Mr No-Credibility Still Lying Through His Snarl

On Dick Cheney

The old warmongering-horse hiding behind dunghills

We seem to be cursed with a has-been who remains confused about his role ... a used-to-be Vice President who would rather lie than preserve and protect.

I remember that which must have been lost around the turn of the century: an extremely powerful - almost sacred - abstraction; the notion that a majority voice from the voting populace will reflect majority wisdom when ballot decisions are finally tallied.

Sadly, that majority seems to continue a lack of awareness that uninformed voters mostly likely wind up foolish, misguided or ignorant of howtheir vote will harm rather than help the country.

Win or lose, when the decisions are made, the victorious candidates receive a leadership mantle which consists of expectations, respect, regard and trust reflective of American faith in a democratic process.

In that regard let's spend a little time looking at the long-term influence of political has-beens and their significance or not-significant reflections after a time out of the driver's seat. Back in 2003, when that shy electoral trust and hopeful respect proffered the new guys in town really came to an end, Bush/Cheney and company ruined their at-bat.When it became imperative that the assumption of the leadership mantle be justified and validated by demonstrated leadership integrity, they should have walked, rather than swing for the fences and foul out.

Americans who vote ultimately cast their ballots based on an ideal that blends perceptions of agreement with a political philosophy and assumptions that the leadership integrity of their candidate and political party ultimately retains the highest good of the country - regardless of party affiliation.

Elected officials are thus obligated to demonstrate such integrity.

Back then and today, continuing like the drum-beating bunny, Dick Cheney offers only public utterances that demonstrate how we could not find that political and patriotic integrity that reflects a passion for the highest good of the country. What we're seeing reflects a self-serving passion for the survival of the party and denigration of political opponents at all costs - treating the intelligence and consciousness of the electorate with contempt.

The lack of presidential intellect in George Bush should have been offset by his so-called intellectual neocon mentor, the Vice President of the United States of America. While we were led down the path that says we can have a folksy guy who without self-conscious reluctance will talk the god-talk, talk the cowboy, beer and race-care talk and mock intellectuals. We could accept his Howdy Doodie charm and still be safe.

Why?

Because presumably President Doodie had at his side one of the ultimate intellectual experts who knew the stuff and had the power and will to reflect the best and brightest lights shining from that legacy of intellectual arrogance and postured wisdom, the American neocon.

We were in fact led down the primrose path by the greater disappointment of these two politicians, Mr. never-a-soldier- other-priorities-in-the-60's Cheney.

The brush-cutting dingbat openly revealed that what we saw was all that there was to see. But ... Mr. Doodie was supplanted by the imperial-presidency advocate who openly revealed that what we saw was what he wanted us to see rather than what represented honest advocacy of the highest good.

Yet today should we not hope that he keeps singing his song to a diminishing choir?

Are we not  long-wearied of lies, manipulation and disinformation?

Are we not long-wearied of repetitive cynical reminders of how stupid we are assumed to be and how those reminders are repeatedly presented.

What ought to come from genuine American leaders, past and present?

If Dick wants to address "cynical and pernicious falsehoods" over the war in Iraq to gain political advantage, then the electorate deserves open and simple denials of the charges; not disingenuous counterattacks.

We ought to hear indignant denial:

"We did NOT lie. We did not manipulate the facts or cook the books."

Nothing More, nothing less.

Rather than hearing,

"The president and I cannot prevent certain politicians from losing their memory, or their backbone - but we're not going to sit by and let them rewrite history,"

 we should hear Mr. Cheney again refute any rewriting of history by the honest and open declaration:

"We did NOT lie. We did not manipulate the facts or cook the books."

Rather than hearing Dick talk about the most dishonest and reprehensible charges ever aired in this city," let us hear these republicans openly and simply refute the allegations:

Once again,

"We did NOT lie. We did not manipulate the facts or cook the books."

Dishonest and reprehensible is what happens when those who serve under the mantle of leadership attack rather than admit or deny the truth of the issues.

What we are seeing - in its natural and inevitable form - is the continuing of original and on-going failure in  credibility; ...

of relying too frequently on political attacks and the continuing assumption that political attacks will always overrule common sense and critical thinking.

The notion that I'm right and you are wrong and nothing good will happen until you admit you're wrong and I am right is a winning tactic for debates ... I suppose ... where a referee says,

 "Yup, that guy with that argument is the smartest." 

 But if you come to my house and break all my dishes including the ones I had that contained poisonous snakes, the plague and an assortment of vipers that are dangerous to my house, my neighbor's house and your house, I hardly think your presence will help solve our mutual problem.

I may ask you to stay the hell out of my house but I certainly will not tell you to ignore the neighborhood and avoid your responsibility to see that the plague you set loose goes no further.

Stay behind the dunghills, Dick, and you'll forever smell the way you do right now.