“Decider” House Rules

"I'm the decider and I decide what's best."

President George W. Bush's words a couple of days ago, stating that he planned to stand firm behind embattled Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, gave me pause.

“Decider?”

Is that even a word?

Well, if someone who runs is a runner, then someone who spits must be a spitter and someone who decides must, then, be a "decider." I guess we're all "poopers," too?

Really, though, shouldn’t the leader of the most prosperous and advanced nation (though I have my doubts of late) use better ... I don't know ... more "growner upper" words? How about, “I’m a leader and I stand by my decisions" or “I contemplate, then stand by my convictions"?

But "decider?" Really?

Oh well, our “decider” has decided and that’s that. No matter how big the pile of poop he's created gets, Bush says Rumsfeld's done "a fine job" -- kind of like Brownie, I guess. This despite recent charges from the New York-based group Human Rights Watch that Rumsfeld might have been fully aware of the abuses inflicted on at least one prisoner held at Guantanamo Bay. The international human rights group is asking the president to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Rumsfeld and other senior Pentagon officials.

"The question at this point is not whether Rumsfeld should resign," said Joanne Mariner, HRW's director of terrorism and counter terrorism, "it's whether he should be indicted. A special prosecutor should look carefully at what abuses Rumsfeld either knew of or condoned."

The "Decider is sticking by his man even after six retired military commanders publicly declared Rumsfeld “unfit to lead the nation's military forces” and called for his resignation.

“What's best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain as the secretary of defense," Bush responded in news conferences.

The military critics, as the St. Louis Post-Dispatch pointed out , are not "perfumed Pentagon princes." They’re Marine and Army generals, who unlike Bush and Rumsfeld, have seen up close combat that's taken soldiers' lives.

But, hey, what do those who Bush and Rumsfeld describe as “two or three or four retired people” really know?

Apparently quite a bit. Just listen to NPR host Diane Rehm’s interview Tuesday with Retired Major General John Batiste and other military leaders. Batiste, who specifically retired to speak publicly against Rumsfeld and the poop he and Bush created in Iraq, lays out a succinct argument for the defense secretary’s ouster.

No matter. We abide by “Decider” House Rules these days and that's scary stuff if you allow your mind to dwell on it -- especially considering his response to the question about plans for a nuclear strike against Iran:

"All options are on the table,” the president replied.

What!?

Just how exactly are China, Russia, Germany or any key members of the U.N. Security Council supposed to keep international tensions on low-boil with a trigger-happy “decider,” who's still cowboying through Iraq by the way, blabbering about dropping nukes?

Now, I’m no Condoleeza Rice, but how can Bush expect Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or North Korea’s Kim Jong-il to quietly abandon their nuclear ambitions when he’s unwilling to take a nuclear option against them off the table.

Haven't our misguided adventures in Iraq convinced enough Americans that the president's simple talk comes with very dangerous consequences? How long was it after Bush uttered the words "axis of evil" that we found ourselves embroiled in the nation-building, democracy-spreading fiasco that is Iraq?

I get nervous when Bush sounds his goofiest. Because while we're laughing, the "Decider" is deciding and nothing ... I mean nothing ... is funny about that.