In late 1990, following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney was heard giving a speech on Iraqi defense systems that were allegedly built surrounding major archaeological sites in Iraq. Cheney with his usual gravitas, gave a striking talk on the location of these defense systems and how world treasures might be destroyed if we attacked them. The only problem with his speech was that he had the facts all wrong. He identified sites that were in one area of Iraq as being in totally different locations in Iraq. Yet surely anyone who listened to that speech and didn’t know the facts came away from Cheney’s talk convinced that he was correct. Cheney’s style of presentation convinced them that he couldn’t possibly be wrong.
This week at the vice presidential debates, Cheney, confronting Democratic contender John Edwards, said that even though he is the presiding officer of the US Senate, “The first I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight.” The Democrats pointed out immediately after the debate that this wasn’t true. Cheney had met Edwards on at least three occasions prior to the debate and they even produced a picture of Cheney and Edwards sitting next to each other at a national prayer breakfast in 2001.
So, how do Cheney and the Republicans get away with these kind of false statements. Let me quote a commentator describing Cheney after the debates:
“Cheney is thoughtful, clear and conversational. His comments were perfectly lucid, often deeply thoughtful, and sometimes even witty to knock his opponents off balance.”
Cheney’s apologists even went as far as saying that his comment that he had never met Edwards previously were only made in jest to make the point that Edwards has missed a lot of sessions of the Senate.
Let me quote another commentator on Cheney’s style: “Cheney’s manner of speaking and thinking had the effect of pulling in the listener, of initiating the listener to hear what he had to say. The listener got the impression that the invitation was worthwhile, that Cheney was saying something worth hearing. That is a rare quality in a politician and once you see it and hear it you know it is good.”
Cheney is often described as “reassuring”, “calm”, “no-nonsense”, “professional”, “clear”, “ credible”, “decisive” and “resolute” by commentators from all sides of the political spectrum. Yet he can be cited for numerous mistakes and falsities throughout his political career.
Edwards, on the other hand, was referred to as “Peter Pan-like” “a pixie” and “inexperienced” by many commenting on the debates. Although Edwards is only 12 years younger than Cheney, he appeared to many as looking like a high school kid in comparison to Cheney’s college professor image at the debate. Additionally, Edwards’ youthful looks weren’t helped by a comment made by John Kerry during the Democratic primaries. In reference to Kerry’s return from Viet Nam in 1969, Kerry said, “I don’t know if John Edwards was out of diapers then.”
Cheney is often cited for his “wealth of international experience.” Although Bush, Kerry and Edwards didn’t have much real international experience when they arrived in Washington, for example, none of them have lived out of the United States for any extended period of time, Cheney might have come to the Washington and the White House with the least amount of international experience of them all. When elected to Congress in the early 1970s, Cheney came from Wyoming with no international experience. Although he served as a White House aide and later became secretary of defense under Bush 1, he dealt mostly with domestic issues in his earlier career and allegedly got the job at Defense because of his bureaucratic skills and experience as a technocrat. And as CEO of Halliburton, he largely utilized his previous positions of power and prestige rather than any real international experience to gain favor in the international market place. Yet he is given much credit for his “international experience” and President Bush relies heavily on him for international decision-making.
Republican image-makers have convinced the public that Dick Cheney is a person of great knowledge and international understanding. With his style of delivery, Cheney has been able to convince the public that he is a wise elder statesman who speaks with grandfatherly wisdom. But is that really the case?
Predictably Democratic Party supporters and their colleagues told us that Edwards won the vice presidential debate while the Republicans and their friends told us the opposite.
Most neutral pollsters tell us that it was probably a draw. But, unfortunately, it is more likely that style and image will win the day over substance and truth for the majority of voters come the November election.
— Dr. Michael Saba is the author of “The Armageddon Network” and is an international relations consultant.
