Kevin Drum, via ThinkProgress, shares some speculation on whether an outgoing administration has a moral or patriotic duty to keep their opinions to themselves once they leave office.
Much has been made of Dick Cheney going off half-cocked with comments insinuating that President Obama is making the country less safe and that his policies are destined to lead us into an abyss.
Compare that to the approach taken by Cheney's former boss, George W. Bush, who has been admirably quiet, and who believes that he owes the Obama administration his silence.
I added the following comment to Drum's piece:
Getting advice and counsel from the previous administration would be a valuable asset to any new president, and there are scores of examples of where such assistance has been provided. Generally it's given directly to the new administration, not via media outlets like FOX.
And intent is very important here. Is the aim of the person providing the advice really to present alternate views and constructive criticism, or is it to poke the tiger and fan the flames of discontent in general?
With Cheney, many believe that he's so consistently wrong and out of touch, as demonstrated by the success (or lack thereof) of programs and dogmas he supported, that he can't possibly have good intentions at heart and therefore he should shut his pie hole.
Perhaps that's simply transference on my part.
Should Dick Keep His Trap Shut?