Wednesday, October 06, 2004

Not from a blog, but Salon is an exclusively online publication (not Big Media):

Cheney expected that the assertion of his authority would be sufficient to make his case. His logic is built on his force. He was commanding, domineering, sardonic and intimidating. His pronouncements went beyond conviction in their confidence. His transparent attitude toward the debate was as if it were a waste of his valuable time, a child's exercise.

Cheney made no effort to hide his sense of unaccountability. Facts that did not serve him were contemptuously treated like unruly underlings. His self-assurance in lying even when politically unnecessary revealed why he is the power in the vacuum. He could only exist with a chief executive self-absorbed in his resentments, narrow in experience and intellectual scope, and who does not hold his vice president accountable; an incompetent national security advisor, overwound in her eagerness to please; and a secretary of state who never presses his advantages but accepts his internal defeats, playing the good soldier. Bush may be seeking the higher Father above, but Cheney is the father on earth.

Faced with another younger man, Cheney attempted to denigrate him. "Your rhetoric, Senator, would be a lot more credible if there was a record to back it up. There isn't. Senator, frankly, you have a record in the Senate that's not very distinguished ...

"Now, in my capacity as vice president, I am the president of Senate, the presiding officer. I'm up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they're in session. The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight."

With that, the master of Washington dismissed the apprentice. But it turned out that Cheney's statement was untrue. He and Edwards had met several times before, and photographs were published the next day showing the two together. Cheney's effort to intimidate Edwards rebounded on his credibility, the larger point the former trial lawyer was pressing. The case for the Bush doctrine floundered on the Groucho Marx doctrine: "Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?"

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home