I agree, Kozmik. Considering the statements you made are pretty broad, I think you need to provide more to define and support them.
I don’t have any evidence to support, I don’t know how… it’s really an inferential claim - if Bush is a puppet ruler then that would explain the 2000 election and 9/11 would substatiate that claim.
Yes, it is broad. But this is already a highly speculative OP.
That’s not a “puppet master” scenario. No one suggested that those folks would be anything other than advisors. It’s like bringing in a CEO from another industry-- he can rely on his technical staff to help him with the particulars of that industry that he may not understand.
No, I remember such coverage, too. IIRC, for instance, the Newsweek cover issue with Bush and Cheney on it, around the time of the 2000 Republican national convention, had several passages about the experts with which Bush had surrounded himself, many of whom had earlier worked for Dear Old Dad. The article, which had several anonymous quotations from top Bush advisors (imagine that!) conceded he was a neophyte on foreign policy, and discussed the “tutorials” which Condi organized for him while Gov. of Texas. Such advisors would, the reader was assured, help him through any crisis once he was in the White House.
And we all know how well that worked out…
By premising that Bush is a “puppet”, you imply that he has intelligence at least equal to that of cloth, rubber, wood or string. This is, of course, not even remotely true, thus this thread is moot.
Even if GWB is a puppet, I’m pretty convinced he believes himself to be in control of his own show. Kind of like that little toy steering wheel that Maggie plays with in the Simpsons intro.
My take on GWB: average intelligence that hasn’t really been honed by having to accomplish anything on his own. Naive in many ways, cynical in others. Believes in his own ideas, dumb as they may be. Tends to sort people into bad guys and good guys. Deeply repressed inferiority complex and a slight resentment for his father. In real life, he would be the perfect mark for con men, golddiggers and other manipulators.
But hasn’t Cheney…
Sorry, but I’m still not getting the connection. Even if you assume (as you appear to be) that there was fraud and/or conspiracy in the 2000 election and the 9/11 attacks, what does this have to do with the OP? The question about whether Bush is in charge of his administration is different from the question of whether the Bush administration has acted illegally.