This is G o o g l e's text-only cache of http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/03/2952/ as retrieved on Sep 1, 2007 02:16:49 GMT.
G o o g l e's cache is the snapshot that we took of the page as we crawled the web.
The page may have changed since that time. Click here for the current page without highlighting.
Click here for the full cached page with images included.
To link to or bookmark this page, use the following url: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:LmzVd0B8rYsJ:www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/03/2952/+distantocean+site:commondreams.org&hl=en&gl=us&strip=1


Google is neither affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible for its content.
These search terms have been highlighted: distantocean 

 
 
 
     
   
 
     
 

Discuss this story Discuss this story Printer Friendly Version Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article
 
 
Published on Friday, August 3, 2007 by The Austin Statesman (Texas)

Cheney Overstepped The Bounds of His Office

by Walter Mondale

The Washington Post’s recent series on Dick Cheney’s vice presidency certainly got my attention. Having held that office myself over a quarter-century ago, I have more than a passing interest in its evolution from the backwater of American politics to the second most powerful position in our government. Almost all of that evolution, under presidents and vice presidents of both parties, has been positive - until now. Under George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, it has gone seriously off track.

The Founders created the vice presidency as a constitutional afterthought, solely to provide a president-in-reserve should the need arise. The only duty they specified was that the vice president should preside over the Senate. The office languished in obscurity and irrelevance for more than 150 years until Richard Nixon saw it as a platform from which to seek the Republican presidential nomination in 1960. That worked, and the office has become an effective launching pad for aspiring candidates.

But it wasn’t until Jimmy Carter assumed the presidency that the vice presidency took on a substantive role. Carter saw the office as an underused asset and set out to make the most of it. He gave me an office in the West Wing, unimpeded access to him and to the flow of information, and specific assignments at home and abroad. He asked me, as the only other nationally elected official, to be his adviser and partner.

Our relationship depended on trust, mutual respect and an acknowledgement that there was only one agenda to be served - the president’s. Every Monday the two of us met privately for lunch; we could, and did, talk candidly about virtually anything. By the end of four years, we had completed the “executivization” of the vice presidency, ending two centuries of confusion, derision and irrelevance surrounding the office.

George H.W. Bush, Dan Quayle and Al Gore built their vice presidencies after this model, allowing for their different interests, experiences and capabilities as well as the needs of the presidents they served.

This all changed in 2001, and especially after Sept. 11, when Cheney set out to create a largely independent power center in the office of the vice president. His was an unprecedented attempt not only to shape administration policy but, alarmingly, to limit the policy options sent to the president. It is essential that a president know all the relevant facts and viable options before making decisions, yet Cheney has discarded the “honest broker” role he played as President Ford’s chief of staff.

Through his vast government experience, through the friends he placed in key positions and through his considerable political skills, he has been increasingly able to determine the answers to questions put to the president - because he has been able to determine the questions. It was Cheney who persuaded President Bush to sign an order that denied access to any court by foreign terrorism suspects and Cheney who determined that the Geneva Conventions did not apply to enemy combatants captured in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Rather than subject his views to an established (and rational) vetting process, his practice has been to trust only his immediate staff before taking ideas directly to the president. Many of the ideas that Bush has subsequently bought into have proved offensive to the values of the Constitution and have been embarrassingly overturned by the courts.

The corollary to Cheney’s zealous embrace of secrecy is his near total aversion to the notion of accountability. I’ve never seen a former member of the House of Representatives demonstrate such contempt for Congress - even when it was controlled by his own party. His insistence on invoking executive privilege to block virtually every congressional request for information has been stupefying - it’s almost as if he denies the legitimacy of an equal branch of government. Nor does he exhibit much respect for public opinion, which amounts to indifference toward being held accountable by the people who elected him.

Whatever authority a vice president has is derived from the president under whom he serves. There are no powers inherent in the office; they must be delegated by the president. Somehow, not only has Cheney been given vast authority by President Bush - including, apparently, the entire intelligence portfolio - but he also pursues his own agenda. The real question is why the president allows this to happen.

Three decades ago, we lived through another painful example of a White House exceeding its authority, lying to the American people, breaking the law and shrouding everything it did in secrecy. Watergate wrenched the country, and our constitutional system, like nothing before. We spent years trying to identify and absorb the lessons of this great excess. But here we are again.

Since the Carter administration left office, it has been criticized for many things. Yet I remain enormously proud of what we did in those four years, especially that we told the truth, obeyed the law and kept the peace.

Mondale was vice president from 1977 to 1981.

2007 The Austin Statesman

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
 
Discuss this story Discuss this story Printer Friendly Version Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article

22 Comments so far

  1. madone1 August 3rd, 2007 11:48 am

    The Carter Administration has long been my favorite. Imagine if Carter had another term and if he got the auto manufactuers to achieve the minimum 30 miles per gallon standard. He probably would have got a peace agreement between Israel and Palestine. Many innocent citizens in Central America would be alive (killed by School of America sponsored death squads).
    Reagan inherited many favorable circumstances like having to deal with an aproachable Russian Premier Gorbachev instead of hardliners like Brechnev or Kruchev. Poland had a non-violent civil disobedience program going for 10 years before it cummulated into the break up of Russian rule in eastern Euorpe as well as other timely factors which Reagan got credit for.
    Reagan destroyed the alternative energy program, the small family farms (many farmers commited suicides as their farms got taken over by corporate agribusiness.
    My blood boils whenever I think about how Reagon suporters in high places secretly negotiated with the Iranian for jet spare parts via Israel. Does any one understand how they got away with this? The hostage release was delayed, peace negotiation between Palestine and Israel was ceased. And many of our current crises can be traced to the Reagan years. Such as the relaxation of media control ownership which indirectly lead to lack of meaningfull debates b\4 we got into the Iraq war. Reagon also killed the “Fairness Doctrine” which enabled the Republican with their vast economic resources overwhelm the media with distorted messages to the advantages of Republican candidates.

  2. MetalDog August 3rd, 2007 12:23 pm

    “The real question is why the President allows this to happen.”

    I think the answer to this question is pretty clear to many of us: Cheney is nominally the Vice President, but functionally the President, because Bush is so inept and incapable of doing the job he was ‘elected’ to do. Dubya’s just a figurehead and a lightning rod, attracting much of the criticism and scorn that rightfully should be heaped upon Cheney. (Not that Dubya doesn’t deserve all the scorn he gets and more.)

    Many see this administration has a miserable failure, but I see them as wildly successful at achieving their goals, namely lining their donors and supporters pockets through deception, theft, and murder. Every giant ‘fuck-up’ these psychopaths commit is a boon to somebody in their camp, whether it’s Medicare reform (a big gift to insurance and pharmaceutical companies), tax ‘relief’ for the richest Americans, destabilization of Iraq with its disruption of oil markets (record profits for Exxon), etc. etc — to say nothing of the many billions of dollars gifted to mercenaries and private contract firms in Iraq’s deconstruction. Even ‘disaster relief’ in LA and MS immediately became corporate welfare for a select few. Bush could never have managed and maintained these atmospheric levels of corruption, graft, and thievery without the help (and direction) of his buddy Dick.

    Here’s the 5-year history of Halliburton’s stock price:

    tinyurl.com/2e6cw4

    I’m pretty sure that looks like a big success to some people.

  3. kivals August 3rd, 2007 12:37 pm

    The psychological interplay between Bush and Cheney would make a fascinating topic for study. Bush certainly wants to believe he is in charge, but he must know he does not possess the intelligence, diligence, or competence to actually be in charge as he delegates so much to Cheney. And Cheney knows he must massage Bush’s ego and never humiliate Bush in front of others to keep up the facade, in the interests of both of them. A capable playwright could do much with this.

  4. Fascism_sux August 3rd, 2007 12:54 pm

    In times past, when I entered a Government building there was always a picture of the current President staring down from its perch on the wall. All too often in recent administrations I have been sickened by the caliber of the person in the photo. Just recently I found myself in another Government building. This time there were TWO sickening pictures on the wall: one of a dummy, and the other of his ventriloquist, NEITHER having been duly elected by the people of my country! In addition to being sickened, I was also enraged and terrified. Perhaps I should have torn the offensive photos off the wall of OUR Government building and stomped on them, but there are now armed guards on the site, mind-controlled into believing that killing people like me will somehow preserve liberty and justice in America.

    Posted under America’s Most Offensive Photos was a warning sign telling us peons that stiff penalties await anyone who falsifies information on an application. Does that include falsifications upon the Application for War Powers?

  5. citizen a August 3rd, 2007 1:46 pm

    perhaps congress should actually refuse to fund… not only the vice-president’s office, but the entire executive branch until the current occupants realize that congress, not the white house, holds all the cards.

    congress has the power to fund, OR NOT FUND, everything.

    let’s move from spineless rhetorical threats to action.

  6. vinlander August 3rd, 2007 2:23 pm

    When Dick Cheney had the battery in his pace maker replaced, did he hand power over to George W. Bush while he was unconscious?

  7. happystead August 3rd, 2007 2:31 pm

    My God, why aren’t we impeaching these bastards?!?

  8. Spike August 3rd, 2007 2:32 pm

    The playwrights have already had their turn. The play was a one acter called
    “Pavlov and the Pampered Dog”.

  9. Poet August 3rd, 2007 4:00 pm

    Kivals–Great idea only instead of a playwright, we need a psychoanalyst cum novelist cum playwright. a modern day Shakespeare if you will (since so many of his plays dealt with the corruption and comic-tragedy of the powerful.

    Oh Shakespeare where are you?
    We need your sharp style
    Our king is a moron
    His handler’s a pile

    The realm’s folk all languish,
    In need of the language,
    To understand and be entertained
    By a spectacle so cruel

    And for good measure
    After mining this teasure
    Go back and do the same
    With Nixon and Agnew!

    P.S.–For an example of what’s posible go read Macbird at:

    http://www.brumm.com/MacBird/

    It examines the “curious” relationship between JFK and LBJ.

  10. frank1569 August 3rd, 2007 9:15 pm

    For those not paying attention, whatever bounds existed have long since been jettison. Cheney has violated laws, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Geneva Conventions, and every treaty ever signed while hiding the secrets of his shadow government in a pair of man-sized safes, as if he were some sort of paranoid lunatic.

    Enough with the pretty talk. Cheney is a lying, thieving war criminal and a domestic enemy to the Constitution. Overstepped his bounds? Why don’t you drop to your knees and beg him to please be nicer?

  11. alyosha August 3rd, 2007 9:59 pm

    “It is Dick Cheney’s particular genius that George W Bush wakes up every morning, believing he is President of the United States”.

    - John Dean

  12. Siouxrose August 3rd, 2007 10:32 pm

    FASCISM SUX: Your post made me laugh out loud. Boy is that the truth! Whenever I am anywhere that Bush is on T.V. I literally cannot look at the “man.” I have women friends who feel the same way. It’s obvious he’s pathetic, but someone that pathetic given that much power wreaks of things too dark to look directly at. You’re so right about the puppet strings; and KIVALS, you’re uncanny on the odd nature of their “relationship.”

  13. Paul from Texas August 4th, 2007 12:33 am

    “Watergate wrenched the country, and our constitutional system, like nothing before. We spent years trying to identify and absorb the lessons of this great excess. But here we are again.”

    Honestly, to compare the Bush Administration to the Nixon Administration, at this writing, is to candy-coat the matter. Nixon resigned. Nixon was held accountable. And Watergate was trivia by comparison to the crimes and constitutional excesses of Bush-Cheney.

  14. notsocasualobserver August 4th, 2007 3:33 am

    Metal Dog hits the Bullseye,
    is anyone
    payin attention.
    more and more
    the weaker die,
    forsooth!
    all is distraction.
    The “bard” poked at royalty,
    all we get is, the show, “Daily”

  15. TKO123D August 4th, 2007 3:42 am

    I like to see all the intelligent commentary although I am disconcerted by the people who seem to have faith in the Democratic party. They are two sides of the same coin. Both pursue the same agenda but the dems use slightly less reprehensible acts. Granted the Carter admin. was an exception and the fact that he does not get the credit he deserves is ridiculous, Everybody seems to claim that Reagan initiated the arms build-up that helped bankrupt the Soviets when it was Carter. However Carter pursued peace initiatives rather than dangerous and utterly useless self aggrandizing rhetoric. Now, with the exception of Al Gore who should be president anyway, the Dems are hardly different from Republicans. Clinton was hardly better. Clinton oversaw the greatest shift in concentration of wealth in favour of the rich in US history. He also made just about the most cuts in social programs in US history. At least he helped stablize the economy in the process though, not bankrupt it. The options in the US now are just sickening, there is no candidate for change. The petrodollar and oil are what control the US foreign policy and until the US transitions to alternative energy that policy will stay the same as the very existence of the US as a power depends entirely on those two factors.

  16. whateveryousay August 4th, 2007 3:53 am

    Former Vice President Mondale,

    Thank you for speaking up and for an insightful, informative article.

    To me, the real question is; Given the current situation and the remarkably disastrous results of this administration’s policies, and given that the constitution and freedom itself are under attack and in grave danger of perishing, why aren’t more former presidents, vice presidents, and high ranking officials/leaders shouting at the top of their lungs, using every platform available and/or creating new platforms to decry and denounce Bush and Cheney? Certainly, it is long past due to abandon ‘polite protocol’, is it not?

  17. Chuck Cliff August 4th, 2007 9:35 am

    I have long felt that the Carter administration was a lot better than the rep it got. In any case, íIt wasn’t corrupt like the admins which preceded and followed it.

    Thanks to Mondale for speaking out.

  18. Siouxrose August 4th, 2007 11:26 am

    WHATEVER YOU SAY: Excellent question. Carter IS speaking out… but Clinton is supporting his wife so that business as usual carried out under the guise of democracy can continue.

  19. distantocean August 4th, 2007 1:00 pm

    It’s good to see Mondale speaking out, but his article doesn’t take into account one important point: Cheney is not what he appears to be.

  20. lunafish August 4th, 2007 4:54 pm

    Thanks to the former Vice President for his input. If a regular commentary can be brought forth to the public often, it can only help to educate the public. What good it will do beyond that is a mystery to me anymore.

    I could smell the stench on Cheney/Bush’s crap from day one… of their campaign in 1998-1999.

    The dialog is important, if for no other reason than to remind us of what we once thought we had.

  21. Gail August 4th, 2007 6:16 pm

    vinlander August 3rd, 2007 2:23 pm

    “When Dick Cheney had the battery in his pace maker replaced, did he hand power over to George W. Bush while he was unconscious?”

    Funny! Thanks for the laugh.

  22. tonkatsu August 5th, 2007 2:13 pm

    Shakespeare had lots of words for Cheyney:

    Hence, horrible villain, or I’ll spurn thine eyes like balls before me; I’ll unhair thy head, Thou shalt be whipp’d with wire, and stew’d'in brine, smarting in lingering pickle.

    Antony and Cleopatra

    Thou whoreson impudent embossed rascal!

    Henry IV, part I

    Thou art baser than a cutpurse.

    The Two Noble Kinsmen

    sanguine coward, [thou] bed-presser, [thou] horseback-breaker, [thou] huge hill of flesh!

    Henry IV, part I

    Methink’st thou art a general offence and every man should beat thee.

    All’s Well That Ends Well

Join the discussion:

You must be logged in to post a comment. If you haven't registered yet, click here to register. (It's quick, easy and free. And we won't give your email address to anyone.)

 
   FAIR USE NOTICE  
  This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
 
 
 
Common Dreams NewsCenter
A non-profit news service providing breaking news & views for the progressive community.
Home | Newswire | Contacting Us | About Us | Donate | Sign-Up | Archives

© Copyrighted 1997-2007
www.commondreams.org