow by making him have to serve a second term?
Someone had to pick up the slack and no one else was willing to do so, so good ol' Dick Cheney took it upon himself to guide the ship of state.
And for this he is ridiculed and disparaged in this paper....and yet, even now, when we all know the dirty dealings do we see anyone in Congress really willing to take on Cheney??
No, of course not....we just want to sit around and gripe about this poor old man with his failing heart and his iron will.
But this is a dick that doesn't care. He will force apart the lips of intransigence and will pentertate to the source of the matter and will deliver with explosive force to everyone's satisfaction.
Way to go, Dick!
Posted by: asiajohn | June 26, 2007 08:34 AM
sigh. thank you ralph nader, we owe it all to you and your ego.
Posted by: jimfilyaw | June 26, 2007 08:49 AM
WaPoo got all of its information, not from investigative reporting, but from their online comment sections. They cut n' paste our comments into their dick Cheney series.
Posted by: kevinschmidt | June 26, 2007 08:59 AM
From His Extremeness' "Extreme Mortman":
http://www.extrememortman.com/cheney/i-never-metaphor-i-didnt-like-2/#comments
Posted by: nickthimmeschearthlinknet | June 26, 2007 08:59 AM
WaPoo got all of its information, not from investigative reporting, but from their online comment sections. They cut n' paste our comments into their dick Cheney series.
Posted by: kevinschmidt | June 26, 2007 09:00 AM
Sometimes some of the people will think it's all fine and they can do anything they want to do whilst neglecting the position that calls for 'public' service. God knows the difference as well as the whole Trinity so be not amazed that escape from reality cometh forth as nothing, not one thing, gets by the Father and he knoweth the hearts of men and the spirit of their existence. Oh, of course he knows the letter also and also knows the USA firsters versus those with prophetic reality as they chose other gods. Oh Zionist, you have not fooled all and surely not Him and the one who sent Him. www confidentialsources com where links to reality of fact are found.
Posted by: abroadventure | June 26, 2007 09:11 AM
In a programmer article such as this we should be exploring the
concept of NON-professional politicians rather than the notion of
secret, insider trading, in effect, of agendas, purposes, profits and illegal activity, to be hidden. Its enough that there is the need for the country to be led, rather than having this shadow conspiracy reflection in every move, so that the people are MISLED, robbed,
lied to and sold out at every turn. this is a particular technique of the republican party, whose purpose has been to aggrandise big and bigger business to the detriment of the workers, or in simpler terms: slavery, but the kinder and gentler type, as well as reducing or removing civil rights, human rights and government services to the lower half of the population while
whoring after laws that serve only the Imperial, entitled and
self appointed grand klaxons of the hate organizations, dividing the peoples, subverting the peoples and clearly not the
intention of the founding fathers. This is no more a democracy than England a Monarchy, but the house of lords here are lying lawyers legislating ONLY their own success, at the expense of the people. Karl and Dick utilize timeworn cliches to describe the greedy down low behaviors intimated in "using each other
to the best effect" . The facts are they are driving this country into the ground and eliminating any education that could lead to introspection on life, hstory and reality. We now have the
Plantation of excesses where the field workers live in half million dollar shacks with all the services, and the disposable people are ignored as they die in the street. Those who go to the moon and into space are princes of death for the rest, and war is something we inflict on those who refuse our desires.
there is no need to spend billions on space travel or greed wars
except to get the kickbacks on contracts and tell each other they are carrying the country. This sham ends only when the lower tier of the economy fails and humanity is subverted once again by the Machiavellian lunacy
Posted by: bebeyond49 | June 26, 2007 09:12 AM
A credible bio about Cheney's legendary characteristics, flaws & failures was published in 2004 by journalist John Nichols. Called DICK: THE MAN WHO IS PRESIDENT (The New Press), it was routinely ignored by the Mainstream Media, including The Washington Post. (They are pretty late to this story, which is hard to fathom as he has been a mover/shaker for some time.) Mr. Cheney's long history is worth noting. What we are seeing is his apotheosis, and it isn't pretty...unless you think fascism is pretty.
Posted by: tdisante | June 26, 2007 09:21 AM
It becomes clearer every day that the true President is the Dick Cheney and our Dear Leader is simply a puppet selected by Cheney and his gang of henchmen for his simple mind (and that is generous)and easily stroked ego. Mind you, the Dems collectivly are even bigger wimps than the President for letting this happen even after they siezed power of the congress. 2008 needs to replace them all and bring back true democracy to the U.S.
Posted by: rcc_2000 | June 26, 2007 09:25 AM
Lawyers use a Latin phrase, "Res ipsa loquitor," which means "The thing speaks for itself."
Bush is a trivial moron, and Cheney is in control from behind the scenes, with no accountability. Their actions over the past six years speak all too clearly to these truths.
Posted by: H5N1 | June 26, 2007 09:35 AM
So much for the "Checks and Balances" written into the Constitution. How can one evil, power hungry miserable excuse for a human being get away with this crap?
Because our lazy, corrupt, do nothing, incompetent 109th and 110th Congress'and their leaders, are more concerned with graft, greed and listening to the their handlers on K-street. Their only loyalty is to the lobbyists for the special corporate interests that have bought and paid for them.
What is really scary is that our incompetent puppet, President George W. Bush still has the power to start another war. With a war monger like Dick Cheney pulling Bush's strings, the prospect for a nuclear war is even greater.
Congress must exercise their "Oversight" responsibility and Impeach this dangerous tyrant now!
Posted by: Justicein2008 | June 26, 2007 09:35 AM
So much for the "Checks and Balances" written into the Constitution. How can one evil, power hungry miserable excuse for a human being get away with this crap?
Because our lazy, corrupt, do nothing, incompetent 109th and 110th Congress'and their leaders, are more concerned with graft, greed and listening to the their handlers on K-street. Their only loyalty is to the lobbyists for the special corporate interests that have bought and paid for them.
What is really scary is that our incompetent puppet, President George W. Bush still has the power to start another war. With a war monger like Dick Cheney pulling Bush's strings, the prospect for a nuclear war is even greater.
Congress must exercise their "Oversight" responsibility and Impeach this dangerous tyrant now!
Posted by: Justicein2008 | June 26, 2007 09:37 AM
Bwahahahah. Hold the line on spending? Bwahahahaha. Small gov'mint cornservative? Bwahahahah. Cut taxes to get more tax revenue? Bwahahaha. You guys are killin' me. And he took the choices to President George J. Le Petomane? Work, work, work. Work, work, work.
Posted by: Bluetexan | June 26, 2007 09:41 AM
Both Perry3 and asiajohn make a good point - whatever Cheney's yen for power, he can only go as far as George Bush will allow. That Bush lacks any capacity for analysis or grappling with complexities and cheerfully hands the details off to Cheney's office gives Dr. Strangelove his power base. Still, Cheney singularly lacks any notion of restraint in aggrandizing power to the executive, risking a fascist taint of what is supposed to be representative governance. I suppose the kooks of the far right can make an argument that Congress cannot or will not govern, lest they make choices that cost them their individual power - sadly, that argument contains a great deal of truth as well. Ultimately, though, we in the electorate allowed ourselves to be snookered by a plausible nonetity into voting to put him in office and keep him there when we should have known better. In a backhanded fashion, George Bush and the chaos of the past six years may have done us all a favor; if we learn to look past the packaging of television ads and sound bites in choosing our leadership hereafter, Bush will have done a great service simply through his dim wits and ineptitude.
Posted by: clare_d_loon | June 26, 2007 09:47 AM
google this:
Unimpeachable - A Bush/Cheney Tribute
Posted by: jimprues | June 26, 2007 09:58 AM
He is pure evil! If you know what to look for he has the mark of the beast! This man will go down in history as a master mass murderer! There is nothing but greed and evil in his being! He is no better nor any worst than Hitler!
Posted by: aishablack1 | June 26, 2007 10:00 AM
He is pure evil! If you know what to look for he has the mark of the beast! This man will go down in history as a master mass murderer! There is nothing but greed and evil in his being! He is no better nor any worst than Hitler!
Posted by: aishablack1 | June 26, 2007 10:00 AM
Cheney has become our little Dictator...In the U.S. this is not suppose to happen. It happens in Iraq and North Korea, but it is NOT suppose to happen in the United States of America. He has become so powerful that he has created a new country here in the United States... a fourth branch not subject to any review. We are no longer the country of our forefathers. Means justify the ends...whose ends?...we are suppose to be a Democracy not a dictatorship of the executive run by the oil companies! Paranoia, fear, greed, and secrecy have always been the tactics of famous dictators.
The principles of the Constitution that I teach at school stress "consent of the governed", amendment process, checks and balances which were put in to avoid the monarchy of that King George. OUR Constitution has been so highly respected by other countries for over 200 hundred years. No longer...But President..WHO is our President?..has allowed this to happen.. he was aware of this change of our Constitution or he was "out to lunch" (which seemed many times, literally, since he was not at many of those meetings) Either way, President Bush is shameful. Cheney makes me cry... GET RID OF CHENEY NOW..but he is so powerful...I fear he will still control things from his home...and Bush will let him.
You said not to make personal attacks. What do we do when we realize people of trust have manipulated us and abused their power? Who can we turn to and trust?
For Heaven Sake, Cheny's abuse of power is no where near the same league as a guy who could not be faithful to his wife!
Beth McKenzie-Mohr
Posted by: B.McKenzie-Mohr | June 26, 2007 10:04 AM
Anyone ready to move to Iceland?
Posted by: styll | June 26, 2007 10:04 AM
styll --
I was thinking Canada, especially when Cheney gets ready to attack Iran.
Iceland sounds good, too.
Posted by: nads1 | June 26, 2007 10:28 AM
If rich, white, business men want to stimulate the economy is it any coincidence that the main economic beneficiary of that process are going to be rich, white, business men?
I appalled at how naive the vice president and his advisers are.
You could give the same tax breaks to the bottom earners in this country and it would stimulate the economy as much. Since the super wealthy are likely to have their capital more mobile it may not necessarily stay in this country. It will for sure only go to certain parts of the country which are already prosperous.
The low wage earners will use their small tax breaks in their poorer neighborhoods and stimulate local businesses, generate more local taxes and pay into school taxes in poor districts, all in all it would target the neediest parts of the under preforming economy for capital infusion which will create jobs and other opportunities.
The shame is the opposition is so inept it can not clearly present a the better option than the further consolidation of wealth and power that will inevitably uncut most citizen's trust in our system.
Posted by: xerxes | June 26, 2007 10:29 AM
If you look beyond Cheney to the larger picture, the Executive branch is amazingly incompetent - just look at their "everything's fine" handling of Iraq until 2006 and their "heckuva job" with Katrina, plus any number of smaller bureaucratic bungles like the attorney firings. Has Cheney's demand for control paralyzed the rest of the Executive? Or is he just "effective" because of the incompetence, which exists for other reasons such as cronyism and party hackery? No doubt he has gotten his agenda through, yet if you pull away from the picture one click, you see an Executive that time and again just can't execute. So the Cheney phenomenon should be viewed against that backdrop.
Posted by: crozetproject | June 26, 2007 10:30 AM
I've been following this series. To date, the writers seem timid with respect to actually calling Cheney for what he is--a megalomaniac bent on throwing the Constitution in the garbage can for his own ends. The picture being painted is a sympathetic one of a poor, misunderstood, much maligned patriot who is not appreciated in his time.
This man is dangerous to the Constitution, and thus to the country. He uses fear, manufactured by the so-called war on terror which was launched after a convenient "Pearl Harbor-like" event, to manipulate the population. Of course, the population, if it was not so ignorant and fundamentally bigoted, would not be so easily manipulated by fear.
In any event, I am severely disappointed. Perhaps the explanation is that the writers have legimate reason to fear the reincarnation of the National Socialist Party that is the current administration. I fear we will soon lose our democracy all in the name of preserving it. Let us hope we do not let this cabal cancel the 2008 elections in the name of national security, and under the slogan: "We have to suspend Democracy in order to preserve it."
Posted by: map529 | June 26, 2007 10:31 AM
The article appears extraordinarily well documented - but who knows: Cheney clearly cannot answer and present his view ...
At any rate the main issues are of a constitutional nature, and about the formal structures and protocols that frame decision making in our government.
We have an executive branch, with all decisions converging to the pen of that single wo/man - the president. A person or a group indeed controlling the final stages of the network of communications and thought surrounding the president can in effect divert or control the many processes, and significantly affect the necessary checks and balances in place. That single wo/man at the top, even assuming that s/he were truly exceptional (!!) has only one brain, and comes with the limited perspective attending any single human. Implicit in what we call a good presidency, is the hope that that single brain, that single mind, is complemented with a well functioning process that branches out to a multiplicity of perspectives, expanding and supporting the decisions that eventually bear the president's signature; and that also at times may mitigate or even oppose some of his personal choices. An essential property of our government, and which makes this country better than, say, Venezuela or Russia, is that the people in power are vetted, and are not capable to divert for their own agenda the decision machine that they lead.
The essential question is thus of an abstract nature - there is a grey zone surrounding the way business is done at the top. This uncertainty fulfills some positive purpose: the prerogatives of the president and of the administration he puts in place after each election are to impart a style and a direction that may be significantly different than his predecessors - one wants to preserve that freedom in style and execution. On the other hand, and as this review illustrates, a system that is left to operate without enough self-awareness and feedback is subjected to the possibility of "network sickness" - an entity or group of entities perverting the free flows that one would desire in a healthy decision community.
Moving towards solution:
One way is to legislate more constraints onto the executive. This may come. But instead (or in support of) of such approach, it may be very helpful to develop methods and tools increasing the self-awareness of the dynamics at the top. Due process requires the president as all decision makers to keep a schedule of whom they meet. Such information is material for review processes. What does not exist, is a methodology to assemble all the pieces of the decision making puzzle. As an extension to the governance processes in place, and to attend to the problems illustrated by the current vice-presidency, one could envision a "visual" mechanism of checks and balances, linking the various document flows, the various interventions on such flows, and even less visible issues such as the attendance lists, and "who was attending the preparatory meetings that led to adoption of a document".
Attending such information gathering process, there could be a governance process that would measure all these flows, and represent to the president how well he is served by the starlike administration that connects to him and serves him. This process could also represent to which extent a person or a group of persons controls the flow of processes.
That would be a remarkable tool. In my sense, the development of such tool would naturally impel a president to develop better structures. It would as well over time provide fodder and material for constitutional improvements of the decision making processes at the top.
This is a field of Political Science that in my view is begging for strategic tools. Much as computers boosted productivity in ways unforeseen 30 years ago, the undertaking of such self-aware mechanism may unleash an explosion of improvements in our governing structures.
saaackkk@yahoo.com
Posted by: saaackkk | June 26, 2007 10:35 AM
After yesterday's hit piece,in which the writers implicitly expressed in every paragraph righteous indignation that Cheney would order subordinates to treat murdering psychopathic terrorists the way they deserve to be treated, this is an improvement.
Today's piece makes Cheney sound like the Hillary Clinton of the Bush administration: someone with an invisible hand in everything.
But there are two important differences: unlike Hillary, Cheney was elected and he is extraordinarily competent.
Posted by: theduke89 | June 26, 2007 10:36 AM
Response to message Posted by: saaackkk | June 26, 2007 10:35 AM
Your proposal is ridiculous. As if any President would want some neutral bureau observing and evaluating the way he does business and then be subjected to inevitable politically motivated leaks that would attend such oversight.
It's a preposterous idea no matter how clever and innocuous the language used makes it seem.
The people at the top of government, like anyone else, deserve privacy and confidentiality. What you are proposing is a spy operation of sorts on the Presidency.
It's an idea that will never fly, no matter who happens to be President. It is a proposal that every presidential candidate would either sneer or laugh at, depending on whether they believed it was a serious proposal or not. My guess is that most would look at it as a joke.
Posted by: theduke89 | June 26, 2007 10:50 AM
Response to message Posted by: saaackkk | June 26, 2007 10:35 AM
Your proposal is ridiculous. As if any President would want some neutral bureau observing and evaluating the way he does business and then be subjected to inevitable politically motivated leaks that would attend such oversight.
It's a preposterous idea no matter how clever and innocuous the language used makes it seem.
The people at the top of government, like anyone else, deserve privacy and confidentiality. What you are proposing is a spy operation of sorts on the Presidency.
It's an idea that will never fly, no matter who happens to be President. It is a proposal that every presidential candidate would either sneer or laugh at, depending on whether they believed it was a serious proposal or not. My guess is that most would look at it as a joke.
Posted by: theduke89 | June 26, 2007 10:52 AM
Why is the Post devoting a series to this scum?
Posted by: vtflyygirl | June 26, 2007 10:58 AM
So, violating the Hatch Act, the DoJ and Cheney "compromise" by noisily sealing the records after implicating a Democrat? Never mind it remains a breach of powers separation.
That's not a concession to moderation.
The tax cut will be looked back as the major economic flaw of the new century's policy aside from deregulating Enron. Cheney profits with the help of Ken Lay then passes a tax cut for the richest to recover the market interests he did effect?
As for NASA, there's several trillion missing that could of had more to do with Cheney having something to do with it.
What, did Gilligan Bush drink a memorial beer and let Skipper Cheney solve that issue?
So, retired Sen. Phil Gramm(now a lobbyist) says Cheney is a 'little government'' conservative. Give me some of what you're drinking, and don't talk about it over the phone or email because Cheney's watching.
So, we find out the most unfair tax cut in history was not enough for Cheney. Inform me how anyone stood up to him?
If tax cuts cause growth, there should be no taxes. The premise of one shows how the existence of any taxes whatsoever reduces possible unlimited growth. Oh, you say Cheney has subsidies he wants in place to prop his own portfolio?
Bush wanted compassionate tax to keep u

![[Photo]](http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2007/06/21/PH2007062101454.jpg)
![[Photo]](http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2007/06/21/PH2007062101438.jpg)
![[Photo]](http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2007/06/25/PH2007062501559.jpg)
![[Photo]](http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2007/06/21/PH2007062101447.jpg)
So exactly when did the Washington Post become aware that the president is little more than a figurehead - and why was that information withheld until now?