First it was the End of Cowboy Diplomacy, and the ascendancy of diplomacy in dealing with Iran–leaving Sy Hersch with some egg on his face.
Then it was the Bush Administration failing to act on their usual grandstanding and beliigerence to the other branches of government by actually reversing their ground on detainees after the Hamdan decision–not just for those at Gitmo, but also for those at CIA prisons worldwide.
And now the third blow in less than a week: The end of unconditional Halliburton contracts in Iraq, and the divvying up up contracting duties to no less than three independent, audited, competing contractors.
These are three pieces of shockingly good news that should take us all aback. I haven’t seen this administration go this much on the defensive and actually reconcile themselves to somewhat saner versions of hare-brained policies in the six years since I’ve been watching them.
And there can be only one reason for this in my mind: a deep and personal rift between President Bush and V.P. Cheney that has now moved into actual policy considerations.
For the record, I have never believed that Bush was evil to the core. I believe he is an arrogant and totally-out-of-touch rich frat-boy. I believe that he is a deeply insecure and spiteful man. I believe he is a sociopath without human compassion.
But at heart, I think he’s a privileged little brat who has had everything done for him all his life, and who still thinks he’s a big kid–and who’s in a job that’s WAY too big for him.
Cheney, on the other hand, is an evil bastard. Cheney is a man who, as John Edwards pointed out, voted against meals on wheels and the MLK, Jr. holiday. He’s a man who calculated his college attendance, marriage, and even his wife’s pregnancy to exactly coincide with draft deferrals from Vietnam. He’s a man who was on the inside of the Nixon administration, and felt that Nixon was wronged.
And these policies that are being reversed are Cheney’s pet policies.
As many journalists and bloggers have pointed out, the Gitmo detainee policy has been Cheney’s brainchild and pet issue. It is Cheney who insisted on the Gitmo policy; Cheney who lashed out at Democrats and the press over torture; Cheney who first and most violently claimed that CIA prisons and extraordinary rendition were absolutely necessary. Bush’s defenses of these policies have, by contrast, seemed tepid, petulant and annoyed by comparison.
Interestingly, they have by contrast NOT stood down on the NSA spying after Hamdan. I believe that’s because the NSA spying program was more Bush’s idea than Cheney’s–and that Bush personally stands to lose a great deal politically (possibly even impeachment) by backing down on it.
And Iran? Remember that it was CHENEY who was and remains a member of PNAC. It is Cheney who wants to nuke Iran. Bush may have been gung-ho to attack Iraq for on account of various personal demons, corporate allegiances and bad advice, but I doubt very much that Bush has any personal incentive to attack Iran. Bush isn’t PNAC, and it’s rumored that Bush highly resents his PNAC advisors for their bullshit lies about how the post-war occupation would turn out.
And Halliburton? This is not only the corporation that Cheney used to run and with whom he still has ties, but it’s the corporation that continues to line Cheney’s pockets. What else can we surmise from a move to hamstring Cheney’s favorite little corporation? I doubt very much that the move is to save face politically, since Halliburton’s horrible misdeeds in Iraq have not exactly been in the news lately. What about the character of this administration over the last six years would lead us to believe that they would make this move out of the kindness of their own hearts?
——————————————
No, my friends. Something very deep is at work here. Strange events have been taking place–strange events that would bespeak, for this first time, a shred of sanity in this administration.
And every piece of unexpected good news comes at the price of a policy very near and dear to Cheney’s heart.
My suspicion is that little boy Bush has seen the political handwriting on the wall, and told Cheney to go fuck himself in none too equivocal terms. I could be wrong, but that’s what my objective analysis tells me.
What do you all think?
[UPDATE: I understand that all this could be political grandstanding and approval-seeking. But then again, it’s not like Halliburton’s been in the news lately, and the GOP stands to lose significant ground with its base by complying with Hamdan. I still believe something bigger is afoot.]
[Cross-posted from My Left Wing, and on my dKos]
for getting rid of Cheney–even if we do still have Bush left to get rid of.
so, the sociopath is finally getting out from under the thumb of the bastard. yay?
Simon, how dare you question the assertion that there is a “deep personal rift” between Cheney and Bush. It’s in boldface. That means it must be true.
it’s got to be BOLDFACED CAPS before it’s infallible intuitive pronouncement.
seriously, though, answer me this: what’s more insane, this diary or that it’s received hundreds of tips over in orange?
if you consider only one reason, then yup, there can be only one reason.
but then again, it’s a reason backed up pretty well:
let’s put aside for a moment that Bush “is a sociopath without human compassion” and consider what this diary is asserting on the basis of zero evidence:
George Bush is really just a spoiled little boy corrupted by his evil uncle Dick. But now, it must be, he’s turning from his evil uncle, standing up for himself at last… except that it’s not really himself, the spoiled brat, standing up (or the sociopath), but the not-evil core telling that evil bastard Dick to go fuck himself. Yay not-evil core!!!
it’s just fracking delusional, beyond the fact that it’s entirely speculative, grounded in nothing more than spoon’s conviction that it must be so because GWB, compassionless sociopath, isn’t “evil to the core” and therefore the really bad things the Bush Administration has done all originate with that evil bastard Dick.
and again, this utter absurdity of a diary is Recommended over at dkos, proud flag-bearer of the Reality-Based Community™. how is this nonsense any better than the most vacuous conspiracy theory?
wait, i know: it’s non-threatening. it’s an anti-conspiracy theory. rather than destabilizing anyone’s faith in the fundamental validity of our federal government, this entirely baseless theory – taken seriously – supports irrational faith in government. the MSM certainly can’t fault anyone for that!
it’s just fascinatingly horrible… but i must get some sleep.
you seem to have a boundless hostility for spoon.
not boundless… but yeah, he bugs me.
there’s a fine line between being annoyed and being disrespectful. I’m not saying your critique is without merit. I’m saying that it is not cool to attack everything he writes in a sarcastic and dismissive tone.
He was already chased off the front-page, I’d say the battle, if that is what it is, is already won.
The prick rule is vague and vague for a reason. Your treatment of spoon is walking up to the line and skirting with it.
You can disagree and even be critical without engaging in totally disrespectful behavior.
You’ve been warned, Simon.
Booman, what’s this about TINS being “chased” off the front page?
What the hell?
First, you said yourself that TINS left of his own accord, resigning his position as a front-pager.
Nobody “chased” him off. TINS posted several diaries, including his infamous final diary (as it turns out), tht was hostile and insulting to a lot of people here.
We’re honest people, so we spoke up and said what we thought. I, for one, did not appreciate TINS’ wild assertion that the Democratic Party “gets lots of votes from Communists”. That’s a QUOTE from TINS. I especially did not appreciate TINS resolute refusal to either explain or apologize for the assertion that Communists have some significant influence in the Democratic Party, which is total bullshit.
So nobody “chased” TINS off the front-page. TINS left Booman Tribune as a frontpager of his own volition. I am not privvy to his decision-making process, but my guess is that he left because he’s used to laudatory responses on DailyKos and MyLeftWing, and was disappointed he didn’t receive the same here.
I don’t have any personal animosity for TINS; it’s his ideas to which I object. Here, once again, a diarist has made wildly unsupported assumptions, logical fallacies, and Simon has called him on it–quite effectively, too.
Look at the other comments on this diary, Booman. Do you see any substantive responses other than Simon’s? That’s because there isn’t any substance to which someone might respond. This diary is TINS’ opinion presented as fact, and it’s ridiculous.
whatever.
I doubt you’d react to these same ideas with the same level of hostility if they were presented by someone else.
He thinks Bush is a sociopath without any empathy, but not truly evil in the way that Dick Cheney is evil. Is that an unsupportable contention?
He thinks Bush may be fed up with Cheney and has decided to stop acting like his puppet. Is this not possible?
It’s speculation and opinion, presented as such. What’s the problem?
It’s the ideas I’m reacting to, not the person. Yes, the absurd past statements of TINS color my reaction to these ideas. You lose credibility over time when you write stuff like “the Democrats get plenty of votes from Communists”.
A sociopath is a person without a conscience or empathy–in other words, a monster without a soul, an abomination in a human skin. That’s the definition of evil. Cheney’s a smarter sociopath than Bush, but my evaluation of their behavior over their adult lifetimes leads me to the conclusion that both men are sociopaths.
Which leads me back to Simon’s point: we should be glad that Bush, a sociopath, may be slipping free of the control of Cheney, a somewhat smarter sociopath? Pardon me if I don’t break out the party hats and candles for that bit of news, even if it’s true (and TINS hasn’t proven that it is true).
So, are you still saying that TINS was “driven off” the frontpage, or is that no longer an issue? Because there’s only two people who can decide whether or not TINS is a frontpager at Booman Tribune: TINS and you. You can put this diary frontpage right now if you want to. So what’s the problem?
the problem i have with spoon is two-fold. first off, i feel that he’s consistently disingenuous. his intent, it seems to me, is not to consider issues so much as it is to manufacture memes. (so yeah, he’s perfectly suited to acting as somebody’s consultant – issues of quality aside.) it seems to me that he is consciously manipulative. so, when i cross the line from critique to slam (above) it is in part as if to say, “you know, spoon, if you actually considered what you were saying – rather than being so content with your power to generate buzz – you wouldn’t write such utter nonsense.”
the other part of my animosity derives from the way spoon ‘left the frontpage.’ this event, it seems to me, emerged out of the very disingenuousness that bugs me. the problem is that it wasn’t quite openly dealt with. spoon wrote one of his typical poorly reasoned diaries, which was actually an attack on quite a few people, and then yucked it up about how the diary was received over at dkos, writing that in his opinion folks at BT ought to just be ‘left behind.’
the fallout here? well, not much, actually. i’m stunned that he is so shameless as to continue to post here. but then, as he’s said, he’s willing to take the votes of communists and whomever else. in short: he’s willing to use BT to propagate his ideas even though he openly disrespects the people here. and that pisses me off. (you might note that in the orange version he doesn’t even mention that the diary is cross-posted here.)
but still, when he posts here i don’t simply show up to call him names. rather, i go after the stupidity inherent in the diaries. because as i see it, spoon’s combination of disingenuousness, disrespect and bad thinking are actually harmful. he sets, in my view, a bad example.
stopped reading at ‘frat-boy’.
Nothing personal. Just my policy.
Lions, togers and Cheney, oh my!