This past week, pundits and politicians spit-balled the concept that the White House install a "relief czar": a prefab Rudy Giuliani meets The Monkees autocrat to take control of the post Katrina situation on the ground.
For the life of me, I can't figure out why the President of the United States of America can't fill that role, but after five years of dealing with this Bubble Boy, I'm not surprised. I give the president credit, though, for at least feigning the effort. Alas, his repeated visits failed to serve their primary purpose: an all new for 2005 bullhorn moment. Staffers thought it might be the "golly, they look like tiny drowning ants!" Air Force One photo. They thought it might be the "you're doing a heck of a job, Brownie" photo op. Evidently, Bush was for Brownie before he was against him.
But no. Nothing seemed to work. No bullhorn moment. I felt so bad for him. I know how important it was for the president to relive his glory days, but I guess he couldn't find any rubble amongst all that, um, rubble.
Bullhorns and photo ops notwithstanding, the Bush administration could've avoided this PR crisis (as well as a percentage of the death toll) had George W. Bush been more willing to cope with something thousands of Katrina victims have grown accustomed to: hearing bad news.
President Bush has a serious Bad News Gap.
This week's issue of Newsweek included further insight into Bush's "no bad news" mandate (and psychological dysfunction). To my knowledge, never before has this childish extension of his petulance and temper risen to a level influence on the events of a major catastrophe. Top level White House staffers, including Dan Bartlett, Chief of Staff Andy Card, Deputy Chief of Staff Joe Hagin, and Scott McClellan, are literally terrified to give Bush bad news for two overlapping reasons: 1) Bush hates bad news, and 2) Put it this way, the consequences of his temper tend to include a dog, feces, and a thumbs-up gesture.
Whatever he thinks "his job" is or however delusional he might be, he has no choice but to listen to bad news. He can't be permitted to just refuse to hear it -- unless, of course, he's actually deaf. It's part of the gig. For a president to wave off bad news or to rip the throat out of the messenger is a dereliction of duty.
Therefore, I propose that Congress pass a law requiring that the White House hire a "Bad News Czar" for President Bush. Sure, there's a separation of powers issue, but if we can't get an impeachment for Bush's criminal negligence in the "Katrina Exercise" (the vice president's words, not mine), at the very least, we should be permitted to have this as a substitute until 2008.
One rule. We, the American people, get to nominate the Bad News Czar. Bush isn't allowed because he'd probably select John Roberts... or Mike Brown. After all, he only has -- what? Four guys he appoints to various positions over and over?
Here's my short list of nominees for Bad News Czar:
-- That guy who played Captain Panaka from STAR WARS: EPISODE I. He was really good at cup-half-empty lines like, "This is a battle I do not think we can win!" and "Our security volunteers will be no match against a battle-hardened Federation army!" How often has Bush heard such blunt lines of negativity? If little Natalie Portman could handle it, so can George W. Bush.
-- Actor Brian Cox. No explanation needed. Brian Cox can do anything.
-- R. Lee Ermey. This would be an easy confirmation since Ermey is a Republican. But in order for me to allow the nomination of a Republican I'd insist that he be wired for video and sound when he confronts the president. I want to have a record of Bush's expression when Ermey gets in the president's face and screams, "You had best un-f**k yourself, Private Pyle, or I will unscrew your head and s**t down your neck!"
We need someone in the White House to immediately, and without hesitation, inform the president of every item of bad news that affects the status of our nation. In fact, on the Bad News Czar's first day, [Ermey!] should have to list for the president all previous items of bad news from the last five years.
I'm serious about this. It's unacceptable for the leader of the free world to be so insulated from the gritty truths the rest of us confront every day -- especially when thousands or potentially millions of lives are at stake. He claims to be a problem solver, but how can he be a problem solver without knowing the full scope of what caused the problem in the first place? Or how about this: shouldn't he hear about bad news before the bad news gets worse?
This should be a bipartisan effort. Cross the aisle, Republicans! I know you can do it for the good of the nation. After all, isn't the safety and security of America more important than your party and the current occupant of the White House? Write to your congressional representative now, and let them know you want a White House Bad News Czar. And I'll take your suggestions for additional nominees below.