Honesty is not Bush's strong suit. Take a look at the sequence of events that preceded this announcement.
When Congress was discussing the need for a 9/11 Commission, Bush was against the idea. When the idea gained political traction, Bush was for it.
When the Commission was formed, Bush appointed as head of it, Henry Kissinger, someone he could rely on to not be too tough with him. Kissinger declined and Thomas Kean was appointed. For months Bush stymied Kean's efforts to get data from the White House.
Bush refused to testify before the commission. Again, when it appeared that practically the whole country wanted him to testify, he was all for it - but he made lots of conditions, including the presence of the Vice President when he testified.
When the 9/11 Commission made its recommendations, Bush lakadaisically accepted them. He obviously was not pleased with the recommendation for a powerful intelligence czar. But he did not say so. He worked behind the scenes to weaken the powers of the czar. When Chairman Duncan Hunter objected, Bush made a phone call from Chile. Very impressive.
Politicians of all stripes were calling on the president to get the bill passed. The newly elected minority leader of the Senate, Harry Reid, challenged Bush to use his capital to get the bill passed.
So Bush acted. He "convinced" Hunter. Since Hunter is on the same side as Bush - keeping Pentagon power in tact with reference to intelligence - "convincing" must have been easy.
Here are the results: The so-called czar will not have the power to hire and fire agency chiefs, as the commission recommended. According to the bill the director will have "the right to concur in [their] appointment." The czar will not have firm control of the spy agencies. He will be able to "monitor the implementation and execution" of agency spending; then he will report problems to the president and Congress.
This is the way the president works. If he wants to get something done he goes ahead and does it. When the public objects, he tells them he is on their side, and then he does what he pleases.
Throughout his presdency he has said one thing to the public and done another. A previous example of this gross hypocrisy is his being against and then for the Homeland Security Deparment. The result is that we have a useless Homeland Security Department. And I suppose the same future is in store for the intelligence czar.
Why can't the president be honest with the American people?
