Dick Cheney and the Art of Op-Ed Trolling

The former vice-president’s new op-ed about Iraq is just the latest in a line of spectacularly confounding opinion pieces.

Former Vice President Dick Cheney talks about his wife Lynne Cheney's book 'James Madison: A Life Reconsidered' May 12, 2014 in Washington, D.C.
National Journal
Add to Briefcase
Matt Berman
June 18, 2014, 5:26 a.m.

Dick Cheney is try­ing to break your brain.

In a new op-ed in The Wall Street Journ­al, cowrit­ten with his daugh­ter Liz, the former vice-pres­id­ent gives Pres­id­ent Obama a ma­jor scold­ing on Ir­aq. Obama, the Cheneys write, made a grave mis­take in not step­ping up to IS­IS earli­er. Put in Cheneyese, “Ir­aq is at risk of fall­ing to a rad­ic­al Is­lam­ic ter­ror group and Mr. Obama is talk­ing cli­mate change.” Amer­ica’s en­emies, they write, “are em­boldened and on the march.” Obama “aban­doned Ir­aq and we are watch­ing Amer­ic­an de­feat snatched from the jaws of vic­tory.” 

And without a hint of self-aware­ness: “Rarely has a U.S. pres­id­ent been so wrong about so much at the ex­pense of so many.” [In­sert com­ment on the Bush ad­min­is­tra­tion be­ing wrong on weapons of mass de­struc­tion, wrong on Sad­dam Hus­sein’s ties to 9/11, wrong on just how hard demo­cracy-build­ing in Ir­aq would be.]

There’s ob­vi­ously a lot to say when you’re talk­ing about an op-ed writ­ten by a guy who helped over­see an Ir­aq War that a ma­jor­ity of Amer­ic­ans think was a mis­take now act­ing as the voice of wis­dom and reas­on. And there’s a lot to be frus­trated by when that op-ed doesn’t really ad­dress the lar­ger cir­cum­stances that have led Ir­aq to its cur­rent crisis, out­side of sug­gest­ing that al-Qaida in Ir­aq had been “largely de­feated” by the end of the Bush ad­min­is­tra­tion. The piece doesn’t even men­tion the name of Obama’s White House pre­de­cessor.

As the Bush-era poli­cy­makers be­hind the Ir­aq War come out to air their opin­ions about the cur­rent crisis in the coun­try, many crit­ics have sug­ges­ted we just ig­nore them. Why’s that? You may re­mem­ber that when Dick Cheney left of­fice in 2009, his ap­prov­al rat­ing was at 13 per­cent. At that same time, just 25 per­cent of Amer­ic­ans ap­proved of how the Bush ad­min­is­tra­tion handled the war in Ir­aq dur­ing his pres­id­ency. Cheney may not know it, but this isn’t a par­tic­u­larly trus­ted for­eign policy brain trust we’re talk­ing about. 

But when you push the policy pre­scrip­tions and the polit­ic­al fin­ger-wag­ging out of your head, you’re still left with at least one thing: Dick Cheney really knows how to get un­der people’s skin with a thou­sand words of colum­nized text. And if you look around the re­cent ma­jor op-ed land­scape, you’ll see he’s not alone.

The busi­ness of news­pa­per op-ed trolling is boom­ing. Like, boom­ing so sig­ni­fic­antly that it seemed that half of on­line me­dia spent a full week earli­er this month try­ing to fig­ure out why, ex­actly, Maur­een Dowd ate so much pot

And it’s easy to fig­ure out why Dowd gets to write that in the pa­per of re­cord. Or why Dav­id Brooks wrote a sim­il­ar column earli­er this year about his pot ex­per­i­ences, and why the drug should be il­leg­al, without bring­ing in much in the way of facts. Or why Susan Pat­ton, aka “Prin­ceton Mom,” gets to write op-eds for The Wall Street Journ­al about how col­lege-aged wo­men need to get hus­band-hunt­ing, already.

The an­swer here is, at least in part, at­ten­tion. Here, check out where the Cheney op-ed stands as of 8:30 AM on Wed­nes­day morn­ing:

On the far right, you can see that the Cheney op-ed is the most pop­u­lar story on WSJ‘s site this morn­ing. This shouldn’t be sur­pris­ing. The piece is per­fectly cal­ib­rated red meat for every­one. Con­ser­vat­ives can love it for its pure rage at the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion. Pro­gress­ives can love it, be­cause who doesn’t en­joy a good hate-read

As with the best of the trolly op-eds that have come be­fore it this year, there are already dozens of stor­ies on­line this morn­ing hash­ing out what the Cheneys wrote. There are sure to be dozens more. Which for The Wall Street Journ­al is just a traffic win. But the Cheneys get a big piece of that, too. Liz Cheney is just com­ing off a very failed Sen­ate bid. Dick Cheney has spent the last few years watch­ing his party’s for­eign policy ideo­logy, and Amer­ic­an pop­u­lar opin­ion, drift away from neo­con­ser­vat­ism and to­ward Rand Paul and anti-in­ter­ven­tion­ism.

The Cheneys likely, and reas­on­ably, can feel their already-tenu­ous hold on the Re­pub­lic­an Party slip­ping. What bet­ter way to re­in­tro­duce your­self than with a column that em­boldens your re­main­ing al­lies and in­flames your polit­ic­al ad­versar­ies to the point where they’re ac­tu­ally talk­ing about you again?


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.