Punch & Judy Presidency

Janet and I had an interesting “What If” style of discussion this morning, and we have a theory. I want to stress before I get into it that this is kind of “conspiracy theorist” in nature. It sounds plausible to us, but unlike many of my other posts, I want to make it clear that I’m not CERTAIN this is the reality of our current government, only that it fits the facts as we understand them. In fact, the use of the term "theory" is probably too strong, it's a possibility, nothing more.

(Credit goes mostly to Janet, by the way. In discussing, we fleshed out the details, but the germ of the idea was hers.)

We’re coming to wonder whether what’s really going on in the executive branch of our federal government is a major power struggle.

As you know, I believe that policy out of this administration has been damaging to the country, and has been geared towards the benefit of a small number of special interests rather than the benefit of the nation and its population as a whole.

Further, I find it perfectly plausible, given all the facts that we have, and more to the point, the facts that are unconfirmable, that this last election was faked. I’ve mentioned that the voting machines in Ohio and other places are made by Diebold, a company whose CEO publicly stated in the run up to the election that he was committed to doing whatever was necessary to deliver Ohio to George W. Bush. I’ve mentioned that this is the first time in the history of exit polling in America that the official results have been more than the statistical margin-of-error wrong (and significantly so). And I’ve pointed out that the results on a Diebold voting machine can reportedly be easily (and untraceably) changed with 30 seconds on the single tabulator machine.

I’ve also mentioned that I believe that there is a small faction of neoconservatives who have made a mockery of the values of the Republican party, taking over control of the party for its own goals, while using psychological “mob rule mentality” tactics to bring large numbers of die-hard Republicans along in “ditto” mode, never really thinking about how little the actions of their party currently match their stated moral philosophies.

Janet and I consider that perhaps these neo-conservatives have been dealt a bit of a blow internally. Perhaps they chose a candidate they believed they could control (who better than a spoiled little rich brat who hadn’t really succeeded at anything in his life, after being handed chance after chance) and managed to groom him to the point of viability and got him elected.

For the first term, things went relatively smoothly. The puppet President knew he had won on a legal technicality but lost the popular vote, and things ran well with the lucky (for them) aid of a country disaster that helped instill the fear that is at the heart of neo-conservative ruling philosophy (read some of the works of the father of the neo-conservative movement for more details. I can’t bring his name to mind just now, but I’ll look it up later and add it in a comment).

But then the second election came along and they forgot to tell the puppet that they were still controlling things, and he came to start thinking he really WAS the President. A power struggle ensues between Bush and Cheney and suddenly Cheney finds the strings with which he had previously been controlling his marionette have been cut. The inmate has taken control of the asylum.

This might explain why Bush appointees seem to have taken a turn from those who most follow the neo-conservative principles to just those who have been pals with the President for the longest time.

However, let me finish by saying again that this is merely a theory. I’m really not willing to let go of “malice and personal gain” as the motive for most of what this Administration does. I really feel like there’s something more sinister than this theory at work. However, it was fun talking about it and positing the “what ifs”, and so I thought I’d share the results of our morning philosophical chat.

Liam.