Friday, April 13, 2007

Bush Wants to Be Replaced

How else can you interpret this? He's already got a Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, so what's the use of an additional "War Czar"? The generals who have been offered the position have all wisely rejected it, seeing it for what it is. My favorite quote is this:
"The very fundamental issue is, they don't know where the hell they're going," said retired Marine Gen. John J. "Jack" Sheehan, a former top NATO commander who was among those rejecting the job.
As many people around the blogosphere have noted, the title of "Commander in Chief" is accorded to the president for a reason. He is supposed to be the leader of the executive branch and the military, and any attempt to delegate that responsibility is essentially an abdication. TPM nails it here, linking to an Onion article about Bush's intentions to appoint someone to run the country that was remarkably, and depressingly, prescient.

I'm open to other interpretations, but the only thing I can conclude is that Bush simply doesn't understand what the job of President of the United States of America entails. Or, at the very least, that he didn't understand what it entailed when he campaigned for it, and he got through the first four years by essentially delegating everything to Rove and Cheney, so now that his pet war has gone to shit and everyone knows it he's trying to pawn the tough decisions off on someone else. He doesn't want to pay the piper, or, perhaps worse, he doesn't even know how.