Just one big, dysfunctional family

About a week ago, Steve Clemons raised eyebrows throughout the political world with a report on the “race currently underway between different flanks of the administration to determine the future course of US-Iran policy.” As Clemons described it, Cheney’s team is actively circumventing the president’s team in order to instigate a U.S. conflict with Iran.

Clemons’ report was bolstered by comments from the IAEA’s Mohamed ElBaradei, who told BBC Radio this week that a war with Iran is a serious possibility because of “new crazies who say ‘let’s go and bomb Iran.'” He didn’t identify the “crazies,” but warned of those who “have extreme views and say the only solution is to impose your will by force.”

Like people in, say, the Vice President’s office?

In interviews, people who have spoken with Mr. Cheney’s staff have confirmed the broad outlines of the reports, and said that some of the hawkish statements to outsiders had been made by David Wurmser, a former Pentagon official who is now the principal deputy assistant to Mr. Cheney for national security affairs. The accounts were provided by people who expressed alarm about the statements, but refused to be quoted by name.

Yesterday, Condi Rice insisted that the entire Bush gang is on the same page…

“The president of the United States has made it clear that we are on a course that is a diplomatic course,” Ms. Rice said here. “That policy is supported by all of the members of the cabinet, and by the vice president of the United States.”

…but Rice’s deputies apparently aren’t convinced.

Ms. Rice’s assurance came as senior officials at the State Department were expressing fury over reports that members of Vice President Dick Cheney’s staff have told others that Mr. Cheney believes the diplomatic track with Iran is pointless, and is looking for ways to persuade Mr. Bush to confront Iran militarily.

Just one big, dysfunctional family.

And what might Cheney’s office have to say about one of his top national security aides (and one of the administration’s most notorious neocons) advocating war with Iran?

[A senior Bush administration official] said, “The vice president is not necessarily responsible for every single thing that comes out of the mouth of every single member of his staff.”

First, that’s not much on a denial. Second, as Kevin noted, “I’m sure Wurmser will be fired any day now.”

Let’s also take a moment to appreciate just how disconcerting it is that we have a Vice President’s office competing with the President’s office on matters of war. As Digby asked, “Why am I not surprised?”

Until recently, the Vice President was a second rate functionary who went to funerals. Now he’s so powerful that he’s running a shadow presidency and nobody really knows what to do about it. Certainly nobody thinks the empty codpiece will do anything about it. In fact, it’s just assumed that Uncle Dick has ordered him to STFU and go out and babble incoherently while the big boys do the work.

In fact, for such a tough guy, that Bush sure is a wimpy little doormat, isn’t he? Cheney and the neocons basically tell him go f**k himself on a regular basis and he just takes it. No wonder he’s pounding his chest and screeching “I’m the president!” to his Texas pals.

It does explain a lot, doesn’t it?

Is this not the very definition of treason?

  • It does explain a lot, doesn’t it?

    The term “useful idiot” comes to mind.

  • This comes as no surprise from the perpetual war administration. Apparently Europe has shit-for-brains pollsters too or this crap is just more propaganda to make bombing Iran more palatable.

    London stink-tank releases poll saying most of Europe supports pre-emptive strike on Iran.

    Jpost article includes description of traitor Eliot Abrams’ speech saying that “US is appeasing Arabs and Europeans” and (between the lines), he will interfere with Rice doing her duties.

    As further proof that the Shrub misadministration is intent on keeping perpetual war rolling on killing brown-skinned people, C__tholeeza Rice discourages peace between Israel and Syria because “the time isn’t ripe for peace yet.” For the survival of the human race on this planet, we should seriously consider riding ourselves of the Shrub/Cheney war machine holding us hostage until January ’09. At the risk of sounding like an alarmist, we may not make it until then otherwise.

  • Of the many things I could say, the one that rises to the top is:

    They deserve each other.

  • Do we even HAVE a government? There’s something fundamentally wrong when the Sectretary of State tries to assure the American people that their Vice President (traditionally a person with as much influence as a substitute teacher) is not trying to start another war.

  • “Mr. Cheney believes the diplomatic track with Iran is pointless, and is looking for ways to persuade Mr. Bush to confront Iran militarily.”

    naturally mr draft deferment would feel this way, but on the other hand, with everything in iraq going to shit, why would it be so hard to convince commander codpiece to start another war as a diversion……..

  • “I’m sure Wurmser will be fired any day now.” Yeah … right after Alberto.

    The only question now is will the evidence that finally leads to impeachment be a mushroom cloud? … But I’m over impeachment. I want a firing squad for these *ssholes.

  • Why does Condi always sound like she’s trying to convince herself more than anyone else? Does anyone take her seriously? If Cheney could outmaneuver Powell, and he did, then she has to be as delusionary as Decider Codpiece if she thinks she’s running any sort of show at all. When the rubber hits the road, Cheney won’t eat her for lunch. She’s merely a mid-morning snack.

    I too am past impeachment if only because I know it won’t happen no matter how atrocious it gets, but I can’t see the military letting itself be backed into yet another ground war with two already going badly, and a shortage of troops that not even Blackwater can furnish as private contractors.

    While Bush can’t fire Cheney he certainly could control him, by budgetary means if no other, so the real question is why isn’t little Shrub threatened by Cheney’s Machiavellis? What is the arrangement between them? There has to be one. Why don’t we ask Rover? He’ll know. Never before have we had a shadow presidency (I’m discounting spouses), and certainly not in the person of the Vice President. How did this come to be? The senior Shrub while VP under Reagan was corporate America’s backdoor to the WH in matters of deregulation and taxes, but despite having been CIA director it never seemed as if he was running his own foreign policy as Cheney does.

  • This is just the usual fantasy about how weak Bush is.

    In reality he’s not. Sure he’s as ignorant as the day he assumed office and he certainly does let Cheney dictate policy a lot.

    But that’s because Cheney reflects Bush’s own “gut” feelings: his religious belicosity, his obtuse belief in the effectiveness of brute force and distain for “complicated” solutions like diplomacy, his pensity to use bluster and threat instead of more traditional negotiations, indeed to see any attempt to compromise or negotiate as “weakness” to be avoided, rather than a compromise solution to be sought.

    Attempts to portray Bush as somehow “helpless” are merely negative versions of the “innocent king” theory. The king as king can do “no wrong”, so bad policies automatically stem from “bad advisors.”

    In fact Cheney simply acts as very useful human shield to cover up for what Bush would probably want to do anyway.

    He certainly needs his advisors to tell him what to do, but he alone has the power in our system.

    And he’s perfectly capable of telling Cheney to sit down and shut up (as he did over the Rumsfeld firing).

  • Comments are closed.