It's really remarkable when you think about it that anyone would listen to Cheney on the subject of national security. His administration was by far the least successful in American history in terms of preventing international terrorists from murdering Americans. Also by far the least successful in American history in terms of preventing international terrorists from murdering NATO allies. And the military action his administration pursued in response to the terrorist attack we suffered under their watch has come to be mired in problems, teetering on the brink of failure, almost entirely thanks to a second--but completely unnecessary--war his administration chose to undertake in favor of successfully completing the first one.Maybe he's running for president in 2012. Man we should be so lucky.
« No Mayo. All Awesome-Sauce. | Main | Italians Do It Better » People Who Should Quit While They're Ahead Pt. 216 Mar 2009 01:00 pm
Yglesias on Dick Cheney:
Comments (9)Post a comment |
Today's Headlines From The Atlantic |
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
Cheney has to take this hard line against Obama. think about it. Cheney's administration instituted an extreme and, more likely than not, illegal policy of detention and torture (and probably lots of stuff we dont even know about yet).
So of course Cheney has to say "obama's deviations from our policy will lead to doom." because if he came out and said, Obama's policies will keep us perfectly safe, then he opens himself up to questions of WHY the Cheney/Bush regime instituted the extreme, illegal measures they did, when clearly less extreme and more legal options would work just as well, if not better.
It's a pity that Cheney's so out to lunch because he's really one of the more articulate officeholder-spokesmen my party has. Other than that, Matt's assessment is a little unfair.
Lets not forget the softballs that John King was lobbing Cheney yesterday. I was just waiting for him to ask "Is President Obama the anti christ?". It was a totally ridiculous interview for everyone involved. Cheney keeps talking about how they "succeeded" in Iraq when I seem to remember us going in Iraq not to create a Democracy but to disarm the supposed WMDs. Of course if we had a better interviewer they might have brought up that point. Its almost pointless to watch the Sunday Shows anymore because nobody asks tough follow up questions.
Yeah, but we tortured people, and that makes us tough. So we had that going for us.
Seriously, why is Cheney not in jail awaiting trial for crimes against humanity?
The only time I have ever seen anyone go after Cheney, and he is such an easy target that one has really chew out the kid glove way in which this scoundrel has been handled, was when John Edwards in their debate pointed out that Cheney voted against sanctions against apratheid. Even Cheney had to swallow his own harumph, and the s***-eating grin on his face was a dictionary worthy graphic example of the phrase: "weak sauce."
Started with Nixon, moved up the ranks with Reagan, was a big star for Bush the Elder, and took over during the first five or six years of W--a scoundrel and a villain: may he get a Shakespearean commupance of self understanding before he dies, may he come face to face with the havoc he's unleashed upon the world.
Tray, what's unfair about that assessment?
Well, there are other countries that hold prisoners indefinitely and torture them, right? And they're all known for their security and stability, right? So he can just move to one of those. I'm sure things would work out just fine for him.
freaktown is right. Cheney is literally trying to protect himself and his cronies from criminal prosecution (and I believe also rescue his reputation and legacy, unachievable as that might be) with these statements. The first time I realized that many of the Bush Administration's policies (e.g. nearly their entire administration of the Justice Dept.) were aimed this nakedly at post-crime cover-up and self-preservation, I remember reeling in shock. Distinctly I remember thinking how appropriate was the accusation that these guys were truly the archetypal American gangsters. It's so gangsta man. Wow. Patriotic feeling boils my blood at this f***ing traitor. It's sad and a little bit chastening that the same degree of patriotic fervor got him started down this evil road.
I second that question. Matt makes three assertions about the Bush administration's security record. The first two about being the least successful in preventing murders of Americans and NATO allies are simple statements of fact. You can excuse it or claim any other administration that happen to be in office at the time would have failed in the same way and most people would probably agree, but that doesn't make the failure disappear. It certainly doesn't give Cheney any standing to be lecturing others on security matters.
The third statement about the necessary war in Afghanistan being such a mess because the Bush admin got us stuck in an unnecessary war in Iraq is a debatable opinion, but it's hardly an extreme or unfair one. A pretty substantial portion of the paleocon wing of the GOP believe exactly the same thing.