We have a new puppy. She is a Goldendoodle, and is a reddish brown, and is supposed to grow to about 55-60 pounds. We named her Dominique, but sometimes I call her “Chocolate Thunder” because of her frequent outbursts of nonstop energy which takes her into places she shouldn’t go and causes her to do things she shouldn’t do. But Niki (according to Jane, this is her “call name”) will grow up to be a valuable member of our family, with her bark becoming the first line of defense against anyone who would breach the perimeters of our place.
But she is a happy pup. You can tell this because of the way her tail moves back and forth with rapidity. Sometimes she wags that tail so hard that it shakes her whole body. Literally, the tail was “wagging the dog”.
Reading this, the frequent reader of my missives will ask themselves, “What has this to do with politics or history or social policy?” A little historical (fictional) background for the title of this epistle is necessary. In 1997, a movie titled Wag the Dog premiered. Starring Dustin Hoffman, Robert De Niro, Anne Heche and Woody Harrelson, it told the tale of an ethically challenged president up for reelection. Fearing that a scandal would torpedo the race, several in his government, appointed by him, decided to “wag the dog”. This meant, that without his knowledge, players in the lower reaches of the bureaucracy would manipulate events to create a fictional crisis with Albania, leading to a war. This would distract the voters in time for the president’s successful reelection. A Hollywood producer would orchestrate the problem with the small Balkan state.
Of course, the circus in our nation’s capital is not an exact parallel to the movie, but elements of it are instructive. If you watch the impeachment proceedings in Washington, especially if you have a predilection for self punishment, several witnesses are career foreign service members who have been tasked with implementing our foreign policy “on the ground” in foreign nations.
For those who read our blog, a week ago I posted a basic civics primer on foreign policy in the U. S. Government. To recap, this part of our national experience is controlled solely by the President, to be carried out by ambassadors, consuls and other personnel as directed by him. All these serve “at the pleasure of the President”, and can be terminated (fired, not shot) for any reason whatever.
I have been amazed at the brazen words from some of these appointed officials. One former ambassador was embarrassed by her firing, complaining that her expertise was necessary to carry out American foreign policy. According to her, that policy was different than President Trump’s and would be more effective than his. Another such witness claimed he was the lead person in diplomatic maneuvers in the country in question, the Ukraine, and didn’t appreciate being sidelined in negotiations. To make his situation even more intolerable in this inquiry, he was in the military; in other words, he was taking a position at odds with his Commander-in-Chief!
By the end of this week, about 13 people will have testified in the attempt to impeach the President. Most of these are appointed to their posts, some in a rather lowly position. Trying to steer the ship of state in this manner, they are the tail trying to wag the dog since anyone lower than the President of the United States has no business dictating foreign policy.
Trump must feel as if he is suffering the “slings and arrows of outrageous fortune”, but so far he has fared as well as Muhammed Ali in most of his fights — the blows are just glancing ones, and no real damage has been done. But we Americans should make our voices known and make sure the tail is neutered, and demand the head guide the direction of the dog.