So, Paul O’Neill is doing what he can to help sell Ron Suskind’s book, The Price of Loyalty: George W. Bush, the White House, and the Education of Paul O'Neill. That is probably a very kind thing for him to do seeing as he was the overwhelming source of the books content. But along with all the good intentions comes the fact that much of the way the book is written is suspect to a begrudged personality who parted ways with the Bush Administration at the highest level. As a ranking Bush Administration official put it, "This is a head-scratcher.”

In Suskind’s book, O’Neill contends that from day one the Bush Administration was hell-bent on a post Saddam Hussein Iraq. O’Neill painted a picture of a Bush Administration seething, champing at the bit, almost lusting for the demise of Saddam Hussein’s tyrannical regime. While it is a painting exotic it belongs in the section of the art gallery that has to do with fantasy.

I find it amazing that people’s memories are so sort as to not remember that the issue of regime change in Iraq was moot. For the eight years of the Clinton Administration the policy was continuously and without falter regime change in Iraq. Many in our elected government were critical of President George H.W. Bush for not going all the way through Baghdad and toppling the rogue regime, a regime transfixed on the idea of regional dominance over other Arab countries and their oil fields, this included Republicans and Democrats alike. So, throughout the eight years of the Clinton Administration scenarios were drawn up for not only the eradication of Saddam Hussein’s government but for a post Saddam Hussein era in Iraq. Of course, no one would bat an eye at the fact Bill Clinton had these scenarios mapped out or that he had contingency plans for a post Saddam Hussein world. Why would they, he was only being prepared, right? It is only when a Republican does it that it is premeditated, pre-emptive and unilateral. Give me a break.

The Presidential Oath of Office states, "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States…" It could be argued, and rightly so, that if a President of the United States didn’t have contingency plans for every situation existing throughout the world that he/she would be negligent of his/her oath of office due to the fact they didn’t "faithfully execute the office.” Whether any of the plans derived from situations critical throughout the world are ever used is irrelevant. Case in point, the entire existence of the Strategic Air Command’s B-52 wing was because of a plan for the "worst-case scenario.” It was never employed, thank the Lord, but the plan was thought out and millions if not billions of dollars were spent on it over the years. Summarily, President Bush would have been delinquent in his duties had he not had plans for every given scenario, this includes Saddam Hussein and Iraq.

Ah, but what of the oil field maps, you ask? While the conspiracy theorists paint a picture of the stereotypically obese oil tycoons sitting in the back room, smoking cigars and issuing sexist comments to waitresses who bring them goblet upon goblet of single malt scotch, scotch that they sip as they divide up the oil wealth of the world (I am always amused at the level of cynicism the fanatically left can rise to), their assertions would be wrong. The fact of the matter is O’Neill, and by his enabling, Suskind, presented maps that were used during Vice President Dick Cheney’s energy policy research. O’Neill used these maps to theorize that they were part of some sort of Nixon Era conspiracy scenario that would have seen post Saddam Hussein Iraqi oil fields divided up an "eaten” by Halliburton and their crony organizations akin to the way hyenas disembowel a water buffalo carcass.

As for O’Neill’s contention that President Bush wavered on the second round of tax cuts. In my life, possibly with the exception of Bill Clinton’s now historic, "I didn’t have sex with that women – Monica Lewinski,” statement, I have never heard anything more absurd. From the lowest staffer to the Bush/Cheney 2004 train station pamphlet volunteer, anyone who is familiar with George W. Bush would be able to tell you he would never waver on the subject of tax cuts. His claim that Bush stated tax cuts were already given to the rich and, "shouldn’t we do something for the middle class” couldn’t have been taken more out of context. But for arguments sake let’s say these words were not taken out of context. They would only prove that President Bush had every intention of securing the second round of tax cuts in order to fulfill his campaign promise of tax relief for all Americans. This assertion by O’Neill validates the idea that he is a disgruntled and begrudging ex-employee with a narcissistic streak about as long as the mapped out Iraqi pipelines.

It makes me wonder. If the White House, the State Department and the Pentagon had so much trouble communicating and being cohesive, as the talking heads contend they did throughout the UN Resolution 1441 moment in time, how is it we are supposed to believe that Paul O’Neill, Secretary of the Treasury, was the only one gifted with unlimited access to President Bush’s "inner circle” placing him in the position of being the singular person burdened with this knowledge? As a senior Bush Administration official stated, "We didn't listen to [O'Neill's] wacky ideas when he was in the White House, why should we start listening to him now?"

Paul O’Neill is a bitter man, fired not because of his ineptness but because his wasn’t the same vision as the President of the United States. If he would have worked to help achieve what his president had wanted of him, tax cuts that have been proven the correct thing to do, with the same vengeful vigor as he is pursuing the slander of the Bush Administration he would most likely be Secretary of the Treasury still today. But then he was too busy minding the business of every other cabinet member…or so it would seem.

Frank Salvato is a political media consultant and the managing editor for The New Media Journal.us. He is a contributing writer for The Washington Dispatch, GOPUSA, OpinionEditorials, Men’s News Daily, Canada Free Press & AmericanDaily. His pieces are regularly featured in Townhall.com. He has appeared as a guest on The O’Reilly Factor, The Kevin Matthews Radio Show (Chicago) and The Brad Messer Radio Show (San Antonio). His pieces have been recognized by the Japan Center for Conflict Prevention and are occasionally featured in The Washington Times and The London Morning Paper as well as other national and international publications.