I think George simply got mixed up in the wrong crowd. He mistook experience for wisdom. By all accounts, Dick Cheney is a nice guy when you sit down with him. Surely he comes across as knowledgeable and someone you can trust. George was the Presidential equivalent of Michael Brown. He was little more than a political appointee. He had no experience, and little intellectual knowledge of what was required to be President. He watched his dad and Reagan do it, but from the sidelines. I've watched my father do his job all my life. I have an idea of what's required, just by nature of hearing him and my Mom discuss various issues related to his work. But were I to actually sit in his chair and try to fashion a crown (he's a dental technician), I wouldn't know what to do. I've seen him do it, but I don't know how he does it. Similarly, George knew what the lifestyle entailed, but he was elected largely because of his name. He had no actual credentials. He had never been abroad. This was a man who knew nothing about the Middle East, nothing about Russia, nothing about South East Asia. He was suddenly thrust into a position, and he knew generally how he wanted to govern, but governing the entire US is a lot different from governing Texas. It's only natural that he would find kinship in older statesmen whom he respected growing up, and that he would rely on them to fill in his considerable gaps in knowledge. Even better, they shared his disdain for bureaucracy.
Herein lies the danger of electing someone you deem to be more 'likable' than the other candidate. George W. Bush had a broad outline of how he wanted to govern, but no specific strategy of how to go about it. He was planning to figure it out as he went along, but then came 9/11. He was completely unprepared for this event. With no knowledge of international relations, he had to rely on the people he had surrounded himself with, who commenced an operation to radically reshape America according to their own agendas. George didn't stand a chance. He was fundamentally, intellectually incapable of managing a crisis of this magnitude, so he had to rely wholly on the people in his cabinet. Those who spoke loudest and most forcefully, those who had most fully adopted his philosophy of leading via fiat were the ones who gained his trust. Colin Powell, who was advocating multilateral solutions, seemed to be steeped in "pre-9/11 thinking," a term implying that he wanted to give the terrorists the ability to tie America's hands behind its back with its own bureaucracy. The President wanted none of that, feeling that what was most needed was decisive action.
The lesson that we must all take away from this dramatically failed Presidency is that the Washington bureaucracy serves an important function. Our nation is strong because of its laws, not in-spite of them. We can never again allow ourselves the fantasy of thinking that a monarchy is preferable to our republic. While our democratic processes, our judicial processes, our legislative processes, are slow and cumbersome, they are so for a very good reason. Far from being an Achilles heel, they protect the rights that are the foundation of our country. Every single mistake this President has made has come with enormous costs to life, property, liberty, security, and happiness. Katrina, Gitmo, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, NSA wiretapping, secret overseas prisons, revenge on Joe Wilson, lying before the U.N., lying in the State of the Union Address, Administration officials lying before Congress while under oath (Alberto Gonzales), deliberately disobeying American laws, deliberately shirking the responsibilities of enforcing laws (EPA regulations), etc. etc. All these fiascoes have come with real price tags. They have hindered the cause of liberty and freedom, yet most of these crimes were perpetrated with the best of intentions. The intention was to "get things done," to "remove roadblocks to implementation," to "secure our nation." Now we're trapped by our own lack of foresight. We can't release Gitmo prisoners because that could be a worse human right's disaster than keeping them is. We can't get out of Iraq because we destroyed the entire country's infrastructure. We couldn't prevent torture because we didn't have adequately trained soldiers available to carry out their duties (including well-trained, well-prepared interrogation teams with respect for international law). This lack of respect for the laws of the land lead to the bypassing of Geneva Conventions regulations. It lead to creating a secret surveillance operation. It lead to poorly vetted intelligence, like the Nigerian documents and the oversimplification of Iraq's political situation.
George W. Bush did not intend to become America's worst President. He set out to reform Washington, to tame its abuses. It was a noble goal. Those of us who were concerned with small details like experience and intelligence could recognize that he was not Presidential material, but his down-to-earth demeanor fooled many Americans. Looking to win power at all costs, the Republican Party nominated him over his obviously better-qualified rival John McCain, due to this perceived electability (the Democrats made a similar mistake). Thrust into a position he was inadequately prepared to handle, he had no choice but to follow the lead of those advisors who seemed most credible. Unable to discern credibility from aggressiveness, he found himself having to appear strong in order to mask his weaknesses. I think this is the position he continues to find himself in today. Any sane person would have fired their entire team, all of them, Rummy, Condi, and Cheney, a long time ago. The reality is that he has staked his legitimacy on their ideals. They steer this country. He couldn't do it by himself, and he feels that at this stage they're all in this ship together. It's going down, and they're all going to sink as one.
So I guess my point is that you can see this President as Jim Jones. World-Wide Suicide, indeed. That's the tragedy of George W. Bush.
Tags:
No comments:
Post a Comment