The measure of a man

While it is easy to blame Bush for all that ails the world and this country, let’s measure his actions as president and contrast them to the words he has used to define both. One of the first things Bush said when he entered the White House was that he was going to change the tone in Washington. Bush promised, “to bring integrity and leadership” to the White House. In his attempt to carve a distinction between his incoming administration and that of the exiting Clinton administration Bush said that there would be “no tolerance for even a hint of scandal.”

OOPS!

Well ladies and gentlemen; it is clear that there is plenty of scandal in this administration. And there is clearly plenty of tolerance for it as well! There is clearly scandal associated with the meetings involving Vice President Dick Cheney in the fomenting of the presidents energy policy. Being sued and taken to court in the first year of one’s administration does not bode well for one seeking to avoid scandal. A hint of it or otherwise.

From there it is but a short jump from a “hint of scandal” to the full-blown scandal associated with the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame. For a president who has no tolerance for a hint of scandal it is strange that he should be seeking the advice of outside counsel on this matter. Surely a leader with integrity and no tolerance would reveal the individual who leaked the information and to fire them immediately rather than allow the administration mire in further scandal.

Then there are the circumstances surrounding the information used to sell the invasion of Iraq. The information presented to the UN by Colin Powell has been proven unreliable. Even Powell has questioned the validity of the information that he presented on that fateful day in February. Here again the president demonstrates through leadership that he does have tolerance for scandal. Then again success of his administration is predicated upon the scandal-ridden invasion of Iraq.

Speaking of Iraq leadership and scandal. The torture of Iraqi prisoners is another area of concern. I would have thought that one like Bush who has no tolerance for scandal would have demanded that those responsible in his administration (Rumsfeld?) step-down rather than sully the presidents good image. As of today the investigation into what happened continues. Where exactly is the integrity and leadership Bush mention he was going to bring? Is it measured in the pictures of Abu Ghraib prison?

There is of course the (growing?) scandal associated with Ahmed Chalabi the neo-conservative choice to head up a subordinate Iraqi government. It does appear that the pre-war information cited by Bush Cheney and Rumsfeld (to name only a few) about Iraq’s WMD was generated by Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress (INC). But even worse still is that now Chalabi is being investigated for his alleged connections to the government of Iran. It is reported that Chalabi has given sensitive information to the Iranian government regarding the US ability to read their encoded messages. The suspicion that surrounds Chalabi should have the scandal alarms in the Bush White House working overtime. Where is the leadership and integrity to be found in this administration?

When one measures Bush to his own words he has proven that he is not a man of his word. There are other instances of Bush not living up to his own words. Take for example the president’s four points he asserts must be met when using US troop abroad. 1. It is a “vital national interest.” 2. That the “mission is clear.” 3. That the troops are “properly trained and prepared.” 4. And “whether or not there is an exit strategy.” Now I have reviewed the president’s words several times concerning these points and not one did I find him arguing that he would authorize the use of troops with the exclusion of any of these points.

In looking at the US involvement in Iraq, the president has yet to articulate an “exit strategy.” For the man who argued that “the exit strategy needs to be well defined” before authorizing the use of US soldiers, the president has yet to demonstrate the integrity that indicates that his leadership would have “no tolerance for even a hint of scandal.”