http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/01/bus...=rss_topstories

On Wednesday, Bush displayed some of the hubris that makes some of us hate him.

Whether or not Donald Rumsfeld stays or goes, is a matter for Bush to decide. The Secretary of Defense serves at the president’s pleasure.

Dick Cheney is another matter. He is elected official and can be removed only by impeachment. In my opinion, it does not make any difference whether Bush wants him to stay or go.

Questions for Debate:

1. What do you think was the purpose in Bush’s endorsement of Cheney?

2. Should this president, any president, have a say in whether his VP goes or stays?

3. Are there behind the scenes tactics a president could use to force a VP to resign? If so what are they.

It was a just a symbolic "I'm sticking with my guy" type thing. To be honest, I'm not sure what grounds Cheney could be impeached under [and I'm not a fan of him], but that is the only way he can be eliminated. I don't think Bush thinks he honestly can do anything but be symbolic in terms of affecting Cheney's job security, but it wouldn't suprise me if I'm wrong...He's not exactly the most in-tune President in history, Constitutionally speaking.

No, as you said, he's an elected official, the President has no control over his job security.

Waterboarding

CP

Is it hubris, BoF, or his characteristic cluelessness again? I say this because he misspoke during the 2000 Presidential campaign saying that the Chief Executive's job was to make law, or some such drivel.

But I'll grant you that it had a distinct quality of nya-nya-nya-nya-nya! Pffft! It probably has a lot to do with his generally defiant attitude when he encounters opposition to his way of doing things.

Realistically, if Bush wanted Cheney to go, he would shut him out of meetings and activities, not inviting him in the first place, contradicting him in front of important people (or a troop of Girl Scouts visiting the White House! ), being disrespectiful and cold. He would certainly stop asking his advice, and he would tell him he didn't want his advice if it was offered. He would farm out to other people the work that the Vice President customarily does. Hey, it worked with Dan Rather...

But Bushie Boy isn't going to do that. Loyalty is very important to him, and he has that quality to a fault. Look at the way he awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom to George "Slam-Dunk" Tenet and to Paul Bremer.

Maybe GW thinks he can fire Cheney, but you're right in saying that he cannot fire another elected official.

Good point PE. I really don't know.

This is like a custom made pair of boots - hubris fits the right foot; cluelessness fits the left.

Through the years, I've noticed that ignorance an arrogance often reside in the same person. You know, "the big head and the dumb ..." all rolled into one.

1. What do you think was the purpose in Bush’s endorsement of Cheney?

Maybe to plant the seed of thought that what Cheney says on the campaign trail is what Bush would also say. Chaney was on Stephenopolus this morning and made it a point to emphasize that he supports the administration's policies, and that President Bush has the ultimate authority over them.

So maybe this is campaign strategy. The message seems to be that the Iraq effort is the right thing to do, that the Democrats will raise your taxes, and there were other talking points that didn't stick. Think I was muttering about how wrong this set of guys always are.

2. Should this president, any president, have a say in whether his VP goes or stays?

I'm not aware of a VP being bounced on the President's sayso. Originally, the VP was supposed to be from the opposition party, but that rule went away very quickly. I suppose the elected status of the VP position is there for this reason, but there's also the idea of being a heartbeat away from the Presidency.

So, with that in mind, no, the President should have no say as with an employer's power to hire and fire. I imagine the President could ask Congress to boot someone.

3. Are there behind the scenes tactics a president could use to force a VP to resign? If so what are they.

Invite the VP to hunt quail in Crawford? Assign him/her to Baghdad? Put him in that basement office where they keep the brooms? It's easy to make a job miserable to force a resignation. I think (seriously speaking) that in this case, it would be a simple request to step down. It'd be an interesting political situation though.

Well, unfortunately this ill-informed article gets things off on the wrong track here. Saying that he endorses Cheney in no way gives him a "job guarantee". The job guarantee comes from the Constitution, regardless of Bush's opinion of him. It's certainly not unprecedented in this country for a President to be stuck with a Vice President whom he can't stand.

Anyway, that reporter's cluelessness seems to be what's responsible for the erroneous perception of "hubris" in the President's statement.

1. What do you think was the purpose in Bush’s endorsement of Cheney?

The purpose was straightforward enough: to make it clear that he endorses Cheney.

2. Should this president, any president, have a say in whether his VP goes or stays?

That raises a very good point that doesn't get addressed enough. I think the Vice President should always be someone in whom the President has complete confidence. After all, he's only a heartbeat away from the Presidency, so it has to be someone the President knows he can trust. So yes, I would support a constitutional amendment that would give a President the power to boot him out.