Does making the decisions on what the Prez gets to decided upon make Chaney more powerful than the Prez? Does it absolve Bush of blame if a decision he makes is bad if he wasn’t given all the real options?
Scores of interviews with advisers to the president and vice president, as well as with other senior officials throughout the government, offer a backstage view of how the Bush White House operates. The president is “the decider,” as Bush puts it, but the vice president often serves up his menu of choices.
Cheney led a group that winnowed the president’s list of potential Supreme Court nominees. Cheney resolved a crisis in the space program after the Columbia shuttle disaster. Cheney fashioned a controversial truce between the legislative and executive branches — and averted resignations at the top of the Justice Department and the FBI — over the right of law enforcement authorities to investigate political corruption in Congress.
And it was Cheney who served as the guardian of conservative orthodoxy on budget and tax matters. He shaped and pushed through Bush’s tax cuts, blunting the influence of Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, a longtime friend, and of Cabinet rivals he had played a principal role in selecting. He managed to overcome the president’s “compassionate conservative” resistance to multiple breaks for the wealthy. He even orchestrated a decision to let a GOP senator switch parties — giving control of the chamber to Democrats — rather than meet the senator’s demand for billions of dollars in new spending.
[Former Army secretary John O. Marsh Jr. said,] “He holds the view, as do I, that the vice president should be the chief of staff in effect, that everything should run through his office.”
In Bush, Cheney found the perfect partner. The president’s willingness to delegate left plenty of room for his more detail-oriented vice president.
It is well known that Cheney is usually the last to speak to the president before Bush makes a decision. Less so is his role, to a degree unmatched by his predecessors, in steering debate by weighing in at the lower-level meetings where proposals are born and die.
>>Bush has taken the “do what I think is right” to an extreme.
Not sure Dumbya has the capacity to “think”. He does what others tell him THEY think is right. Others being evil entities like Heart Attack Cheney and Der Komissar Rove.
A leader should do what is right over what the people want. One might be able to argue that Bush is doing the right thing in Iraq and therefore a good leader (one could also argue the opposite of course), but on domestic issues he is actually mostly doing “what the people want”, if people = Conservative Republican Christians.
Bush has consistently only served his core constituentcy, ignoring the will of at least half of the American population.
As for the “Bush Economy”, it is quickly turning into a 3rd world style economy. The cost of .living is rising slower than the declining value of the dollar. This makes things like GDP and Stock values look a lot better than they really are. Calculate the GDP in terms of Euros, and under Bush the GDP has declined.
30–Right you are Bubba. What strikes me is that crowd wisdom is more often correct on “observational or attitudinal” rather than “judgemental” issues which may be just restating your point (sorry if so).
What I really like about it though, is that the people making the decision ((ie as decided by the presnit by accurate polling)) suffer the consequences rather than some elite “ruling” without accountability. Current issue re border control, and even energy policy, are really prime examples (oops, War in Iraq too). I think what we want are slimly, triangulating, pandering, poll-driven politicians WHO WILL DO WHAT THE PEOPLE CLEARLY WANT AND VOTED FOR!!! The exception would be when the people want prayer in school or other BS that the Court has shown is clearly unconstitutional.
But I’m sure some people want a “leader” and are damn pround to follow him anywhere.
What happens if Dick Cheney dies?
George Bush becomes president.
You’re right about Clinton Gore being unrelated. I misunderstood the comment about absolving Bush of blame.
Just what income are you calling wealthy? Tax rates are below where they were under Clinton for people at all income levels. The top wealthy rate went from 39.6 to 35, and it was 31 before Clinton.