Wednesday, June 27, 2007

The Office Of The Unitary Regency Of The U.S.A.

(Updated below) (Update II) (Update III)

This is not a "Co-Presidency", nor is it a (misnamed) "Fourth Branch" of the U.S. government.

Rather, this is a Unitary Regency - Dick B. Cheney's Regency actually - which has been the de facto Executive Power behind the Puppet Presidency of George W. Bush since January 2001.

It is well known that Cheney is an ardent proponent of the Unitary Executive Theory. Alexander Hamilton expounded much on the necessity for a Unitary Executive in The Federalist Papers (No. 70; 03/18/1788):

"(...) all men of sense will agree in the necessity of an energetic (vigorous) Executive (...) The ingredients which constitute energy in the Executive are, first, unity; secondly, duration; thirdly, an adequate provision for its support; fourthly, competent powers (...) That unity is conducive to energy will not be disputed. Decision, activity, secrecy, and dispatch will generally characterize the proceedings of one man in a much more eminent degree than the proceedings of any greater number; and in proportion as the number is increased, these qualities will be diminished (...) This unity may be destroyed in two ways: either by vesting the power in two or more magistrates of equal dignity and authority; or by vesting it ostensibly in one man, subject, in whole or in part, to the control and co-operation of others, in the capacity of counsellors to him."
(Emphasis mine)

Therefore, the idea of a "Co-Presidency" runs counter to the very concept of a Unitary Executive - and as a matter of fact, Cheney's long-held core beliefs on this subject are so extreme that they can be summed up in two words: "Executive Supremacy".

This is why I submit (again) to you, good folks, that Dick Cheney sought nothing less than such Executive Supremacy. Some (myself included, until recently) may call this an Imperial Presidency, I now prefer to call it a Regency - because this was the true objective that Cheney had for himself all along: to be the true Head of State of the U.S.A., ruling quietly behind a Puppet President which acted as concealment and facade.

To this effect, the inept Bush must have been a dream come true for would-be-Regent Cheney, back in 2000, when the former approached the latter for guidance and counseling in the vetting of potential running mates. After all, Bush's propensity for minimal workload and eager willingness to delegate constituted a golden opportunity for Cheney's complete involvement in the formulation and execution of policy. Ergo: Bush was the perfect Puppet for the Master Puppeteer. Consequently, Cheney seized the occasion and chose himself as Bush's running mate.

To paraphrase Hamilton and, to some extent, Harvey C. Mansfield: decision, activity, secrecy, and dispatch are the characteristics of a vigorous Unitary Executive. It goes without saying that Regent Cheney followed this axiom to the letter. Allow me to provide a few examples to support this:

Decision: Regent Cheney made the decision that terrorist suspects held by the U.S. were to be stripped of access to any court and be confined indefinitely without charges, in order to be tried, if at all, in closed military tribunals. The Regent made his Puppet sign the Executive Order and thus the deed was done. This is only one example. Among. So. Many.

Activity: Regent Cheney shaped and enacted (through his Puppet President) foreign policy (Iraq, Iran), anti-terrorism policy, homeland security (the Patriot Act, the Military Commission's Act, the Catastrophic Emergency Presidential Executive Order, as obvious examples), domestic initiatives, energy policy, environment policy and economic policy. He also shaped SCOTUS by vetting nominees. And. So. Much. More.

Secrecy: Regent Cheney gathered his Cabal of the Regent's Men (nearly all of which he picked himself), he had his spies and his motus operandi was to "never leave tracks" (so that his unlawful Regency ever remain effective, hidden and secure). Just the fact that it is only now that we are learning of the reality of this Office of the Regency of the U.S.A. is proof enough that secrecy, spying and deniability were an integral part of Regent Cheney's "characteristics" as a "vigorous" Supreme Executive.

Dispatch: Whether through monies marked for "vague items" (e.g. "black ops") or through other more dubious monetary sources, Regent Cheney has been approving secret intelligence operations against Iran - most likely by contracting private intelligence ops firms. I think we can legitimately ask the question: what else?

Last, but not least, I ask another question: isn't it strange that George W. Bush never professed any belief in, let alone displayed knowledge of, the concept of the Unitary Executive prior to 2001 (at least, to my knowledge)?

My answer to this question is: it is not strange at all, because he got "educated" on this concept only after he became Regent Cheney's mouthpiece and Puppet.

And to those who like to claim that "President" Bush charted his own way since 2001, I reply to them with a final question: how is it, then, that Cheney always got his way in the end?

In conclusion, the Office of the Unitary Regency of the U.S.A. was installed on January 2001, complete with a Puppet President to ensure its cover.

This was indeed never a "Co-Presidency", nor a "Fourth Branch" (it is the media which is supposed to be the 4th Branch of government), but rather a bona fides Regency.

Woe to the Republic ...


Update: 06/27/2007 - While the OURUS (Office of the Unitary Regency of the U.S.A) continue its typical despot-like obfuscating, disassembling and issue-confusing, more admirers/supporters of Regent Cheney become emboldened to come out of the woodworks. At the same time, more continue talking about "Fourth Branch" and thinking that defunding will do it (wrong on both counts). Lastly, looks like private contractors flourished under the Unitary Regency - I wonder how many of them are intelligence private firms?


Update II: 06/28/2007 - Via Digby, more people are calling for the impeachment of Regent Cheney.


Update III: Sydney Blumenthal published an opinion at Salon about Cheney's "Imperial Vice-Presidency". He misses the point: this is not an Imperial Vice-Presidency, but a bona fides Unitary Regency. Let's call things for what they truly are, shall we?


(Cross-posted at DKos, at Suzie-Q, at Diatribune, at Progressive Historians, and at Progressive Bloggers)


Sphere: Related Content

15 POVs/Comments:

Psychols said...

Cheney expresses indifference, in public and private, to any verdict but history's, and those close to him say he means it.

Dangerous thinking for a man of power, even if it is power that wasn't given to him by the law. The man actually believes his own press. What he doesn't believe is all that evidence that his agenda is destined for failure. He dreams only of a future when the rest of the world realizes that he was right all along.

There was a book about the stupidity of very successful people. Their confidence is so high that they have lost sight of their own fallibility.

Mentarch said...

Indeed - and I chalk it all up to the Eight Principles of Incompetence ...

DivaJood said...

Mentarch, Cheney so fits into the eight principles of incompetence that it seems as if they were created to describe him. Unfortunately, his incompetence makes him the most dangerous person on the face of this earth.

I'm beyond outraged.

Mentarch said...

Jood: indeed - especially since it is the incompetents who abuse power ... hence, they are more often than not dangerous.

Larry said...

Excellent article and oh so true. I believe there never was a "search" for a Vice President for Bush.

I believe that having Cheney choose himself was all part of the masterdom plan of future Imperialism.

Very good read today.

TomCat said...

Good one, Mentarch. With the help of some firefighters we can solve the Cheney problem. Just attach a 5" hose to his bidet. :-)

Mentarch said...

Larry, TC: thank you.

However, I think folks do not reallly want to hear about this reality. They'd rather think of Cheney as a VP who "went too far". Some are even talking of abolishing the office of VP.

But the problem (and the real question) is this: how is it that the Constitution could not safeguard from such perversion of itself?

Answer: "We The People" looked the other way while incompetents did what they always do - misuse/abuse power ...

Suzie-Q said...

Answer: "We The People" looked the other way while incompetents did what they always do - misuse/abuse power ...
------------------------
Medntarch:

That's exactly what happened! Most people would rather hear about their favorite celebrity or sports star, rather than address the political problems of this country! However, I do think the tide is turning...

Mentarch said...

It is to be hoped, Suzie-Q ... it is to be hoped ...

LET'S TALK said...

Nice post mentarch, I just cannot see how we allowed the congress and the senate to let this Vice President have his way with the office that means less than any other in the power of our government.

Then we the people as you and Q said, turned our head while Enron and others met secretly with this man. We went on with our little worries, our television programs, our basketball favorites and gave this man an unwilling pass to do as he wished.

We assumed the two (2), HOUSES OF GOVERNMENT WAS TAKING CARE OF OUR COUNTRY AND OUR RIGHTS.

A stacked court gave this man more power and from that he never looked back.

Mentarch said...

Let's Talk: yes, we have to trust our elected representatives ... but the ultimate buck stops with *us*.

To paraphrase Ronald Regan: "trust, but verify" ...

mirth said...

I disagree that any tide is turning.
The coalition between the military-industrial complex and the fundamentalist Right is a forward-moving wave and we citizens have no representation to stop it. Worse, one component of this tide is to empty the national treasury. With that, laws that have been subverted will not have the $ to be reinstated.
You ask the real question: How is it that our constitution did not prevent this?

Mentarch said...

Mirth: exactly. And unfortutately, the answer looks to be "We the People" ...

Constitutionalist said...

The most frightening thing of all is the lack of outrage not from an uninformed public but from a noncaring "Fourth Estate" whom remark carelessly how "deft and masterfully" Cheney manipulated and knew the mechanics of goverment.

Furthermore journalist point with glee as for example Chris Matthews of "Hardball" at their excitment over the upcoming showdown. Talk about Nero and Rome anyone?

Mentarch said...

Constitutionalist: the MSM and politics are joined at the hip by intellectual sloth ( http://pov-mentarch1.blogspot.com/2007/05/politics-and-journalism-joined-at-hip.html ) ... no surprise, considering that they arise from the same culture as "We the People" ( http://pov-mentarch1.blogspot.com/2007/06/cancer-on-body-democratic.html ) ...

It has become a downward, devolving spiral ...

Post a Comment

Please feel free to comment on APOV. However, remember to keep in check your tone and respect for all here. Let rational, reasoning, enthousiastic and passionate conversations and discussions rule first and foremost in our participatory democracy, so as to facilitate the free exchange of reality-based facts and ideas. In between, do not forget to have fun and enjoy yourselves ... in other words: keep on rockin'! - Mentarch