THE BUSH RECORD AFTER THREE YEARSGETTING WORSE

I keep wondering why each week it becomes harder to fit even a portion of the top news stories into my weekly analysis. The sheer quantity of bad news emanating from the bowels of government and brought to light by concerned libertarians and civil liberty watchdogs has become a flood, even as traditionally watchful conservatives choose to "see no evil, and hear no evil" by the Bush administration.

There are obvious signs of outright betrayal of our laws and culture, such as the administrations latest version of amnesty (euphemistically called a "guest worker" program) that even the most fervent Bush apologists are having trouble explaining away. But there are also many crucial signs that this administration is working silently and stealthily behind the scenes to undercut liberty and increase the size and power of government, contrary to its "conservative" pretensions.

We would have expected a truly conservative administration, with control over both houses of Congress, to create havoc among the opposition in its efforts to undo the historic evils of entrenched bureaucracy:

WHOS REALLY RUNNING THE BUSH PRESIDENCY?

Its no secret that Bush was a know-nothing playboy businessman living off papas reputation and power prior to being allowed to move up the stepping stones of public office. After being interviewed by kingmaker George Shultz in San Francisco, and having been declared "ready" to serve the establishment, he still had to be briefed for weeks on foreign and domestic policy by the likes of Kissinger, Scowcroft and Talbot before he could face the cameras - something he has rarely done without a written script. Even now, savvy analysts still consider Bush only a step above a script reader. Whenever he tries to wing it on his own, his answers are grammatically incorrect, poorly worded, confused, or simply a rehash of overworn "tough guy" phrases he memorized previously. So, whos the real power behind the throne?

A rash of articles have been emerging in the alternative media lately on the topic, all pointing to VP Dick Cheney as the real power in the Bush administration. The details are generally correct, but the conclusions about Cheneys overall role and power are wrong. He is directing the president, but hes only a middleman. Heres a sampling:

Ritt Goldstein of the Sydney Morning Herald writes, "A former Pentagon officer turned whistleblower says a group of hawks in the Bush Administration, including the Vice-President, Dick Cheney, is running a shadow foreign policy, contravening Washington's official line." Karen Kwiatkowski, a former air force lieutenant-colonel in the Pentagon claims, "George Bush isn't in control . . . the country's been hijacked." She describes how key areas of neoconservative concern were strategically placed throughout the White House and in government agencies. She ought to know. She worked under one of Cheneys boys, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith. However, Kwiatkowski is wrong about the presidency being "hijacked." Bush is a knowing, but lower level participant.

Another significant article describing how Cheneys boys control the other key posts in the administration was written by Jim Lobe, a journalist for Alternet.org and other liberal publications. In todays world we often have to rely on the Left to do the initial critical analysis of Bush administration policies. Most conservatives writers either have gone to sleep or have become inveterate yes-men to Bush.

In general, keep in mind that Lobe and other leftists believe there is a natural tension between liberal-leaning Sec. of State Colin Powell (including the traditionally leftist State Department), and the "right wing" neo-cons of the White House and Pentagon. They believe the "right wingers" in power run a capitalist conspiracy for greed and power, which Powell and other token liberals in government try to resist. This is not true, in reality. They do resist a little, but few of the liberals at mid-levels of government are quiting in protest. All those in high position, without exception, are participants, to one degree or another, in a conspiracy of governmental control, for globalist purposes. The degree of difference between various players is in how much of the game plan they are actually aware of. Occassionally a nave and subservient conservative is given a top level agency to run, in order to help preserve the faade of conservatism in the Bush administration. They too know there is a powerful control system, but they think it is benevolent, with good intentions. I dont consider Attorny General Ashcroft as one of these nave conservatives. Hes told too many lies to qualify as an honest man any more.

Colin Powell certainly knows he is part of a powerful control system. The system brought him up the chain of military command as Powell fulfilled his "uncle Tom" role. He was a useful minority officer who could be relied upon to cover-up for military mistakes. Bush has been the recipient of a lot of favors from the establishment as well. The control system is what has covered for his errors and missteps throughout life, and provided him the wealth making opportunities that otherwise would have eluded someone of average abilities. Neither Powell nor Bush, I believe, are aware of the big picture. They only know they are part of the sytem and protected by it as long as they dont cross anyone higher up. As far as Cheney is concerned, I think he is the point man within the Bush administration for the real Powers That Be (PTB), who rarely hold public office. Taking his orders from others higher in the power structure, Cheney then directs the president, sometimes openly, but usually by suggestions. Besides directly influencing the president, Cheney was also in charge of selecting the staff of the White House, the Pentagon, and some positions within State Department.

Most of Lobes conclusions are wrong because he doesnt understand the over-arching conspiracy of power that is above the office of the President. He thinks narrowly only about people trying to "hijack the presidency." But his analysis is still useful. Ill insert my comments in [brackets] to give insight into whats really going on.

"While the mainstream media mostly continue to cast Bush as the captain of his ship, hints that Cheney is the dominant figure shaping Washington's diplomatic policy have become too numerous to ignore. A recent Washington Post article assessing Condoleezza Rices performance as national security adviser revealed a most stunning example of this lopsided state of affairs. According to the Post, Bush had ordered Cabinet officials not to give any preferential treatment to Ahmed Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress (INC) when US forces moved into Iraq last spring. But soon after, in flagrant violation of his directive, the Pentagon flew Chalabi and 600 of his armed followers into southern Iraq in early April, with the approval of the vice president. [The facts are right, but Lobe doesnt have the whole story. The original Bush directive was only make a pretense of fairness for all of those staff members in the White House and Pentagon who still think our government tries to do whats right. The Cheney directive was Bushs intent all along. Cheney did and does assume the power to issue orders directly-which no other VP has ever exercised, to my knowledge.]

"It would not be the first or last time that Cheney simply ignored his commander-in-chief. The extent of Cheney's power is not surprising given the degree to which Bush relied on him during his presidential campaign and in the administration's early days. [Relied on is not correct. Whenever the PTB bring in a relatively nave and unqualified person such as Bush to serve as president, they assign him several advisors and one main "handler," whom the president knows he is never to disregard-despite his position as president. Cheney, I believe, is Bushs handler.] And the fact that Cheney, who was asked by Bush to recommend his running mate in 2000, picked himself for the job [a foregone conclusion anyway; the entire "selection process" was only for show] reveals that he expected to wield extraordinary power if Bush won the election.

"Cheney has played a much more important role than Rice since the early days of the administration, despite her closer personal relationship with the president. [True, and this will always be the case. Rice is a second rate academic still in training for higher things. She rarely thinks for herself. No previous National Security advisor has had this level of inexperience. Most, like Kissinger, Scowcroft and Talbot, were high level conspirators placed at NSA to control presidents like Nixon and Ford. Rice is a shamefully apologist for everything Bush says or does. She has little credibility when she does this, among the old guard of Kissingers group, and thus is not trusted with any crucial decisions. Llike Powell, she must be corrected often by Cheney and his plants within the State Department.] It was Cheney's choices that prevailed in the appointment of both cabinet and sub-cabinet national-security officials, beginning with that of Donald Rumsfeld as Defense Secretary. Not only did Cheney personally intervene to ensure that Powell's best friend, Richard Armitage [a CIA drug smuggling spook, despised by the neo-cons], was denied the deputy defense secretary position, but he also secured the post for his own protg, Paul Wolfowitz. Moreover, it was Cheney who insisted that the ultra-unilateralist John Bolton be placed in a top State Department arms job - a position from which Bolton has consistently pursued policies that run counter to Powell's own views. [True. Thats because, while Powell is a "player" and yesman, he is not trusted to know the overall game plan. Only those who are high enough to know the big picture are capable of understanding why the US plays both sides in the wars on drugs, terror, and tyranny. Powell, being a nave liberal, is a natural pick to head the State Department, which is full of hard core leftists. Cheney had to put someone in State that the leftists there would tolerate and trust to some degree.]

"Moreover, Cheney's own national-security staff is the largest ever employed by a vice president. Its members have largely been chosen for both their ideological affinity with their boss and proven Washington experience. [Good point. The size of Cheneys staff is a huge indication of his hidden role as handler.] They play to win, said one State Department official. Cheney's chief of staff and national security adviser, I. Lewis Scooter Libby, a Washington lawyer and Wolfowitz protg, is considered a far more skilled and experienced bureaucratic and political operator than Rice. [This is a gross understatement. Libby is one of the real evil players to watch. Hes a ruthless operator-the kind the PTB bring up in the ranks to control others, but from behind the scenes. Libby has a Lenin type face and would never be trusted by the public. Cheney, on the other hand, has a cherubic expression capable of deceiving conservatives-so hes who they put out front nowadays.] With several of his political allies on Rice's own staff - including deputy national security adviser Stephen Hadley and Middle East director Elliott Abrams - Libby is able to run circles around Condi [true, indeed], noted a former NSC official." [End of Lobe quote.]