Poor Paul O'Neill

Townhall.com ^ | January 13, 2004 | Bruce Bartlett (archive)

[.cnI redruM]

When Paul O'Neill was forced out as Secretary of the Treasury in December 2002, everyone knew that it was not the last time he would be heard from. Now, after a year of silence, he is speaking out again in a new book, "The Price of Loyalty: George W. Bush, the White House, and the Education of Paul O'Neill" by Ron Suskind. A long excerpt appeared in the Wall Street Journal on Monday and O'Neill himself went on "60 Minutes" to promote the book, which is based largely on interviews with O'Neill and documents provided by him.

The picture O'Neill paints of President Bush is that of a man totally disengaged from policymaking; an enigma, whose views on key economic issues were a mystery even to his principal economic spokesman, Mr. O'Neill. In cabinet meetings, the president appeared "like a blind man in a room full of deaf people." O'Neill implies that decisions on key issues, such as the imposition of steel tariffs, were made with no regard to the substance and were based solely on politics.

One of the most serious charges made by former Secretary O'Neill is that President Bush expressed concern about the proposed 2003 tax cut being too tilted toward the rich at a November 2002 White House meeting. The book quotes the president as saying, "Haven't we already given money to rich people? This second tax cut's gonna do it again…. Why are we doing it again?" It goes on to say that he was talked out of these reservations by his political adviser, Karl Rove, who said that Mr. Bush must "stick to principle."

Although the books cites a transcript of this meeting provided by Mr. O'Neill, participants in the meeting tell me that no such statements were ever made. Former Council of Economic Advisers Chairman R. Glenn Hubbard states flatly, "The president NEVER made any of the distributional comments referred to in the interview." Cesar Conda, Vice President Dick Cheney's domestic policy adviser, also told me that the president never said anything about giving money to rich people. Referring to his own notes of the meeting, Conda said that the discussion was about extending depreciation rules that were due to expire, not about reducing income tax rates.

Conda is also critical of Mr. O'Neill's portrayal of the debate surrounding the imposition of steel tariffs in March 2002. The Wall Street Journal excerpt clearly implies that Vice President Cheney supported the tariff decision, when in fact he opposed it. At the meeting O'Neill refers to, Cheney was simply acting as an honest broker, keeping his personal views private. Vice President Cheney generally made his views known to the president only in one-on-one meetings, so as to facilitate discussion in open meetings.

Although Mr. O'Neill portrays himself as the principal opponent of steel tariffs, in fact he was AWOL at a critical moment. According to a Sept. 19, 2003 report in the Washington Post, at a crucial meeting of the economic team, tariff opponents were abandoned by Mr. O'Neill, who sent an underling in his place. Lacking the stature of the Treasury secretary to beat down tariff supporters like Commerce Secretary Don Evans, the opponents essentially lost by default.

Mr. O'Neill would have us believe that he was the only honest man in an administration of sycophants. Another interpretation would be that he was simply ill-suited to the job he had been given, too used to being the boss and incapable of taking direction, too interested in doing things his own way instead of the way his boss wanted them done, and too easily led to believe that outspokenness is the same thing as honesty.

Even without the details made public in this book, we know that Paul O'Neill was not a very effective Treasury secretary. Looking through my files I find headlines like these from his tenure:

"All Thumbs at Treasury," Washington Post (5-20-01)

"Mr. O'Neill's Gaffes," Washington Post (8-1-02)

"Treasury Secretary Gets Into Hot Water On U.S. Cuba Policy," Wall Street Journal (3-15-02)

"O'Neill Solidifies Maverick Status With Public Jabs at Bush Policies," Wall Street Journal (3-18-02)

On Oct. 2, 2001, the New York Times had this to say: "Mr. O'Neill's erratic statements have sometimes rattled investors and…marginalized him as a policymaker and spokesman."

You get the idea. Yet O'Neill never improved. He continued to go out of his way to be out of step with the Bush Administration, both substantively and stylistically, right up until the end. The only question is why he wasn't fired sooner.

Mr. O'Neill may think he is getting revenge on a president he believes treated him shabbily. But I think that all he has really done is remind people of why he never should have been named Treasury secretary in the first place.

[.cnI redruM]

O'Niell sucked. He was a loser and a glad-hander from day 1. He probably came up with the book idea 3 months after he took office.

[benCartwright]

Dubya ain't the sharpest tool in the shed. I would tend to agree that for the most part it is true. While O'Niell probably has an axe to grind I don't think he's a liar.

[benCartwright]

Dubya ain't the sharpest tool in the shed. I would tend to agree that for the most part it is true. While O'Niell probably has an axe to grind I don't think he's a liar.

[txzman]

Rumsfeld and two of Cheney's aides, present in meetings that O'Neil 'quoted' said conversations in the book never happened. In general, Rumsfeld called him - nicely - a liar.

Asked how the author could quote people in high-security Presdiential meetings, Suskind says he had 'virtual transcripts'. Unfortunately in those meetings, no transcripts are made - a long standing policy going back decades in the White House.

[jaz.357]

Welcome to Free Republic Ben. How are things over at DU?

[Joe 6-pack]

"Dubya ain't the sharpest tool in the shed."

Unlike you newbie, who carries the fine razor-honed edge of a ball peen hammer.

[Colonel Kangaroo]

Anybody he ever saw Paul O'Neill in the Yankee dugout after striking out knew that he was too volatile to last long in government.

[winner3000]

Hi Ben. We here at FR like to use reasoning and proof for debate instead of name calling. I'd respectfully say that our MBA President has proved in his successful leadership both internationally and in matters of the economy quite successful. Even domestically where many Conservatives disagree with him, even they have to agree that he has gotten his way in Congress; this is OBJECTIVELY not the record of a dumb person.

On the other side, O'Neil's record in his position in the administration, using any objective measuring stick was a disaster.

[petercooper]

welcome!

[LandofLincoln]

I can't wait NOT to buy his book

[Spacemonkey1023]

Then why did he start backpedalling on CNN? They just ran a headline on their website in which he said the Iraq thing was a remnant from the Clinton years?

[hole_n_one]

In case you didn't know, the search function at FR is working just fine.......

Poor Paul O'Neill

[fish hawk]

I suggest you take what few marbles you have "LEFT" and go play with your people. There is no such person as Dubya, there is a great man ,though ,we call President George W. Bush.

[ShandaLear]

And he ain't no JUNIOR either.

[mc5cents]

Hey ben, go back to the Ponderosa. AKA DU.

[benCartwright]

Not from DU buddy.....have been there a few times like I have here. Seen SOME things I agree with there, as I have here also. I don't think the Dems have the answer and I SURE don't think Bush does. To me Bush is not a conservative, he's a neo-con and the conservatives need a leader......I was a McCain supporter until he was "Bush" wacked...

[benCartwright]

Regime change in Iraq was definitely on the agenda in the Clinton administration. Difference is though, no other admin was going to throw us into war for the purpose of getting rid of Saddam. It's a good thing he's gone.....but at what cost? I think it could have been done without destroying a country, killing Americans and Iraqi's, and driving our economy into the toilet.

[MrsEmmaPeel]

Dubya ain't the sharpest tool in the shed.

How do you figure that? Because you say so? Because other liberals have said so? Because so many treat Gore as an intellectual giant, when in fact his SAT scores were lower than Dubya's? The greatest test of a man is the quality of the people around him. Dubya can hang around with a pretty heady group and hold his own. Give me his more "down-home" style than the pretentious arrogance of Mr. Earth In the Balance (gag!) any day.

[BlueLancer]

"To me Bush is not a conservative, he's a neo-con and the conservatives need a leader......I was a McCain supporter until he was "Bush" wacked..."

Oh, oh ... kitties, we've got a live one ...

[benCartwright]

Not on the "LEFT".....Not on the "RIGHT". Clinton knew when to sway to to right just as Poppy knew when to sway to the left. Good leaders make decisions based on what is good for ALL the people and our country....NOT what their party or their supporters want them to.

And President George W. Bush is an idiot.

[dighton]

Welcome to FreeRepublic. Have a seat.

[general_re]

Hassan Ali ben Cartwright, space cowboy...

[fish hawk]

I love when someone like you shows their ignorance. Make flat untrue statements and I can almost see the drool running down your cheek.

President Bush is well educated and managed to become the President of the Greatest Country and the most powerful on earth. Not bad for an "idiot" yeah?

[MediaMole]

And you are Outta Here!

[FrankR]

"Dubya ain't the sharpest tool in the shed. I would tend to agree that for the most part it is true. While O'Niell probably has an axe to grind I don't think he's a liar."

Are you sure your screen name isn't "benCartLEFT?

[Catspaw]

Oh, oh ... kitties, we've got a live one ...

Meow meow meow....

Hold on a sec--I'm sharpening my claws as we speak.

[BlueLancer]

benCartwright
This account has been banned or suspended.

Hold on a sec--I'm sharpening my claws as we speak.

Sorry, kitty, but you're too late. We played with him until he was dead.
You can claw the corpse for awhile, if you want to. Just don't leave the body outside the front door.

[Catspaw]

You can claw the corpse for awhile, if you want to. Just don't leave the body outside the front door.

I can still pretend he's still alive, can't I? Shake him by the neck, toss his lifeless body into the air, pounce on him, shake him by the neck....and I'll just do what my momma taught me to do--eat the middle, then leave the head & tail on the back porch for that tall thing that feeds me.

[L,TOWM]

You sound like Dighton's cat. Except for forgetting the "Please feed me" part.

[Catspaw]

That "please feed me" in our house doesn't include the "please," at least according to our Siamese. It's a number of sustained--and really annoying--yowls in my face, morning, noon and night. Especially that "night" part.

[dighton]

Did mine really say "please"? As far as I know, that's not in her vocabulary.

[Wolfstar]

Actually, as the above article makes very clear, O'Neill is a liar. Two participants in one of the meetings O'Neill uses to make his case flatly contradict what O'Neill said occurred. And they were willing to do it openly, in print, by name, rather than through the usual Washington anonymous source technique.

[BlueLancer]

That's true ... I don't remember Dighton's cat ever saying "Please." To the best of my memory, it was always "Come feed me."

[L,TOWM]

I stand humbly and apologetically corrected. I must have been confused, equating the felines on this forum with the plaintive yowls of my NEIGHBOR'S cat whenever we cook something that involves meat...

[Caleb1411]

[SVLew]

I'm with Ben--George W. Bush ran Texas government into the ground with giant deficits, and they aren't any prettier when we've got them nationally.

And cut the guy some slack--if he wants to get a debate going, let him. Either our arguments stand up to his points, or they don't.

[gedeon3]

No Ben, you are an idiot.

[bayourod]

There are no deficits in Texas. The Constitution requires a balanced budget.

[fish hawk]

Why dont you cut me some slack, this guy's been banded from F.R. just another Troll. You could be next.

[HP8753]

Trolling,Trolling,Trolling, Keep those Doggies rolling....

Never Mind,That was some other TV Show. ;-)

[SVLew]

I could be next? Why, because I think Bush spends too much money, and is making government bigger instead of smaller?