What Next? Bush and Cheney Should Resign
I’m surprised I haven’t heard this suggestion — a completely serious one — more often as we Americans review our policy options following the collapse of Republican party support for President Bush, the resignation of Donald Rumsfeld and the release of the Iraq Study Group report. There is widespread agreement that we face no easy options in the Middle East, and I think a strong non-partisan case can be made that a Bush/Cheney resignation is in the best interest of national security. In fact, it could make all the difference for our future.
The Bush/Cheney administration has lost too much credibility with the American people to effectively govern for the next two years. Would any Fortune 500 company in the United States retain a CEO with this kind of track record? Of course not, and as former business executives both George Bush and Dick Cheney must see the simple truth here. Resignation should not be a last resort, nor need it be a disgrace. In fact, resignation may be Bush and Cheney’s best chance to avoid the disgrace of history. They tried, they failed, they moved aside. It would prove that they put the nation’s well-being above their own personal considerations.
How should it happen? Cheney should resign first, and Bush should work with Congress and party leaders to select an acceptable replacement (John McCain? Colin Powell? Neither have perfect records, but both could be trusted to carry out the duties of the office, as could many other experienced Republican politicians). Once the new Vice-President is in office, Bush should follow with his own resignation.
This happened once before, of course. In fact, it’s fascinating to look into an intriguing question — what exactly were the behind-the-scenes machinations that led to Vice-President Spiro Agnew’s exposure in a financial scandal and subsequent resignation in the midst of President Nixon’s Watergate scandal? The subtext was always clear: Agnew was widely disliked and distrusted, and an Agnew Presidency in the wake of Watergate was inconceivable. He had to be cleared out of the way before Nixon could resign (the fact that an Agnew scandal — unrelated to Watergate — was conveniently uncovered at this time seems almost too good to be true).
I’d like to write more about this aspect of the Watergate scandal in a future post here here. There are many interpretations of the Watergate affair, but I’ve always seen the whole mess as the necessary convulsion of a world power stuck in an unwinnable war. It was definitely about Vietnam — specifically, it was about getting us out of Vietnam, which Richard Nixon could not do because he was committed to past promises and beholden to a pro-military power base. Woodward, Bernstein, Segretti and Sirica … in the end, it all amounted to a peaceful coup d’etat that allowed our country to declare defeat in Vietnam and move on.
It’s 2006, and we need our Gerald Ford. Of course, it took many months of agonizing press/legislative hounding before Agnew and Nixon resigned, and I hope we wouldn’t have to work that hard to get rid of our current failed leaders. Perhaps Bush and Cheney could be persuaded by their own associates and trusted advisors to make the move that is clearly in the best interests of the United States of America. Nobody’s asked them yet if they will resign as a fair consequence of their mistakes. That seems like a good first step, so here goes: President Bush and Vice-President Cheney, will you please consider resigning so as to allow the United States of America to best move forward?
It was worth asking, but it will probably require trusted advisers closer to the White House to make a stronger case. Are they ready to ask the President this question? Take a look at this guy’s face and tell me if you see an answer there:
December 8th, 2006 at 7:26 pm
Part 1. Bush/Cheney cannot resign. That is an idealistic and moral concept or slogan. But they were elected by idiots and/or crooked ballots and judges. Idiots must learn from their mistakes. As Michael Moore said, people must die so that others may learn. Christiane Amanpour stated in 1999 that Bush didn’t have the intelligence to be seriously considered for high political office. No one listened. We’re listening now, and seeing the results, perhaps even learning. It’s a hard lesson.
Segue - those of us who remember Nixon, know what Republicans are.
Part 2. Generalities help to understand things, but they are inexact. The American revolution for example, has little specific resemblance to the Russian revolution.
A fairly unpopular Richard Nixon ran for re-election with the promise of a “secret plan” to end the Vietnam War. But this was simply another Kissinger lie. (I remember this as I was 18 and eligible for the draft.) Here is a factual timeline from Wikipedia:
1. 1972 - the withdrawal of American troops, who numbered less than 100,000 at the beginning of the year, was continued as scheduled. By June only six infantry battalions remained. On 12 August, the last American ground combat troops left the country.
2. 1972 - by November 30, force levels were down to 27,000.
3. 1973 - all US troops were gone from Vietnam by the end of the year.
4. 1974 - In May the House Judiciary Committee opened formal and public impeachment hearings against Richard Nixon.
5. 1974 - In August, Nixon resigned. The War in Vietnam (as far as US ground troops participating in any armed combat) had been over for almost exaclty one year.
I know this doesn’t fit your view of the Nixon impeachment proceedings, but these are the facts, and they are indisputable.
December 10th, 2006 at 7:35 pm
Very interesting, Calico. I think I’ll look up some other sources about the later years of the Vietnam War (I’m pretty knowledgable about the earlier part, but could know a lot more about this phase) and see what I find. I thought the war was still raging in many ways from 72 to 75, but I know the activity level had considerably dropped.
Assuming what you say is true, that would pretty much defeat my theory that the Watergate scandal had a “functional purpose” of forcing an end to the war.
I expect to write more about this soon …
December 10th, 2006 at 10:38 pm
Funny story about nothing. I got off work in Hollywood (Friday, 1972) went to the nearest bank to cash my paycheck. They wanna see i.d., all I have is drivers license. “What about draft card” says the teller. “What?” “You’re eighteen” he says “you have to register.”
So I did. Then later lost my billfold (and all its contents) at some kid’s house up in Altadena. Never heard anything more if my number’d come up in the draft or not. Never bothered to ask.
Moved back to Nebraska, became a hippie. The war was really winding down, weren’t even looking for draftees by then. My neighbor volunteered in ‘73, told me it was just a mop-up action at that point.
December 13th, 2006 at 9:11 pm
And then what?
December 15th, 2006 at 8:14 pm
Then I’m gonna stack my flow.
January 19th, 2007 at 9:12 pm
Verrry interesting…It would be of some note to realize, a month later, that the “Scooter” Libby case is up to the docket. I wonder what is going to happen in reaction to a possible conviction of Libby. Are other heads, besides Rumsfeld going to roll? What’s the frequency? Will it rival the “hundred heads that rolled” in the Reagan administration?
February 9th, 2007 at 2:14 pm
Maybe it is time to restore the will of the People. Remember 2000?
A week ago this was reported online, and it evidences rigging in Ohio:
OHIO 2004: 6.15% Kerry-Bush vote-switch found in probability study.
Defining the vote outcome probabilities of wrong-precinct voting has revealed, in a sample of 166,953 votes (1/34th of the Ohio vote), the Kerry-Bush margin changes 6.15% when the population is sorted by probable outcomes of wrong-precinct voting.
The Kerry to Bush 6.15% vote-switch differential is seen when the large sample is sorted by probability a Kerry wrong-precinct vote counts for Bush. When the same large voter sample is sorted by the probability Kerry votes count for third-party candidates, Kerry votes are instead equal in both subsets.
Read the revised article with graphs of new findings:
The 2004 Ohio Presidential Election: Cuyahoga County Analysis
How Kerry Votes Were Switched to Bush Votes
http://jqjacobs.net/politics/ohio.html
A PowerPoint too:
http://jqjacobs.net/politics/vote_switching.ppt