Home > Jay Bookman > Archives > 2009 > January > 08
Thursday, January 8, 2009
Dick Cheney, the glower behind the throne
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
In an interview with CBS Radio, Vice President Dick Cheney “insisted that his influence within the Bush administration was overstated throughout the past eight years.”
“The notion that somehow I was pulling strings or making presidential-level decisions. I was not,” he said.
“There was never any question about who was in charge. It was George Bush. And that’s the way we operated. This whole notion that somehow I exceeded my authority here, was usurping his authority, is simply not true. It’s an urban legend, never happened.”
That’s the party line these days … at least some times, among some parties. But among conservatives, the talking points change a bit. For example, conservative blogger Erick Erickson of redstate.com and Georgia’s own peachpundit.com was invited to lunch with Cheney recently. Erickson got a bit “verklempt” recounting the experience at peachpundit:
“This is about him — about Dick Cheney, the great, private conservative leader who whispers in the President’s ears. The untold story of this administration, and one that I asked him about with very little success at getting an answer (to be honest, my question was poorly formed as it is a difficult topic), is that Cheney has been the great conservative influence at the White House.
Solid, credible, dependable sources on Capitol Hill, both staff and elected leaders, tell me Cheney is the guy who they go to when they White House goes wobbly. It’s Cheney who calms the waters and straightens the spines.”
I have a pretty good idea which side the historians will take, but time will tell.
Permalink | Comments (72) | Post your comment |
Obama lays it on the line about economy
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
In a speech at George Mason University in Washington, President-elect Obama painted a stark picture of the crisis confronting the nation:
“We start 2009 in the midst of a crisis unlike any we have seen in our lifetime - a crisis that has only deepened over the last few weeks. Nearly two million jobs have now been lost, and on Friday we are likely to learn that we lost more jobs last year than at any time since World War II. Just in the past year, another 2.8 million Americans who want and need full-time work have had to settle for part-time jobs. Manufacturing has hit a twenty-eight year low. Many businesses cannot borrow or make payroll. Many families cannot pay their bills or their mortgage. Many workers are watching their life savings disappear. And many, many Americans are both anxious and uncertain of what the future will hold.
I don’t believe it’s too late to change course, but it will be if we don’t take dramatic action as soon as possible. If nothing is done, this recession could linger for years. The unemployment rate could reach double digits. Our economy could fall $1 trillion short of its full capacity, which translates into more than $12,000 in lost income for a family of four. We could lose a generation of potential and promise, as more young Americans are forced to forgo dreams of college or the chance to train for the jobs of the future. And our nation could lose the competitive edge that has served as a foundation for our strength and standing in the world….
It is time to set a new course for this economy, and that change must begin now. We should have an open and honest discussion about this recovery plan in the days ahead, but I urge Congress to move as quickly as possible on behalf of the American people. For every day we wait or point fingers or drag our feet, more Americans will lose their jobs. More families will lose their savings. More dreams will be deferred and denied. And our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse.”
That last sentence is the most chilling, and perhaps most important, in the speech. The stakes are that high. Full text here.
Permalink | Comments (247) | Post your comment |
Ground invasion a dangerous course
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The border between a necessity and a mistake isn’t as clearly marked as the border between nations. So when Israeli troops crossed the line that separates Israel from Gaza this week, they may also have strayed across the line into a mistake.
It’s impossible to argue that Israel had no right to respond as it has. With Hamas firing missiles into Israeli territory, Israel had every justification and indeed obligation to stop those attacks. The most fundamental duty of any government is to protect its people, and when the people have the tragic history of the Jews, that duty is close to sacred.
(Of course, Hamas and its supporters claim similar justification, arguing that it fired the missiles because Israel had sealed off Gaza and barred all but subsistence aid, denying its people a right to make a living. To which Israel responds that the embargo was necessary because Hamas is a terrorist group that refuses to recognize Israel’s right to exist, to which Hamas responds … well, the mutual recrimination can go all the way back to the days of the Bible.)
However, whether Israel had the right to respond militarily is a very different question than whether it was wise to do so in such all-out fashion, moving from a quite effective air campaign to outright ground invasion.
As powerful as it is, Israel’s military cannot impose peace. Any victory it achieves will be temporary; any cessation in missile launches will be fleeting. The idea that the Israeli military can “free” Gaza from the grip of Hamas over the long term is implausible.
And that’s the core of Israel’s predicament. In the short term, it has every advantage. It has the military might, the economic strength, the backing of the world’s sole superpower. In the short term, it has the ability to crush Hamas and is doing so.
But in the long term, the balance of power changes. The missiles acquired by its Arab enemies get longer in range and heavier in payload with every passing year. The Palestinians are producing many more babies than the Jews, threatening to change geography by demography, and international support for Israel, particularly outside the United States, is waning. According to our own analysts in the CIA and elsewhere, America’s power and influence will decline in the years to come, at least in relative terms, and so will its ability to protect Israel.
Conversely, while the policy of Hamas and the Palestinians may seem extremely self-destructive and foolish —- exposing their own people to death and destruction on a massive scale —- there is a perverted wisdom to it in the long term. By provoking attacks such as the bombing of the school at Jabaliya, which killed an estimated 40 civilians, including 10 children, Palestinian extremists ensure a simmering wrath against Israel that will nurture their cause for generations.
Somehow, Israel has to break that cycle. Somehow, it has to stop sacrificing its long-term survival hopes for short-term returns. But it will not do so without outside pressure, and that help can come from only one place —- the United States.
In that regard, President Bush has done Israel no favors. Rather than push Israel and its enemies to compromise, his unquestioning support has created a false sense of security for Israel. It has lulled its leaders and its people into believing that long-term survival really can be attained largely through force of arms, even though the map and demography say otherwise.
That hands-off approach has had an impact on many Palestinians as well. With no hope of intervention from the Americans, they have taken help where they could find it, from Iran. Through Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, the mullahs in Tehran have what they long sought, a role in attacking Israel and by doing so winning standing in the Islamic world.
And so the spiral deepens into dark familiar violence. For both sides, war now feels natural, almost safe, certainly safer than the risk of trying to change things. And their “friends” are all too willing to supply the means to make war, but balk at helping them find peace.
