Tag Archives: Dick Cheney

Cheney's hubris is astounding

Listening to former Vice President Dick Cheney blast President Obama over his Iraq policy is like listening to — and I’ll have to give credit to a former editor of mine for this one — Xaviera “Happy Hooker” Hollander lecture us on chastity.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/iraq-turmoil/obama-briefs-top-lawmakers-options-iraq-n134626

Cheney co-wrote with his daughter Liz an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal in which he blamed Obama for the mess that has erupted in Iraq.

This man continues to spew nonsense with absolutely zero trace of self-awareness of his own role in creating the monster that is now roaring loudly across Iraq.

It was Cheney and President Bush who sold the world a bill of goods on Saddam Hussein’s bogus role in the 9/11 attacks; on his goal of developing nuclear weapons; of his possession of “weapons of mass destruction”; of how Iraqis would greet U.S. forces as “liberators” after they breezed into Baghdad.

Yet the former VP fails to recognize any complicity in the turmoil that has erupted in the country we occupied for nearly a decade.

And what did Republicans say in 2003 when Democrats criticized President Bush’s decision to invade Iraq? Oh, yes. They said such criticism gave aid and comfort to the enemy. Hmmm. Is that notion now off the table?

What in the world does it take to persuade this chicken hawk to shut his pie hole and follow the lead of the president he served for eight years? George W. Bush — following the lead of his own father, George H.W. Bush — has taken a vow of silence on the policies of his successor. I am quite certain “W” has plenty of thoughts on where he believes President Obama has gone wrong. That’s fine. He’s entitled.

However, President Bush recognizes we have one commander in chief at a time. If only the vice president who called so many of the shots in his own administration would come to the same recognition.

Cool it with 'We told you so'

Congressional Republicans, quite predictably, are now declaring “We told you so!” while insurgents storm Iraqi cities and threaten to launch an all-out civil war in a country once occupied and governed by the United States of America.

Let’s cool it a bit, ladies and gents.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/john-mccain-iraq-criticize-barack-obama-107780.html?hp=t3_3

Sunni Muslims — from the very same sect that gave us Saddam Hussein — have launched full-scale attacks on key Iraq cities. They’ve taken Mosul and Tikrit and are believed to be headed toward Baghdad. The Iraqi armed forces are trying to defend the cities, but so far with little success.

The Iraqis are asking President Obama to supply air power to strike hard at the insurgents. Republicans are demanding it, too. That might be a good option for the president to employ if we can bring enough air power to bear.

Republicans opposed the president’s withdrawal from Iraq, contending that the country wasn’t yet ready to defend itself fully against terrorists and insurgents.

Thus, they’re yelling it loudly that they were right and Obama was wrong.

Sen. John McCain — who never met a war he didn’t want the United States to fight — has demanded the resignation of the president’s entire national security team, including the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Let’s look back, though.

* Was it prudent to launch a war against Iraq in the first place back in March 2003, when President Bush declared to the world that Saddam had chemical weapons and was going to develop nukes to launch against Israel? It turned out he had neither.

* Did the Republican president misread more than a decade ago the Iraqis’ ability to transition from totalitarianism to democratic rule when they had no history ever of living in freedom and liberty?

* Remember when Vice President Cheney said we’d be greeted as “liberators” and not “occupiers” when we invaded Iraq and toppled Saddam Hussein? It didn’t happen. The war continued for years afterward, costing us more than 4,000 young American lives.

* And aren’t Americans just sick and tired of war? Don’t public opinion surveys tell us over and over that we no longer have the stomach for wars with no end?

The Iraq War went bad from the get-go. President Bush made a colossal mistake in linking Saddam Hussein to the 9/11 attacks and that, I submit, is what we are reaping today.

So … the current president ought to order air strikes at the insurgents and try to put down the attacks without the use of ground forces. We’ve got plenty of ordnance we can drop on the bad guys.

As for the carping and chest-thumping on Capitol Hill, how about speaking with one voice and letting that voice belong to the commander in chief, who’s got to make the tough calls?

Let the man practice law

Byron York, a conservative columnist and commentator for Fox News, thinks it’s somehow the public’s business that John Edwards has returned to his first passion: personal-injury law.

Big deal.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/john-edwards-chasing-ambulances-again/article/2548894

Edwards once was a U.S. senator from North Carolina. He ran for vice president on a Democratic ticket led by John Kerry. They lost in 2004 by a narrow margin; a swing of some 70,000 votes in Ohio (out of more than 5 million cast in that state) would have elected the Kerry-Edwards ticket over the George W. Bush-Dick Cheney ticket.

Then came another run for the presidency four years later, the adultery scandal, the birth of Edwards’s daughter to a woman other than his wife, his separation from Elizabeth, who then died of cancer.

Edwards’s political career is finished. That, I submit, is a very good thing.

I personally don’t care what he does with his private life or his private law practice.

In fact, I would prefer he’d disappear from public view.

If only his notable right-wing critics would just allow it.

Button it up, Mr. VP

Dick Cheney continues to astound me.

The former vice president of the United States just won’t go away quietly. He keeps yammering and blathering about what a horrible job Barack Obama has done as president. He proclaims the president has demonstrated “weakness” in the face of foreign threats. He talks about the “danger” posed by the Obama foreign policy doctrine.

What utter crap!

Cheney the chicken hawk — who got all those draft deferments during the Vietnam War — keeps harping on the need for “military response” to any overseas crisis. Give me a bleeping break.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/05/18/cheney_obama_has_demonstrated_repeatedly_that_he_can_be_pushed_around.html

Cheney was at it again over the weekend, Monday-morning-quarterbacking recent moves by the Obama administration.

My hope would be that one day Cheney would follow the lead of the man in whose presidency he served, George W. Bush, and just clam up and let the one president we have do his job. President Bush, as has his father, George H.W. Bush, have been the models of post-presidential decorum as it regards the men who succeeded them in office.

In fairness, I cannot let slip a slap at President Clinton, who’s spouted his share of criticism at George W. Bush, who succeeded in him in the White House.

Presidents and vice presidents should assume a role of “elder statesmen,” which by definition keeps them elevated from the partisan political posturing that occupies current officeholders.

They’ve all had their time in the arena. They’ve all made mistakes. Yes, that means Vice President Cheney has made them, too — although he is so very loath to admit to the doozies that occurred on his watch.

Cheney’s post-vice presidential arrogance just is too much for me to take.

Put a sock in it, Mr. Vice President.

Cheney makes my head spin

My head is spinning.

I just caught up with former Vice President Dick Cheney’s interview on “Face the Nation” in which he ridicules the Obama administration’s efforts to manage the crisis in Ukraine.

President Obama is weak, indecisive, he’s lost the confidence of our allies, he’s wrong to take military options off the table — those are just some of the things Vice President Cheney offered in his assessment of Obama’s handling of the crisis.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/03/09/cheney_no_question_putin_thinks_obama_is_weak.html

I want to declare that Dick Cheney has no credibility — none whatsoever — on matters relating to managing international crises. How he can assert the things he does blows my ever-lovin’ mind.

Let us remember that Dick Cheney was in the Situation Room when President George W. Bush decided to go to war with Iraq in 2003. Cheney had declared time and again publicly that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein possessed chemical weapons and that he would use them on our allies in the Middle East. Cheney made the case for war, argued that the United States had to invade a nation, topple a sovereign government, rebuild a nation, and create a more democratic society where none ever had existed. We would be seen as “liberators, not occupiers,” he said.

Well, Mr. Vice President, it didn’t quite work out that way.

The weapons were nowhere to be found. We toppled the government and installed one more to our liking. The war went on even after Saddam Hussein had been hanged. We lost more than 4,000 American lives.

Let us also remember that Saddam Hussein played no role at all in the 9/11 attacks. Our “allies” in Saudi Arabia are far more complicit in that heinous and dastardly act than the Iraqis. Why didn’t we topple that government, too, Mr. Vice President?

It’s almost laughable how Cheney glossed over the U.S. response to the Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008, saying that it occurred near the end of the Bush administration and as the Obama administration was preparing to take over. What’s the implication, Mr. Vice President? Might you be suggesting that Russia’s brass felt more comfortable invading Georgia as President Bush was about to leave office?

The Bush administration was as powerless to stop the Georgia incursion single-handedly as the Obama administration is now with the crisis in Ukraine.

My next task is to get my head to stop spinning.

Liz Cheney ends her Senate campaign

Liz Cheney isn’t as obsessed with political power as some of us thought, apparently.

The Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate from Wyoming ended her campaign early today, citing undisclosed family health issues. I wish her and her family well, of course.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/liz-cheney-wyoming-senate-race-101767.html?hp=f1

Another part of me, though, is glad she’s bowing out, if only to restore some sanity to the political process in one of our 50 states.

Cheney is the outspoken daughter of the outspoken former vice president, Dick Cheney. She challenged long-time Wyoming Republican Sen. Mike Enzi for reasons that continue to escape me. She claimed, I guess, that Enzi — one of the Senate’s most conservative members — isn’t conservative enough.

Her candidacy drew immediate fire from the state’s GOP establishment. GOP powerhouses lined up in Enzi’s corner.

Then things turned bad.

Cheney was accused of being a carpetbagger, given that she moved to Wyoming in 2010 after growing up in Washington, D.C. I don’t hold that against her. Two of my favorite carpetbaggers have been Robert F. Kennedy and Hillary Rodham Clinton, both of whom represented New York quite nicely in the Senate. In this age of intense media scrutiny, though, Cheney’s opportunism was drawing unusual attention.

Of course, then we had Cheney getting into that public tiff with her openly gay sister, Mary, over the issue of same-sex marriage. Mary is married and is a mother. Liz opposes gay marriage. The sisters got into a spat that only served to embarrass the entire family.

As Politico.com notes, Cheney’s campaign never got “traction.” Enzi continued to poll far ahead of his upstart challenger.

What this means for the health of the national Republican Party, though, remains to be determined. Liz Cheney is just one challenger to establishment GOP incumbents to drop out. Other insurgents are out there, including a few throughout West Texas, who are mounting challenges to long-time Republican incumbents.

Liz Cheney, though, is out of the game. Good. Her voice, though, won’t be silenced. She’s got her Fox News Channel job waiting for her.

Cheneys learning terrible lesson about fame

The Cheney family is being schooled on the terrible price famous clans must pay at times.

Their family feuds become public spectacles. The exposure goes with the territory.

New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd brings it all home with her latest essay.

The story has been told and retold many times in recent weeks. Liz Cheney, daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney and his wife, Lynne Cheney, wants to be the next U.S. senator from Wyoming. She’s challenging a long-time fellow Republican, incumbent Mike Enzi. She’s trying to outflank Enzi on the right, which is a hard thing to do, given the senator’s impeccable conservative voting record.

But in doing so, Liz has managed to offend her sister, Mary in the deepest way imaginable. Liz says she opposes gay marriage. Mary is gay and is married to Heather Poe. They are the parents of two children.

Daddy Cheney has declared his support for gay marriage. He also supports Liz’s campaign for U.S. senator. The Cheneys also used to be pals with the Enzis. Then we have another prominent Wyoming pol, former GOP Sen. Alan Simpson, who is mortified at what’s transpiring with his friends the Cheneys — and the Enzis.

Why should anyone beyond this tight circle of family and friends care? Because Dick Cheney served for eight years as vice president of the United States. Before that he was secretary of defense during the George H.W. Bush administration. Before that he was a congressman from Wyoming and before that he served as White House chief of staff to President Gerald Ford.

He’s a public man. His business becomes our business, even if it involves his daughters — both of whom have been in the public eye themselves.

Fame at times exacts a terrible price from those who seek it.

Family feud mirrors larger GOP split

Two women from one prominent political family are sparring publicly over one of the nation’s most sensitive social issues.

It involves gay marriage.

One of the women is gay; the other is straight. The gay sister, Mary Cheney, is married to her wife and is the mother of two children. The straight sister, Liz Cheney, is running for the U.S. Senate seat from Wyoming against a long-time incumbent, fellow Republican Mike Enzi.

Cheney Family Airs Gay-Marriage Feud on Facebook

Liz Cheney has come out strongly against gay marriage. Her sister Mary has challenged Liz’s views, saying she is out of step with history.

Oh, have I mentioned these women come from a prominent political family? Their dad is former Vice President Dick Cheney, who supports gay marriage; their mother is Lynne Cheney, who’s served as top adviser to GOP presidents going back to Ronald Reagan.

The women’s differences over gay marriage — or “marriage equality,” as proponents like to call it — serves as an interesting metaphor for the divisions that exist within the larger political party. The right wingers are unwilling to compromise on this or any issue with the “establishment wing” of their party.

No one can accuse the Cheney family of being squishy on their conservatism. They all come from sturdy right-wing stock.

The sisters’ split reminds me a bit of a similar split within Ronald Reagan’s family, particularly between the two sons — Michael and Ron. Michael Reagan is a star on the conservative talk-radio circuit; Ron tilts considerably to the left and is a frequent guest of liberal TV talk show hosts. The third surviving Reagan child, daughter Patti, is aligned with brother Ron.

Has anyone seen the Reagan brothers in the same room lately?

Back to the Cheneys …

If anyone needs a lesson on the split among Republicans, they can look no further than the strain developing between two strong-willed women.

Politics means ‘lying’ takes on broader context

My American Heritage dictionary defines the term “lie” thusly: “a false statement deliberately presented as true.”

That’s a commonly accepted description of a lie. Someone has to knowingly say something that is false.

Well, in politics, lying takes on a different sort of meaning.

Liz Cheney, the daughter of former Vice President Dick “Prince of Darkness” Cheney, said just the other day that President Barack Obama lied when he made grand promises about the Affordable Care Act.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/senate-races/190496-liz-cheney-no-question-obama-lied-about-o-care

“No question” that he lied, said Cheney. What’s more, the former VP’s daughter has accused Republican U.S. Sen. Mike Enzi of Wyoming — whose seat Cheney wants to take from the incumbent — of enabling the president to lie about the ACA.

I won’t get into whether Enzi enabled anything.

I am puzzled, though, why we allow politicians to use terms like “liar” and “lie” when the universe could contain all kinds of reasons for untruthful statements.

Yes, the president said anyone could keep their health plans if they wanted to do so once the ACA kicked in. It didn’t happen; millions of Americans had their policies canceled, forcing the president to announce this past week that insurers could keep policies in force for another year.

Pardon the verbal parsing, but for Cheney — who’s an underdog in her campaign to beat Enzi — to suggest that Obama “lied” is to become a mind-reader. She knows without a doubt, she says, that the president lied — which is to say he deliberately stood before the nation and said something he knew to be untrue.

Just maybe the president believed what he said at the time to be true. If someone says something in good faith — believing they are telling the truth — does that make them bad-faced liars?

Here’s an example that might hit Liz Cheney right in the gut.

Her dad told us that the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. Those WMD became the basis for us launching a full-scale war against Iraq in March 2003. Our troops stormed into Baghdad, captured Saddam, scoured the country from top to bottom looking for those WMD.

They weren’t there.

Did Daddy Cheney tell a lie? I’m guessing his daughter Liz would say “no.” Some of us likely would beg to differ. Hey, that’s politics.