The big news story of the last week was that President Bush
finally allowed Condoleezza Rice to testify in public about her
role in the government’s failure to protect roughly 3,000 of
its citizens from perishing on Sept. 11, 2001.
A much smaller headline was that Bush would himself testify
““ privately, and only under the condition that Vice President
Dick Cheney could be right at his side.
The White House’s demand should set off light bulbs
throughout the country. Why can’t the president of the United
States answer for himself, by himself?
Sadly, Bush hardly ever does so. When weapons of mass
destruction didn’t turn up in Iraq, the president pointed a
finger at the intelligence community. When former administration
officials Paul O’Neill and Richard Clarke raised serious,
substantive questions about the president, Bush dodged the issues
by releasing the White House attack dogs.
Now, the commander in chief won’t discuss
““Â even in private ““ an act of war on the country
without Cheney’s company.
Presidents rarely testify under oath. And when former President
Clinton and former Vice President Al Gore testify, they will do so
in private, like Bush and Cheney.
But at least Clinton and Gore can speak as individuals. Bush,
who fashions himself as a fiercely independent leader, cannot.
That begs the question, is he really a leader at all, or just a
puppet?