who picked them?... cheney?...
That's right! You know, the same guy that "ended up" as VP, because he just couldn't find anybody else that would be as good at the job as he would.
while overseeing the search for a Bush running mate, Mr. Cheney ended up with the job himself.
and
He ran the president's efficient and rapid transition process, installed several of his allies in key Cabinet posts, and remains a top and trusted west wing adviser.
from
pbs.org
I freely admit, I blew it. In the fall of 2000, in a post to Zeev, I recall referring to the "Oil and Gas Boyz" from Texas. Stupid me. Sure Cheney had some oil and gas experience, and had just been CEO of Halliburton. But Halliburton had picked him because he was really a MIC (Military Industrial Complex) guy, and they wanted to increase their MIC contracts. Given recent no-bid contract “wins”, they (Halliburton) have been well repaid.
We have to remember just how powerful the MIC is. After Eisenhower’s warning, you rarely see any disparaging reference to the MIC by a politician - of any stripe, and with good reason. If you supported the MIC, like L. Mendel Rivers, then your district would be rewarded with military bases and defense contracts. Thus, re-election billboards saying “Rivers delivers”, and a submarine named for you follow.
hullnumber.com
Note that the “Rivers delivers” phrase is now the sub’s motto.
All this cozy, tax paid “distortion” that Eisenhower had warned about, seemed invulnerable. Then the Soviet Union collapsed. The raison d’etre of the MIC had ceased to be. The neo-cons (what passes for a MIC brain trust) under Cheney’s name, produced in 1992, the Defense Policy Guidance (DPG) document, that was the precursor of the Rebuilding America’s Defenses (RAD), from 2000. Here is an excerpt from the RAD
In broad terms, we saw the project as building upon the defense strategy outlined by the Cheney Defense Department in the waning days of the Bush Administration. The Defense Policy Guidance (DPG) drafted in the early months of 1992 provided a blueprint for maintaining U.S. preeminence, precluding the rise of a great power rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests. Leaked before it had been formally approved, the document was criticized as an effort by “cold warriors” to keep defense spending high and cuts in forces small despite the collapse of the Soviet Union; not surprisingly, it was subsequently buried by the new administration.
Yes, it (the DPG) “was criticized as an effort by “cold warriors” to keep defense spending high and cuts in forces small despite the collapse of the Soviet Union”, and “it was subsequently buried by the new administration”. The ‘90s were hard times for the MIC. Even with massive mergers, lay-offs, plant and base closings, budgets had to continue to be trimmed on both the civilian and military side. The MIC was hurting..., and planning. The formation of the PNAC was a “wake-up” call. Look at the Introduction of the RAD. Do these sound like the words of a group that are ready to quietly retire into history with a “Mission Accomplished” banner for “winning the cold war”? Rather, they are “issuing a call to arms”. Why not? They’re the arms merchants.
No, in 2000, I didn’t see the Bush campaign as a “Revenge of the MIC”, but shouldn’t I have?
JMO
lurqer |
