Unbridled Enthusiasm

Oh, I'm not aware of too many things
I know what I know, if you know what I mean 
d-do ya?
--What I Am,
Edie Brickell and New Bohemians 

Have you ever seen the film Being There,
in which Peter Sellers plays a vacuous imbecile
 who through a series of misunderstandings
ends up poised to become president? 
--Watch Out, World, The Sunday Times
_____________________

[Of course, Ron Liddle was comparing Mitt Romney to the hapless character Chauncey Gardener, but the comparison works just as well for George W. Bush. Come to think of it, it applies to an endless number of candidates, hence the brilliance of the construction.]

Last month, former Vice President Dick Cheney wrote in a WSJ op-ed,:

"Rarely has a U.S. president been so wrong about so much at the expense of so many," -- not referring to President G. W. Bush, but President Obama (The Collapsing Obama Doctrine).

How is this level of shamelessness possible in a man who has held a position of respect in our government? Could Cheney be deluded? Perhaps just terribly confused, or bombastic? Does he care that his legacy be one of an inveterate liar -- a  criminal creep? Perhaps he is simply a flat-out criminal, engaging in some Projection 101.

Ranger recently came across a photo in General (RET.) Hugh Shelton's book, Without Hesitation, of the General standing with President George W. Bush on 28 September 2001, a mere two weeks after the World Trade Center attacks:

The President looks positively glowing -- nary a sign of furrowed brow for him.

Remember the "high striker" game at local fairs and carnivals? If you struck with the mallet hard enough, you could max out at the top of the scale. Now, if you were charged with choosing the penultimate word or phrase for describing chutzpah of VP Cheney, and then for Mr. Bush, what term would you choose?

Six Degrees of Separation

It ain't personal.
We don't like you, but it ain't personal
--Dick Powell, Murder My Sweet
________________

Since Ranger last left the topic of Dick Cheney, let's re-visit John Walker Lindh [The American Taliban] and draw a connection.

Lindh was a rifleman for the Taliban, and no proof was given that he engaged in terrorist activity. Nonetheless, he was sentenced to 20 years in federal prison for violating the embargo against the Taliban. Twenty years for carrying a rifle and fighting the Northern Alliance. So much for the freedom of religion in the U.S. Onward Christian Soldiers.

Lindh was shot, tortured, humiliated, kept in solitary confinement, denied medical care and generally treated as if the freedom of America hinged upon his skinny ineffectual ass.

And ineffectual, if not skinny, asses is where we join up with one-each Dick Cheney. Cheney outed CIA operative Valerie Plame, lied about intelligence data and continues to do so, told the CIA to lie or omit facts from their congressional testimony, facilitated torture, assassinations, secret prisons and illegal rendition programs, which included child kidnapping, and more. Just another day at the creepy Veep's office.

The question is: Who is the bigger criminal? Which deserves a 20-year prison sentence? If justice were served, Lindh would be pardoned and Cheney placed in immediate detention, minus habeas corpus.

It would be fair, but it won't happen because America is living its own real-time version of Lost.