Althouse: Why is Dick Cheney suddenly talking so much?

June 2, 2009

Why is Dick Cheney suddenly talking so much?

He says: the Vice President "was a job that required me to give advice. And I thought it better to do it in private than in public." But also: he's shopping a memoir to publishers and wants $$$.

93 comments:

traditionalguy said...: He has permission to be the spokes person for the 70+ age group. He has no political future since he does not reach out to the Boomers or to their kids well. Yet it is reassuring to remember what adult people used to sound like and look like, similar to seeing an historical exhibit at the Smithsonian.; 6/2/09, 6:35 AM
Bob said...: Cheney doesn't need a book to make money, although a profitable memoir would be gravy to him.

Cheney's philosophy during the Bush years was to take the fight to the terrorists, rather than let them continue to hit us with impunity. He's carried that philosophy over to his post-government life: he isn't going to let attacks on him by leftists, the current administration or the MSM go unanswered, and in fact will go on the attack against those people. It's the very same philosphy that the Republicans should use against the Democrats; there is no use playing by Queensberry rules when the Democrats play by street fighter rules.; 6/2/09, 6:37 AM
hdhouse said...: Mr. Cheney is adult by age only. Of course we remember him moaning about persons outside the administration yelping "in a time of war"....well what has changed?

He appears to be endlessly psychotic...a sociopath of the first rank...and that anyone gives this lug the time of day is beyond me.; 6/2/09, 6:39 AM
traditionalguy said...: Hd...Don't you ever see anything good in other people? Give the Lug a break. He did well by NYC after 9/11.; 6/2/09, 6:43 AM
hdhouse said...: I see good and good intentions in most everyone. I don't have to agree with anyone to see their value and place in society.

I just come up short in that assessment when Mr. Cheney is mentioned. I see no good in him.; 6/2/09, 6:50 AM
Jason said...: It's always funny when liberals throw around words like 'psychotic' without knowing what they mean.; 6/2/09, 7:02 AM
Cedarford said...: Thanks in no small part to Dubya, McCain, the Religious Right, Wall Street laissez faire (and the Republican kleptocrats of Congress motivated more by money than values) - the Republicans are fragmented and intellectually incoherent.

Cheney may do the same valuable service as Nixon did from 1964-68 after the Goldwater debacle. Keep the flame alive, help craft an articulate political message to renew the Party and craft a New Majority.

The media hates the guy, but they hated Nixon too, and it didn't stop Nixon and a pack of Republican centrists.

One of the most destructive self-delusions Republicans have is that Goldwater was right...and only lost by bad PR, and the Republicans wandered in the Wilderness until King Ronnie led the Hard Right to victory. And now, all the Republicans need is a hardcore, charismatic conservative to return things to status quo.

Cheney knows that is asinine.; 6/2/09, 7:06 AM
Hoosier Daddy said...: It's always funny when liberals throw around words like 'psychotic' without knowing what they mean..

Especially when it comes from the resident lunatic hdhouse.

For whatever reason Cheney was picked by the lefties to be the object of their hatred but I'm at a loss to figure out what he ever did that generated so much hate. I guess it was the Haliburton position.; 6/2/09, 7:08 AM
Anonymous said...: "I just come up short in that assessment when Mr. Cheney is mentioned. I see no good in him."

He publicly supports gay marriage far more than Obama does. I thought that'd be good to you. Or are you one of those "bigots" who, like the President, believe marriage is just between men and women?; 6/2/09, 7:23 AM
Superdad said...: "For whatever reason Cheney was picked by the lefties to be the object of their hatred but I'm at a loss to figure out what he ever did that generated so much hate. I guess it was the Haliburton position."

No it is simpler that than. The left had a constant drone that Bush was stupid (almost mentally retarded) so when they wanted to gin up their elaborate conspiracy theories they had to have someone else be the mastermind. After all Bush couldn't be cognitively disabled and the diabolical brains behind the operation at the same time.; 6/2/09, 7:28 AM
Jason (the commenter) said...: Althouse : he's shopping a memoir to publishers and wants $$$.

But isn't that the entire point of the Obama administration? I mean, he's already published two without any experience. Once he retires he'll be shooting one out every year.; 6/2/09, 7:31 AM
MadisonMan said...: I suppose he's talking because he thinks he has something important to say. To paraphrase someone else, the graveyards are full of such people who thought they were so important.

If he can separate money from his fan club by shilling a book, good for him. I won't buy it.; 6/2/09, 8:07 AM
Anonymous said...: The odds of Cheney saying something important and thought-provoking, to date, have dwarfed the odds of Obama doing the same.; 6/2/09, 8:09 AM
ricpic said...: Cheney loves the country Zero is hellbent on destroying. He's trying to protect his country. It's called being a patriot.; 6/2/09, 8:10 AM
A.W. said...: This is kind of pathetic.

Apparently it never occurred to the left that maybe he loves this country, has profound disagreements with Obama, and decided he couldn't remain silent.

They say the first person to make an ad hom loses, you know.; 6/2/09, 8:21 AM
knox said...: For whatever reason Cheney was picked by the lefties to be the object of their hatred...

It's not just Cheney. Any effective leader who's not on the left must be destroyed. In fact the more effective they are, the more the "stupid" and/or "evil" label is perpetuated.

It's never enough to disagree--the opposition has to be absolutely destroyed. Look at Palin. As soon as McCain chose her, the attack dogs were loosed. The same thing's happening here. Any threat to Obama's success has to be annihilated.

[hdhouse calling Cheney a psychotic (LOL!) and sociopath is another great example. It's never enough just to disagree.]

Cheney is at least out there, defending himself and the conservative position on national defense. Where are the republicans? Too scared and incompetent to come up with a coherent and strong response. As usual! Cheney is doing an effective job of it, so he'll be ridiculed and reviled for it.; 6/2/09, 8:32 AM
Salamandyr said...: I dig Cheney. He has been a fascinating figure. He's quite and unassuming, but often the center of much controversy. It seems like memoir by him would be a hot item. His fans would want to read it because they think he has meaningful things to say. His detractors want to read it to find a long enough rope to hang him with.

Considering the advances that the Clintons got, you would think 2 million would a cheap price to get a memoir by a political celebrity like this.; 6/2/09, 8:41 AM
Invisible Man said...: Now that he's not responsible for anything or anyone now he's free to prattle away with no obligations. Cowards always have something to say when they have nothing to lose.; 6/2/09, 8:57 AM
Anonymous said...: "Now that he's not responsible for anything or anyone now he's free to prattle away with no obligations. Cowards always have something to say when they have nothing to lose."

Yeah!! Reminds me of Obama before he was TOTUS; 6/2/09, 9:07 AM
AlphaLiberal said...: He's trying to shape events before he's swept up in them. Events like a grand jury.; 6/2/09, 9:18 AM
Anonymous said...: "Now that he's not responsible for anything or anyone now he's free to prattle away with no obligations. Cowards always have something to say when they have nothing to lose."

So he's now campaign Obama? Good for him.

"Mr. Cheney is adult by age only. Of course we remember him moaning about persons outside the administration yelping "in a time of war"....well what has changed?"

So, you're saying the Democratic opposes making gay marriage illegal?

Because, otherwise, your comment is utterly senseless.; 6/2/09, 9:21 AM
Bissage said...: I fully hope that Cheney’s memoir will confirm the reports that he can still lift a coffee mug with his penis.; 6/2/09, 9:47 AM
Invisible Man said...: Yeah!! Reminds me of Obama before he was TOTUSOK? Obama, unlike Cheney, has stood before the cameras and repeated that he wants to end our stay in Iraq, wants to close GITMO and even that he believes in judges with "empathy", to the right's deep displeasure. He's not hiding in an undisclosed bunker somewhere, but facing reporters and people who question him, completely unlike Cheney. At this point his daughter in the last month has had to face tougher questioning than Cheney did during the full 8 years of his presidency.; 6/2/09, 9:47 AM
traditionalguy said...: Politics is an art, and Cheney is a good artist at that craft or he would only be ignored now instead of being called silly names. The Democrats, true to their beliefs that they are stealing our money for all the noble reasons, always go Postal when an adult in authority says no to them.; 6/2/09, 9:52 AM
Anonymous said...: Oh yeah!! The hard hitting press corps..."Jeff Zeleny of The New York Times, who asked President Obama what has most surprised, enchanted, humbled and troubled him while on the job."

Hard questions for a hard man.; 6/2/09, 9:53 AM
Richard Dolan said...: T/G: "Yet it is reassuring to remember what adult people used to sound like and look like, similar to seeing an historical exhibit at the Smithsonian."

Nice way to put it. Cheney is just what "adult people used to sound like and look like," before so many decided that they wanted to look and act like their kids (or grandkids).; 6/2/09, 10:07 AM
Hoosier Daddy said...: Obama, unlike Cheney, has stood before the cameras and repeated that he wants to end our stay in Iraq, wants to close GITMO and even that he believes in judges with "empathy", to the right's deep displeasure. .

So why are we not out of Iraq yet? Why is Gitmo still open? If we close Gitmo what do we do with future terrorists we capture? How is putting them in a federal prison different from putting them in a military one? Are the Islamofascists going to like us once we put them in prisons in the US?

He's not hiding in an undisclosed bunker somewhere, but facing reporters and people who question him, completely unlike Cheney. .

You said that with a straight face? You mean answering hard hitting questions about what has enchanted him so far?; 6/2/09, 10:08 AM
Jen said...: Cheney can yammer on all he wants. I just can't listen. Like I said. . .When I hear his voice I break out in hives.

I wonder who will buy his book.; 6/2/09, 10:11 AM
Jen said...: Is he worried now about how history will judge what he has done?; 6/2/09, 10:13 AM
Salamandyr said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 6/2/09, 10:15 AM
Salamandyr said...: Is he worried now about how history will judge what he has done?

What has he done?

I'm not sure that Cheney has ever given two thoughts to how history will judge him.; 6/2/09, 10:16 AM
Anonymous said...: "Obama, unlike Cheney, has stood before the cameras and repeated that he wants to end our stay in Iraq, wants to close GITMO and even that he believes in judges with "empathy", to the right's deep displeasure."

Unlike Obama, Cheney doesn't lie about this. Obama has the power to do whatever he wants, but he can't provide a plan to move the inmates at Gitmo.

So, Obama talks...but seems to not act.; 6/2/09, 10:21 AM
Hoosier Daddy said...: Is he worried now about how history will judge what he has done?.

Cheney was the VP. I'm not sure he did anything.; 6/2/09, 10:25 AM
garage mahal said...: Leftists nagged Cheney and Halliburton so much they had to back up the Mayflowers from Houston headquarters and move to Dubai and now pay all those taxes to Arabs. Why, or why do leftists hate us!?; 6/2/09, 10:30 AM
Anonymous said...: Whoa!

You mean high taxes might lead companies to move to places more hospitable to them?

Shocking. Thanks for the blinding flash of the obvious.; 6/2/09, 10:37 AM
Jeremy said...: Here's a REAL SHOCKER:

Cheney Admits: "There Was Never Any Evidence ... Iraq Was Involved In 9/11"

Someone might want to mention this to Fen, Pogo, Palladian, Peter, TraditionalGuy, Rev, Hoosier, and 99% of the rest of the yahoos here who still believe there's a connection.; 6/2/09, 10:58 AM
Anonymous said...: Here's a REAL SHOCKER:

Cheney Admits: "There Was Never Any Evidence ... Iraq Was Involved In 9/11"Given that Cheney never said anything to the contrary, how is this a "shocker"?

I'll quote from his appearance on Meet the Press, 9/14/03:
MR. RUSSERT: The Washington Post asked the American people about Saddam Hussein, and this is what they said: 69 percent said he was involved in the September 11 attacks. Are you surprised by that?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: No. I think it’s not surprising that people make that connection.

MR. RUSSERT: But is there a connection?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: We don’t know. You and I talked about this two years ago. I can remember you asking me this question just a few days after the original attack. At the time I said no, we didn’t have any evidence of that. Subsequent to that, we’ve learned a couple of things. We learned more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the ’90s, that it involved training, for example, on BW and CW, that al-Qaeda sent personnel to Baghdad to get trained on the systems that are involved. The Iraqis providing bomb-making expertise and advice to the al-Qaeda organization.

We know, for example, in connection with the original World Trade Center bombing in ’93 that one of the bombers was Iraqi, returned to Iraq after the attack of ’93. And we’ve learned subsequent to that, since we went into Baghdad and got into the intelligence files, that this individual probably also received financing from the Iraqi government as well as safe haven.

Now, is there a connection between the Iraqi government and the original World Trade Center bombing in ’93? We know, as I say, that one of the perpetrators of that act did, in fact, receive support from the Iraqi government after the fact. With respect to 9/11, of course, we’ve had the story that’s been public out there. The Czechs alleged that Mohamed Atta, the lead attacker, met in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official five months before the attack, but we’ve never been able to develop anymore of that yet either in terms of confirming it or discrediting it. We just don’t know.
Feel free to post the time he said Iraq was behind it.

Don't confuse your ignorance of reality with reality not happening.; 6/2/09, 11:17 AM
Swifty Quick said...: I'm at a loss to figure out what he ever did that generated so much hate. I guess it was the Haliburton position.Haliburton and the golden parachute he got when he left to be vice-president was most definitely where the hatred began. Up until that point the meme was all about how much "gravitas" he brought with him.; 6/2/09, 11:19 AM
garage mahal said...: Dick Cheney shot his friend in the face and made him apologize. Not that is gravitas!; 6/2/09, 11:21 AM
Hoosier Daddy said...: Someone might want to mention this to Fen, Pogo, Palladian, Peter, TraditionalGuy, Rev, Hoosier, and 99% of the rest of the yahoos here who still believe there's a connection..

Hmmm...care to point to any post by anyone you just mentioned that ever even hinted that there was such a connection? Take your time because I'm sure you'll have to dig pretty far up your ass to find one.

Oh wait, I forgot this is JeremyMichaeloldson and not someone who actually discusses in good faith.; 6/2/09, 11:23 AM
KCFleming said...: The connection was to Al Qaeda, not 9/11.

Not the Gene wants to have a real discussion.; 6/2/09, 11:29 AM
hdhouse said...: psychotic....one suffering from a psychosis...to wit:

1.a mental disorder characterized by symptoms, such as delusions or hallucinations, that indicate impaired contact with reality.
2.any severe form of mental disorder, as schizophrenia or paranoia.

And I give you Mr. Cheney in the flesh. Ya'betcha.

et tu Jason?; 6/2/09, 11:41 AM
Anonymous said...: I'm not sure evidence means what you think it does, hd.; 6/2/09, 11:43 AM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: Dick Cheney shot his friend in the face and made him apologize. Not that is gravitas!

His friend should apologize. He violated hunting etiquette and was in the wrong place during the bird hunt. They guy should have stayed out of the line of fire and should not have come up unannounced surprising the group with his presence by being where he was not supposed to be standing.

He got a few pellets of 28 shot. Bird shot. The rules of hunting are that you let people know where you are in relation to the target area at all times. If you get in the line of fire in a quail hunting trip, it is only your own fault.; 6/2/09, 12:15 PM
Jeremy said...: scinfinity said..."Given that Cheney never said anything to the contrary, how is this a "shocker"?"

Really?

Friday, June 18, 2004

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Vice President Dick Cheney said Thursday the evidence is "overwhelming" that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq, and he said media reports suggesting that the 9/11 commission has reached a contradictory conclusion were "irresponsible."

Read much?; 6/2/09, 12:30 PM
traditionalguy said...: The tug of war in a court case is which side posits the question that the jury thinks will decide the case.The liberal propaganda avalanche goes on setting the question for an answer to be whether Saddam sent the 9/11 guys over to the USA. The only question was how and who to whack in the Arab world to send a message back atSaudi Arabia and Iran factions that we were too dangerous to mess with. Today Obama Boy is carefully removing that Meaney Bush's message as fast as his pro-moslem little tongue can slither out with a double message that we wantpeace at any price that Israel has to pay.; 6/2/09, 12:35 PM
Jeremy said...: Pogo - "The connection was to Al Qaeda, not 9/11."

I realize you're not that bright, and do little if any actual reading or investigation before posting inane comments, but...

...are you saying you're not aware of the fact that Osama bin Laden is the leader of Al Qaeda, and they were behind the 9/11 attacks?

Thursday, June 17, 2004:

Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the plot, planned to have nine of the planes crash into the FBI and CIA headquarters, the Pentagon and the White House, as well as nuclear plants and the tallest buildings in California and Washington state.

The plot also called for hijacking and blowing up 12 airliners in Southeast Asia, but al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden scrapped that part of the plan because it was too difficult to coordinate operations on two continents.

Pogo - Dumb and getting dumber by the day...; 6/2/09, 12:37 PM
Hoosier Daddy said...: Here's a REAL SHOCKER:

Cheney Admits: "There Was Never Any Evidence ... Iraq Was Involved In 9/11".

Vice President Dick Cheney said Thursday the evidence is "overwhelming" that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq.

Ok since you're moron I'll help you through this exercise in reading comprehension. The first post was regarding a connection between Iraq and 9/11. Cheney never claimed there was one.

The second states that Hussein had a relationship with AQ which is true. Nazi Germany had a relationship with Imperial Japan but were not involved in the attack on Pearl Harbor.

If you had an IQ higher than your shoe size you could be able to distinguish between the two.; 6/2/09, 12:38 PM
Jeremy said...: Hoosier - Dick Cheney says "the evidence is "overwhelming" that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq"...

And from that, YOU say...

"Cheney never claimed there was one."

Let's see if we can make this understandable...even for YOU:

Let's start with: Cheney saying: "evidence is "overwhelming" that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq...

Combine that with: Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the plot, being one of the leaders of al Qaeda...

Combined with: Osama bin Laden being the leader of al Qaeda...

And YOu come to the conclusion that Dick "never claimed there was" a "connection" between al Qaeda, Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq and 9/11???

Even you're not that dense...(maybe).; 6/2/09, 12:53 PM
William said...: The left can draw a clear, direct line between anti-abortion activists and the Tiller murderer. They cannot, however, imagine that Saddam could channel funds to AQ in a plausibly deniable way. Only people on the right practice the dark arts of subterfuge and manipulation.....The Libyan government was giving money and training to the IRA. The Bader Meinhof Gang and the Red Liberation Army were supported by Stasi. For the German General Staff, Lenin was a useful idiot. They did more than just give him a ride to the Finland Station......I don't know if there will ever be any proof of Saddam's involvement in AQ, but he certainly had the means, opportunity, and motive.; 6/2/09, 12:55 PM
Christopher in MA said...: DBQ - I know garage's comment was typical lefty snark, but you have to admit, it was pretty funny in a "before he goes to bed, Chuck Norris checks under his bed for Dick Cheney" sort of way.; 6/2/09, 12:59 PM
Anonymous said...: "Hoosier - Dick Cheney says "the evidence is "overwhelming" that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq"..."

Can you cite the time he said that? I cited the exact date and show of my citation. Even posted the relevant part of the transcript.

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Vice President Dick Cheney said Thursday the evidence is "overwhelming" that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq, and he said media reports suggesting that the 9/11 commission has reached a contradictory conclusion were "irresponsible."

Read much?""

So, can you point where he said Iraq was behind 9/11, which was, you know, the accusation made here?

I'd ask you if you read much, but I think the answer is pretty obvious.

"...are you saying you're not aware of the fact that Osama bin Laden is the leader of Al Qaeda, and they were behind the 9/11 attacks?"

I must ask what posts you're responding to because your comments don't really mesh with what was actually written here.

"Hoosier - Dick Cheney says "the evidence is "overwhelming" that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq"...

And from that, YOU say...

"Cheney never claimed there was one."

Let's see if we can make this understandable...even for YOU:"

You seem confused still. Iraq having ties to AQ doesn't mean Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. Cheney never once said Iraq had anything to do with 9/11.

Your "proof" of your claim is only further killing your claim.

"And YOu come to the conclusion that Dick "never claimed there was" a "connection" between al Qaeda, Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq and 9/11???"

Japan had close ties to Italy and Germany. Ergo, using your logic, Italy bombed us at Pearl Harbor.

It was stated that it was a shocker that Cheney said Iraq wasn't involved in 9/11. It was noted that Cheney never claimed Iraq was behind it. You wish to fight about that, in spite of Cheney never saying that Saddam was behind 9/11.; 6/2/09, 1:12 PM
Jeremy said...: Hoosier thinks the members of al Qaeda and Saddam may have played a little golf together...had a few drinks maybe...but that's it.

He also never mentioned mushroom clouds or chemical wagons...

It was ALL just a dream...; 6/2/09, 1:31 PM
Jeremy said...: scinfinity - Do you need a fucking road map?

When Cheney says "the evidence is "overwhelming" that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq"..."

And "al Qaeda" was behind the 9/11 attack...what exactly are you missing?

Do you think he was inferring they were getting together for a BBQ? To shoot the shit about sports?

When he and Bush both constantly threw out insinuations relating to Saddam and his connection to al Qaeda they weren't just making conversation, they were trying to justify the invasion of Iraq.

What you really need to do is read out there, written by military reporters and military people themselves, all making the rationale behind Bush and Cheney's comments perfectly clear.

This exactly old news.; 6/2/09, 1:37 PM
Anonymous said...: "Hoosier thinks the members of al Qaeda and Saddam may have played a little golf together...had a few drinks maybe...but that's it."

The Left is convinced that Obama worked with and had fundraisers in the house of Bill Ayers...but had no actual political agreements with him.

They believe Obama went to an undeniably racist church for 20 years...but he didn't notice it.

But they're convinced that Cheney believing that Iraq and AQ had ties means Iraq was behind 9/11. Funny.; 6/2/09, 1:38 PM
Jeremy said...: William said..."The left can draw a clear, direct line between anti-abortion activists and the Tiller murderer. They cannot, however, imagine that Saddam could channel funds to AQ in a plausibly deniable way."

Saddam was secular and had absolutely no reason to funnel anything to anybody outside his realm of influence, which was Iraq...especially any organization based in religion. Why would not know this by now?

Why do you think al Qaeda was nowhere to be found in Iraq BEFORE we invaded?

Saddam needed Osama and his pack of assholes like he needed a fucking hole in the head.

Read a book. Educate yourself.; 6/2/09, 1:40 PM
Jeremy said...: scinfinity - You need some new material.

Obama won.

You lost.

It's over...he's President.; 6/2/09, 1:41 PM
mariner said...: Jeremy:

If Pogo is not very bright, you are completely dark.; 6/2/09, 1:42 PM
Anonymous said...: "scinfinity - Do you need a fucking road map?"

I'm thinking you might need the roadmap and all. You seem lost thus far.

"When Cheney says "the evidence is "overwhelming" that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq"..."

And "al Qaeda" was behind the 9/11 attack...what exactly are you missing?"

Again, as said earlier, Germany, Italy, and Japan had a relationship. That doesn't actually mean Germany and Italy were behind the Pearl Harbor bombing.

"Do you think he was inferring they were getting together for a BBQ? To shoot the shit about sports?"

Saddam likely gave money and offered asylum. Which, technically, isn't "Iraq planned 9/11"

"When he and Bush both constantly threw out insinuations relating to Saddam and his connection to al Qaeda they weren't just making conversation, they were trying to justify the invasion of Iraq."

Given that Bush said he was taking people who harbor terrorists as being no better than the terrorists, no, they really were not.

But keep doubling down on false points.

"What you really need to do is read out there, written by military reporters and military people themselves, all making the rationale behind Bush and Cheney's comments perfectly clear.

This exactly old news."

When you point to a single occasion of Cheney saying Irag was behind 9/11, then you might have a point.

Otherwise, you're incorrect and lack the integrity to simply admit it.; 6/2/09, 1:43 PM
Anonymous said...: "scinfinity - You need some new material.

Obama won.

You lost.

It's over...he's President."

Ahh, Jeremy, ever oblivious to the idea of a comparison, huh?

"Saddam was secular and had absolutely no reason to funnel anything to anybody outside his realm of influence, which was Iraq...especially any organization based in religion. Why would not know this by now?"

The USSR "hated" the Nazis. We have been told this for years. Yet, they signed a treaty with them, allowed them to conquer Poland, and didn't break the treaty. My, how could that be POSSIBLE?

That is a comparison, Jeremy. I can't think of a simpler one that I can have more confidence in you following.

"Why do you think al Qaeda was nowhere to be found in Iraq BEFORE we invaded?"

...provided one ignores Zarqawi being in Iraq in 2002 after fighting the US with the Taliban in Afghanistan...; 6/2/09, 1:49 PM
Hoosier Daddy said...: When you point to a single occasion of Cheney saying Irag was behind 9/11, then you might have a point. .

He can't which is why he has to consistently equate Saddam had a relationship with AQ to Saddam was behind 9/11.

It's Jeremy logic it doesn't require anything resembling facts.; 6/2/09, 1:51 PM
tim maguire said...: It has to tickle Cheney at least a little that he and his cellar level approval rating are taking Mr. Popular and his full battery of media lap dogs to the woodshed in the court of public opinion.; 6/2/09, 1:55 PM
Jeremy said...: Hoosier thinks Cheney, when saying the evidence is "overwhelming" that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq," that it wasn't related to any planning or the execution of the 9/11 attack...they were just really good buds who liked to get together from time to time.

And when he and Bush insinuated the reason for going into Iraq was because Saddam had ties to al Qaeda, it really didn't have anything to do with 9/11.

They just thought we should all know.

Hoosier...you need to read more and talk less.; 6/2/09, 2:00 PM
Anonymous said...: "Hoosier thinks Cheney, when saying the evidence is "overwhelming" that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq," that it wasn't related to any planning or the execution of the 9/11 attack"

...which is a rather simple concept that isn't hard for most people to get.

"And when he and Bush insinuated the reason for going into Iraq was because Saddam had ties to al Qaeda, it really didn't have anything to do with 9/11."

Miss Bush's statement that those who harbor terrorists will be treated no differently than people who are terrorists?; 6/2/09, 2:03 PM
Jeremy said...: Tim maguire "It has to tickle Cheney at least a little that he and his cellar level approval rating are taking Mr. Popular and his full battery of media lap dogs to the woodshed in the court of public opinion."

Got any objective polls that reflect that sentiment?

Here's one:

A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll asked respondents whether they agreed with the former vice president's remarks that Barack Obama's policies were making the country more vulnerable to attack.

The response: a resounding "no."

26 percent) of respondents said that the "actions Barack Obama has taken as president have increased the chances of a terrorist attack against the U.S."

72% of respondents said they had not.

53% of Americans also support Obama's strategy in Afghanistan.

Obama carries a 65% approval rating.

Cheney carries a 37% approval rating.; 6/2/09, 2:05 PM
Anonymous said...: Jeremy, out of curiosity, do you actually read what is written?

tim didn't say Cheney is more popular than Obama. Just that every stand he makes his position tends to be far more popular than Obama's.

Shall I cite polls on gay marriage or opposition to shutting down Gitmo?; 6/2/09, 2:09 PM
Jeremy said...: scinfinity said..."Miss Bush's statement that those who harbor terrorists will be treated no differently than people who are terrorists?"

Are you referring to Pakistan?

We've dumped over 10 billion dollars in their laps and what have we gotten in return?; 6/2/09, 2:09 PM
Anonymous said...: "Are you referring to Pakistan?"

Given that the topic thus far has been Iraq, one must ask, again, do you actually read before you respond?

"We've dumped over 10 billion dollars in their laps and what have we gotten in return?"

A better return on investment than Chrysler, GM, and Obama's porkulus thus far.

Do you REALLY want to discuss spending?; 6/2/09, 2:12 PM
Jeremy said...: scinfinity said..."tim didn't say Cheney is more popular than Obama. Just that every stand he makes his position tends to be far more popular than Obama's."

Guess you missed this, huh?

Tim - "It has to tickle Cheney at least a little that he and his cellar level approval rating are taking Mr. Popular and his full battery of media lap dogs to the woodshed in the court of public opinion."

- 26 percent) of respondents said that the "actions Barack Obama has taken as president have increased the chances of a terrorist attack against the U.S.

- 72% of respondents said they had not.

How does this substantiate Timmy's claim that Cheney's "position tends to be far more popular than Obama's"??

Did you and Timmy skip those reading comprehension and math courses?; 6/2/09, 2:14 PM
Jeremy said...: scinfinity - When I mentioned Pakistan I was responding to this bit of drivel you posted:

"Miss Bush's statement that those who harbor terrorists will be treated no differently than people who are terrorists?"

Does Pakistan harbor terrorists? Have we poured billions into their laps?; 6/2/09, 2:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Well, since you asked:

According to a recent Gallup poll, Americans by more than a 2:1 margin feel Gitmo has made America safer v less safe. They oppose closing it 2:1 and oppose moving them to the US by more than 3:1.

A majority of Americans support legalizing gay marriage, a stand Cheney agrees with and Obama opposes.

I'm betting that was specifically what he was referring to.; 6/2/09, 2:18 PM
Anonymous said...: "Does Pakistan harbor terrorists? Have we poured billions into their laps?"

Nothing indicates the gov't harbored them. More like the gov't didn't have total control of the country.

Bush, though, was smart enough to not vow to violate their territorial sovreignty. Wish Obama was as wise.; 6/2/09, 2:19 PM
Jeremy said...: scinfinity - The Dow is up over 20% since Obama became President...even after inheriting the economic mess Bush left in his wake.

Maybe if you spent more time investing and less time whinging and bitching...??; 6/2/09, 2:19 PM
Anonymous said...: "scinfinity - The Dow is up over 20% since Obama became President"

Well, when it crashes to a laughable low when you win an election, it's hard to keep going down.

I notice unemployment is still climbing quickly and is higher than Obama said it'd be if we did nothing. And interest rates are going up. Nobody wants to buy our debt. Gas prices are skyrocketing. Oh, and with the idiotic credit card proposals, we'll see the poor having much less access to credit in the future.

But, hey, NO WORRIES!

"Maybe if you spent more time investing and less time whinging and bitching...??"

Invest in an economy where Obama has already shown a willingness to ignore bankruptcy law, force courts to make rulings before they're ready, and screw over investors?

You're kidding, right?

And "whinging"? Seriously?; 6/2/09, 2:24 PM
Anonymous said...: And, out of curiosity, in what world is 8279.63 (opening of DJIA on Obama's inauguration day) increasing by 20% resulting in a new average of 8762.76 as of right now?

20% increase from 8279 would be 9934.8. So, until we're above 10,000, you're incorrect.

...as usual.; 6/2/09, 2:27 PM
El Presidente said...: Jesus Christ, didn't you people get the memo? It's like feeding stray cats and then complaining about how many of them come around.

Calling 'him' an idiot is an insult to idiots everywhere and just encourages him to post more and better idiocies. Shun 'him' every chance you get.; 6/2/09, 2:54 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: Pogo:

The connection was to Al Qaeda, not 9/11. .

Right... Because, as anyone knows, a connection to AQ has NOTHING to do with 9/11!!

How do you do that eye roll emoticon again?

At least try harder to dissemble, Pogo. Give it some effort.; 6/2/09, 3:53 PM
Anonymous said...: "Right... Because, as anyone knows, a connection to AQ has NOTHING to do with 9/11!!"

Amazingly enough, you can have ties to a group and not be responsible for everything they do.; 6/2/09, 4:06 PM
nucint said...: Prior to Cheney speaking in public about the war, there was serious talk about indicting him for war crimes. He is defending himself in the court of public opinion from the threat of indictment.; 6/2/09, 4:17 PM
Hoosier Daddy said...: Hoosier...you need to read more and talk less..

You need to get a new line. That one is pretty stale.; 6/2/09, 5:13 PM
Hoosier Daddy said...: Hey Jeremy since you seem to get a hard on over polls, how about these.

Here you have Americans are resoundingly opposed to closing Gitmo.

So while Obambi wants to close it, most Americans don't.

Most Americans oppose gay marriage.

So there you go Jeremy. Polls show Americans want to be tough on terrorists,are homophobic bigots that support Obama.

Lemme know what other polls you would like to discuss because we all know domestic and foreign policy should be directed by polls.; 6/2/09, 5:53 PM
Cedarford said...: Traditional guy - The only question was how and who to whack in the Arab world to send a message back atSaudi Arabia and Iran factions that we were too dangerous to mess with. Today Obama Boy is carefully removing that Meaney Bush's message as fast as his pro-moslem little tongue can slither out with a double message that we wantpeace at any price that Israel has to pay..

Part of the problem is that a range of Muslim countries were our stalwart allies in the Cold War, from Morocco to Jordan to Indonesia...and yes, including Iran and KSA. While socialist Israel flirted with the Soviets, advanced Soviet propaganda through their friends in US media, actively spied on the US.

Somewhere along the line, Israeli influencers convinced many conservative Republicans, especially the Religious Right and the Christian Zionist movement they cultivated - that Israel was Our Special Friend.
And did much damage to America with the transformation of conservatives into neocon minions who were aggressive internationalists backing a series of endless wars with Muslim countries mainly to advance Israel's interests.

While this was going on, Bush and others did nothing to stop Israel's continued land and water grabs as it expanded into Occupied Lands with Settlements. And was headed in a direction of the Zionists being allowed to draw us into starting a major war with Iran.

Obama, for his many other faults, is sensibly backing America off being an unquestioning tool of AIPAC and the Likudnuks. Ending the period where Israel hijacked our ME foreign policy and using the US military as a proxy tool to defend it's abuse of Palestinians and Israeli Arabs and expansionist designs.

Now Obama; 6/2/09, 7:32 PM
Fen said...: He is defending himself in the court of public opinion from the threat of indictment

Hardly. Cheney is a patriot. He's Leo McGarry - the only adult in the room, and he's not going to let Obama's revisionism go unchallenged. Because he knows it will cost lives.; 6/2/09, 9:10 PM
Jeremy said...: In the new Dick Armey book, Armey says that Cheney lied to him about Saddam and al-Qaeda. (Hardly a "leftist.")

The threat Cheney described went far beyond public statements that have been criticized for relying on "cherry-picked" intelligence of unknown reliability.

There was no intelligence to support the vice president's private assertions, Gellman reports, and they "crossed so far beyond the known universe of fact that they were simply without foundation."

"Did Dick Cheney . . . purposely tell me things he knew to be untrue?" Armey said. "I seriously feel that may be the case. . . . Had I known or believed then what I believe now, I would have publicly opposed [the war] resolution right to the bitter end, and I believe I might have stopped it from happening."

*Cheney lied and continues to lie...and suck-asses like Fen just perpetuate him getting away with it.; 6/2/09, 9:18 PM
Jeremy said...: Hoosier - Obama will close Gitmo because it's the right thing to do and is supported by Gates and the military leaders.

They don't give a flying fuck what wingnuts like think.

They're patriotic Americans who care about our country's reputation.

Get used to it...and please...stop the whining and bitching; you and others here sound like little babies.; 6/2/09, 9:21 PM
Jeremy said...: scinfinity said..."Amazingly enough, you can have ties to a group and not be responsible for everything they do."

I never said Saddam was responsible for everything they do. I said he wasn't responsible for ANYTHING they did. Cheney insinuated again and again that Saddam was tied to al Qaeda (a bald-faced lie) and in turn, had to have something to do with to 9/11. (another bald-faced lie...they didn't and every investigation has shown that to be the case.)

*But...if you want to join Fen and others and continue to suck on Dick Cheney...I'm not surprised.

Are you drunk or what?; 6/2/09, 9:26 PM
Jeremy said...: By Walter Pincus and Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, June 5, 2003; Page A01

Vice President Cheney and his most senior aide made multiple trips to the CIA over the past year to question analysts studying Iraq's weapons programs and alleged links to al Qaeda, creating an environment in which some analysts felt they were being pressured to make their assessments fit with the Bush administration's policy objectives, according to senior intelligence officials.

With Cheney taking the lead in the administration last August in advocating military action against Iraq by claiming it had weapons of mass destruction, the visits by the vice president and his chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, "sent signals, intended or otherwise, that a certain output was desired from here," one senior agency official said yesterday.; 6/2/09, 9:27 PM
Hoosier Daddy said...: Hoosier - Obama will close Gitmo because it's the right thing to do and is supported by Gates and the military leaders.They don't give a flying fuck what wingnuts like think..

Oh I see. When the polls which you put so much stock in don't meet your approval you just dismiss them as wingnuts. Hey tell me where are we going to house these guys once GItmo is close. Or are we changing the policy to take no prisoners or just surrender. Obama hasn't let us know what that plan is. Probably cause the dumbass doesn't have one.

They're patriotic Americans who care about our country's reputation..

Yes I forgot how beloved we were before Bush took over.

Get used to it...and please...stop the whining and bitching; you and others here sound like little babies..

The only one whining is you. You come in here crying like a little pussy every time someone says something about Obama that isn't glowing praise.

Hey, get your other sockpuppet out cause you're getting old.; 6/2/09, 9:39 PM
Anonymous said...: "Hoosier - Obama will close Gitmo because it's the right thing to do and is supported by Gates and the military leaders."

So, why is it still open? If the President and Sec of Defense want it closed...seems like it'd be something he could pull off fairly easily.

I mean, we KNOW he's serious because he announced a detailed plan on how to do it...right?

And he's sure getting out of Iraq faster than Bush would have. You know, with his whole "following Bush's strategy to the letter...but grovelling much more for people to love him personally".

"They're patriotic Americans who care about our country's reputation."

When will it happen? And if it's not time in that timeframe, does that mean you're calling Obama a traitor?

"I never said Saddam was responsible for everything they do."

*sigh*

...you know, it's not even worth the headache. Re-read your mindless gibberish. I lack the desire to try and squeeze an honest answer out of somebody without the most basic concept of honesty.

"I said he wasn't responsible for ANYTHING they did. Cheney insinuated again and again that Saddam was tied to al Qaeda (a bald-faced lie) and in turn, had to have something to do with to 9/11."

Obama supporters voted to pass Prop 8.

Using your logic, you support Prop 8.

You know, since you supported somebody who supported it and all.; 6/2/09, 9:48 PM
Jeremy said...: scinfinity said..."So, why is it still open?"

Gee, let's think about that.

The economy takes some time, repairing our worldwide reputation is important, we still have wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, health costs are skyrocketing...oh, and it will take an agreement via Congress to do anything.

And gosh...he's only been in office for what...4 1/2 months?

Bush took us into Iraq in 2003...and we're still there...and after being welcomed with flowers and candy and as liberators.

Why not try to come up with something other than what we hear every day from Rush, Hannity and other right wing morons wo just can't get over the fact that Obama won and the GOP is a complete mess.; 6/2/09, 10:59 PM
MadisonMan said...: His friend should apologize. He violated hunting etiquette and was in the wrong place during the bird hunt.

It is the responsibility of the person pulling the trigger to know where all the members of the party are. If you're too distractable -- or drunk -- to keep track, you shouldn't have a gun.; 6/2/09, 11:21 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: Like, I was saying. One step ahead of the grand jury...

Cheney Led Briefings of Lawmakers To Defend Interrogation Techniques; 6/2/09, 11:52 PM
Anonymous said...: "Gee, let's think about that.

The economy takes some time, repairing our worldwide reputation is important, we still have wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, health costs are skyrocketing...oh, and it will take an agreement via Congress to do anything."

An agreement...from a congress that is overwhelmingly Democratic and are opposing it ONLY because he has provided no plan? Truly, a hurdle that nobody can hope to match.

Funny, when Bush has mild majorities of Republicans in Congress, they're a "rubber stamp". When Obama has a much bigger majority, then it's not fair to expect Obama to deal with them. Got it.

Are you arguing that Obama is incapable of multi-tasking? I thought that was one of his big selling points.

"And gosh...he's only been in office for what...4 1/2 months?"

Well, Obama was the one who promised to close it quickly.

"Why not try to come up with something other than what we hear every day from Rush, Hannity and other right wing morons wo just can't get over the fact that Obama won and the GOP is a complete mess."

I guess we're not supposed to notice that you're incapable...laughably so, mind you...to actually answer a question.; 6/3/09, 7:22 PM