Getting Cheney
The first thing you need to understand about him is his strange power to induce irrationality in his opponents, even greater possibly than the similar power wielded by Bush. It will be the stuff academic careers are built on. For now, we have to make do with the media and punditry, their descriptions of the raw manifestations of Cheney’s dark hold upon the body politic and their efforts, with varying degrees of sophistication, to comprehend.
Derrick Z. Jackson, Boston Globe:
PLEASE, Dick Cheney, keep talking!
Now we know why he was so hunkered down as vice president, except to proclaim that we would be welcomed as liberators in Iraq. Had he been more candid sooner, even more Republicans would have staked their lawns with Obama signs, ashamed of the rock their party lives under.
I couldn’t agree with him more, at least as far as Line 1. Please, Dick Cheney, keep talking! Derrick kind of loses it after that. You know, I’m thinking now if Cheney had spoken up more, maybe even run himself, Democrats wouldn’t be faced with such horrible turmoil … a White House increasingly following the Bush line, enraging the lefty base, and a Speaker on the rocks. They’d still be in helpless opposition rather than helpless power.
Oddly, the words “House Speaker” and the name “Nancy Pelosi,” not to mention “CIA Director” and “Leon Panetta.” don’t appear in that column. Always wondered what the “Z.” in “Derrick Z. Jackson” stands for, BTW. Not a lot of “Z” names out there. “Z” as in “Zzzzzzzzz,” maybe. Is there a precedent in American history for a former veep of a party in disarray wreaking such havoc in the opposite camp?
OK, here’s a Cheney critic who disgrees with him on several major aspects of Cheney’s veephood, with deep respect for his character and his reasons, and with nothing but disdain and scorn for the rest of Cheney’s critics. Carl Gannon takes a stab at understanding Cheney at Politics Daily. It is a must read. The words “House Speaker” and “Nancy Pelosi” also don’t appear in this, but it is more of a backward glance and an admonishment of politicians whose practice of the craft is clumsy and inept compared to Cheney’s.
At 10:39 a.m., Cheney spoke with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. It’s clear from the transcript of that call that Cheney believes he may have authorized the shooting down of an American passenger jet. Rumsfeld seems skeptical, but he doesn’t really know either. I’m not sure “changed” is the right word, but I believe that in those 40 minutes–with the nation under attack, with Cheney not knowing if his daughters and grandchildren are safe, with his impression that he’s directed a very hard order to some flyboy in the U.S. Air Force, possibly killing another 200 Americans–that Dick Cheney resolved to do whatever it would take to protect this country, regardless of the cost to his reputation or popularity. I respect him for that, and I empathize with him.
…
Am I wrong to get worked up about the rhetorical excesses of Cheney’s critics, when the stakes of governmental misjudgments in the previous administration seem so high? If so, I’m in good company. In 1944, as Allied bombers devastated German cities, George Orwell received a letter from a reader who said that although he realized “the Hun (has) got to be beaten,” he was troubled by the civilian casualties suffered in cities such as Dresden and Hamburg. Replied Orwell in his newspaper column, “It seems to me that you do less harm by dropping bombs on people than by calling them ‘Huns.’”
Surely that’s hyperbole, but we definitely do damage to ourselves when we substitute political debate with name-calling and ad-hominem attacks. I think Dick Cheney is wrong on important matters. I also think he is a patriot. And I hate to think that we have lost the ability to hold two such opinions in our heads at one time.
So while some Hill Republicans were fretting about getting a positive message out and others were launching substance-free listening tours, while GOP operatives were wringing their hands about whether Republicans could recover from the Bush years, and while most senior Bush alumni were in hiding, Dick Cheney–Darth Vader himself, Mr. Unpopularity, the last guy you’d supposedly want out there making the case–stepped onto the field. He’s made himself the Most Valuable Republican of the first four months of the Obama administration (ably assisted by a few bold denizens of the Hill like the ranking Republican on the House intelligence committee, Pete Hoekstra).
Of course, this has resulted in some Republican political operatives’ doing what they do best: complaining, on background, to the media. “As Cheney Seizes Spotlight, Many Republicans Wince,” was the front-page headline in Thursday’s Washington Post. Two Republican “strategists” spoke “on the condition of anonymity in order to be candid.” Profiles in courage! One of them opined that Cheney is “entirely unhelpful.” The other elaborated, “Even if he’s right, he’s absolutely the wrong messenger. . . . We want Bush to be a distant memory in the next election.”
To have such a juvenile understanding of political dynamics, you’d have to be a prominent “Republican strategist.” You might actually have both the Dole and McCain campaigns under your belt. Or perhaps you were one of those who encouraged the Bush White House to assume a fetal position on most issues in its second term and not fight back against slanders or defend their people, because to do so would spotlight the “wrong” issues or people.
But of course an intelligent and knowledgeable advocate–even if he’s personally not so popular–can do a lot to get an issue front and center. And the debate of that issue can do political damage to the existing administration and its congressional allies.
The real question any Republican strategist should ask himself is this: What will Republican chances be in 2012 if voters don’t remember the Bush administration–however problematic in other areas–as successful in defending the country after 9/11? To give this issue away would be to accept a post-Herbert-Hoover-like-fate for today’s GOP.
Well, the former vice-president has already turned the White House and its CIA director to his will. If he manages, simply by opening his mouth in a talk-show appearance and scribbling a letter, in taking down the House Speaker, he will deserve an even greater place in American history than he already does for his uncompromising, stalwart defense of the nation and unselfish service to his president in the Global War on Terrorism. His underlying lesson for history, as Kristol notes, is that in politics and war you have to fight, and keep fighting, and fight dirty if you have to, for what you believe in.
The above via RealClearPolitics. Meanwhile, this is rich. NYT’s Frank Rich on how the Obama admin just can’t seem to turn the page on Bush war crimes. Apparently they just aren’t wallowing deep enough.
Meanwhile, for the latest on what you need to know about Pelosi, just ask Surber.
Pelosi, recognizing her horrible gaffe, shifts fire from the CIA to “the Bush administration.” via HotAir. Smart enough not to directly engage Our Dark Lord Cheney? I dunno, to adapt a phrase, so far she’s been what our Brit cousins might call too dumb by half.
Riehlity check: the Obama admin, while happy to point Pelosi toward the oncoming bus, would rather she not dive under it. That means talking Dems into dropping the torture thing. Good luck!
Hinderaker at Powerline has the over-under on Pelosi’s speakership … you get to vote … also, examines some tectonic shifts in party lines on detainee policy.
Everyone loves a dark classic, but Neptunus Lex is getting a little tired of watching The Scottish Play.
Balloon Juice, which I’ve been enjoying a lot lately, yearns for Rumsfeld, but allows he is unlikely to prove a distraction from the Democratic Party’s current woes.
Dawn’s early light spotted in the hog pen: “I’m not convinced that either Cheney or Pelosi – the Republicans or the Democrats, actually want a lot of light shined on the events of the last eight years.” I dunno. I can see where the Dems are rethinking that, but at last check Cheney was for more, not less light. Jake T. Snake at Whiskey Fire, anonymous foul-mouthed savant who commented here so incisively if hurtfully the other day, also doesn’t seem to have figured out yet that digging up political mass graves is a messy business. Watch out you don’t fall in! (Anti-Southern bigotry alert).
Related, Protein Wisdom on the gnashing of teeth, rending of garments in left field re Obama and tribunals.
You know, I’m liking the idea that an ex-veep and a(nother) beauty queen could be the downfall of the Dems. Probably too much to hope for, but here’s Allahpundit on Axelrod’s tilting at Prejean.
OK, going out on a positive note, Treacher, evil genius, envisions a world in which Obama is funny, and above thinly veiled cheap shots at his detractors. Heck, I’d settle for a world where he made thinly veiled cheap shots at people who are actually in office.
G’day Instapundit, RCP, etal. Always so good to see you. Be sure to stop in and browse around Crittenden’s Right Wing Warmonger Bookshop while you’re here. It’s A Boutique Warmongery. So, you think maybe Biden’s trying to make himself more relevant by targeting himself? Good luck, Joe. Meanwhile, when it comes to missile strikes, Kilcullen and Exum aren’t just droning on.
Topics: Cheney, ancient mysteries, media, pols
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 8:42 am Comments (7) on Sunday, May 17, 2009
7 Responses to “Getting Cheney”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
May 17th, 2009 at 11:27 am
[...] Jules Crittenden is getting all Cheney [...]
May 17th, 2009 at 11:58 am
[...] that critics actually read the memos that the White House released. Dick Cheney keeps talking, with critics and admirers unable to agree even on the ontological nature of his [...]
May 17th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
[...] JULES CRITTENDEN: Getting Cheney. [...]
May 17th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
[...] Go here to see a roundup of Dick Cheney [...]
May 17th, 2009 at 8:57 pm
“I couldn’t agree with him more, at least as far as Line 1. “
HAHA! I was just about to say the same thing before I read your comment :)
May 17th, 2009 at 9:24 pm
“…ashamed of the rock their party lives under.”
As opposed to drifting through the dreamworld that inhaling Nitrous Oxide places you into?
May 18th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
[...] the MSM wages war on the former Vice President, Dick Cheney, again Jules Crittenden: Well, the former vice-president has already turned the White House and its CIA director to his [...]