Home / News /

The fall and rise of Dick Cheney

May 25, 2009 — Dick Cheney did something few vice-presidents have done: He made the executive branch’s number two position not just ceremonial but also powerful. After 9/11, when he took on the portfolio of keeping the nation safe from terrorist attacks, he became even more important in national government, an importance underscored by his keeping out of the limelight, often hidden in a secret and safe location in case an attack on Washington did succeed.

But as the war in Iraq, for which he was a key architect, bogged down, appearing both unwinnable and possibly based on unsound assumptions, Cheney’s stock fell. He became the Darth Vader of the most recent Bush Administration, the GOPer liberals and Democrats loved to hate. Cheney’s reputation reached its nadir in 2006 when he accidentally shot a friend on a Texas hunting trip, an event that made him the butt of jokes motivated both by politics and the comedians’ need for good material. 

So how come a former vice-president whose approval rating is only 25%, compared to President Obama’s 65%, has been able to put the White House on the defensive, help force the Democratic-controlled US Senate to block the president’s attempt to close the Guantanamo prison, and contribute to the near-downfall of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on the issue of water boarding of prisoners?

The simplest answer is fear. The Democrats are afraid of Cheney. When Rush Limbaugh and lesser GOP spokespersons have criticized Obama’s homeland security policies, the Democrats have trotted out the same arguments from the 2008 campaign, and stayed on course. Even had former President George W. Bush been leading the charge against the Administration’s closing of Guantanamo and cessation of “enhanced interrogation methods,” it is unlikely that Democrats would have been quaking in their boots, much less changed directions. Only Cheney, smart and knowledgeable, could make them question whether abandoning Bush’s policies in this area is a politically wise course. Now they are forced to recognize that, if there is another major terrorist attack on American soil, Cheney has put them in the position of having to face severe political repercussions

There are reasons why Democrats take Dick Cheney’s arguments into account, where they could ignore other GOPers. For starters, he’s smart, and the Democrats in Congress know that. Secondly, he’s knowledgeable. He’s not arguing from mere ideology -- though he’s certainly a conservative -- but from a detailed knowledge of what was done to keep the nation safe in the previous administration, why it was done, and whether it contributed to the lack of post 9/11 terrorist activity in this country. Moreover, when Cheney challenged the new president to release the CIA memos that showed the results of water boarding and other such practices, his critics in the White House declined to authorize their release, suggesting that the memos might indeed bolster the ex-veep’s position. If Cheney was bluffing, Obama and company were afraid to call his bluff.

To add to Cheney’s recent prestige, the two homeland security addresses given last Thursday in Washington -- one by the current president, one by the former vice-president -- temporarily put Cheney on a level with Obama, adding additional authority to Cheney’s reputation as an expert on homeland security matters. 

Finally, the arrest last Wednesday in New York of four men -- all members of a New Jersey mosque -- for allegedly plotting to blow up two synagogues in the Bronx and to use a missile to shoot down a national guard airplane supports the point of view that homeland security is a serious, on-going concern. The what-might-have-beens of this incident has to give the Democrats’ pause.

As to whether Obama or Cheney is right, the answer may lie in the files of the CIA or the Pentagon. More likely, however, it goes back to a basic difference in the underlying philosophy with which the left and the right approach foreign and defense issues. Liberals believe in moral principles and international law; conservatives prefer national self-interest enforced by a strong unilateral response. In 2008, the American people chose the former. Cheney is trying to reverse that decision. In the process, he may have thrown his fellow Republicans a much-needed lifeline.