NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/15/cheney.interview/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

Cheney told CNN's "State of the Union" that the Bush administration's "alternative" interrogation techniques were "absolutely essential" to preventing further assaults like the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington.
But Cheney said the administration had to grapple with the September 11, 2001 al Qaeda attacks and the resulting war in Afghanistan, as well as the disaster of 2005's Hurricane Katrina.

He also defended the invasion of Iraq, which the administration launched in 2003. Obama has begun to wind down the widely unpopular war, but Cheney said: "We've accomplished nearly everything we set out to do."
1. If the former administration "grapple[d]" with Hurricane Katrina, they should stay out of wrestling.
2. WMDs? Check. I will say no more.

http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/03/15/cheney-says-obamas-policies-are-making-the-us-less-safe/

Well, Cheney says Obama is making us unsafe. He also says that everything they did was legal. Sorry Dick, SCOTUS disagrees.

http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/03/15/cheney-says-obamas-policies-are-making-the-us-less-safe/

Well, Cheney says Obama is making us unsafe. He also says that everything they did was legal. Sorry Dick, SCOTUS disagrees.

LOL, and pissing off the whole world and creating a breeding ground for extremism (Iraq) didn't make us unsafe?

Anyone know what Dick is smoking?

I personally like how Dick Cheney is some kind of expert on what keeps America safe. Last I checked, ignoring a memo saying "Bin Laden to attack within United States" isnt really doing the trick.

I personally like how Dick Cheney is some kind of expert on what keeps America safe. Last I checked, ignoring a memo saying "Bin Laden to attack within United States" isnt really doing the trick.

Quoted for truth.

I personally like how Dick Cheney is some kind of expert on what keeps America safe. Last I checked, ignoring a memo saying "Bin Laden to attack within United States" isnt really doing the trick.

that's because it wasn't written in a language they understood.

how the report should've read...

"See Bin Laden"
"See Bin Laden plan"
"Ben Laden is going to hurt alot of Americans"
"will our government stop Bin Laden?"

I bet if it was written like that... sept 11th would not have happened.

that's because it wasn't written in a language they understood.

how the report should've read...

"See Bin Laden"
"See Bin Laden plan"
"Ben Laden is going to hurt alot of Americans"
"will our government stop Bin Laden?"

I bet if it was written like that... sept 11th would not have happened.


Awesome.

that's because it wasn't written in a language they understood.

how the report should've read...

"See Bin Laden"
"See Bin Laden plan"
"Ben Laden is going to hurt alot of Americans"
"will our government stop Bin Laden?"

I bet if it was written like that... sept 11th would not have happened.

No no no, it would need illustrations to go with it. Don't forget Dear Leader was reading My Pet Goat on 9/11.

He also says that everything they did was legal. Sorry Dick, SCOTUS disagrees.

Supreme Court rulings change over time. You know how they keep saying their administration will stand the test of time?

Supreme Court rulings change over time. You know how they keep saying their administration will stand the test of time?

They just didn't expect the "test of time" to last seconds.

Supreme Court rulings change over time. You know how they keep saying their administration will stand the test of time?

This one wont. It was the right ruling, and anyone who knows anything knows that.

No no no, it would need illustrations to go with it. Don't forget Dear Leader was reading My Pet Goat on 9/11.

By himself!? :eek:

This one wont. It was the right ruling, and anyone who knows anything knows that.

I hope you meant correct, as opposed to right?

Anyways, standards change over time... so you never know! I don't think it'll happen, though.

By himself!? :eek:

Oh wait, he had a class of children in there with him, so probably not.

Oh wait, he had a class of children in there with him, so probably not.

lol :D

that's because it wasn't written in a language they understood.

how the report should've read...

"See Bin Laden"
"See Bin Laden plan"
"Plan Bin Laden, plan."
"Ben Laden is going to hurt alot of Americans"
"will our government stop Bin Laden?"

I bet if it was written like that... sept 11th would not have happened.

Added a line in bold that you seem to have missed.

Added a line in bold that you seem to have missed.

... seems to me you're more familiar with Bush's language than I am. :D :p

Oh wait, he had a class of children in there with him, so probably not.

... and wasn't the book held upside down... as if he had it flipped over and was showing it to them?

so they were infact reading it to him?

From the CNN political ticker:

Cheney also defended Rush Limbaugh from charges by some conservative commentators that the radio host was electoral "kryptonite."

"Rush is a good friend. I love him," Cheney told King. "I think he does great work and has for years. He's now offered to debate President Obama on his radio show. Hell, I'd pay to see that! It would be interesting to have developed. I think Rush is a good man and serves a very important purpose."

You know, drop the radio show and have the debate in the same format as the presidential debates and that would be phenomenal to see. Kind of like a MMA fight between Kimbo Slice and Stephen Hawking. ;)

"Rush is a good friend. I love him," Cheney told King. "I think he does great work and has for years. He's now offered to debate President Obama on his radio show. Hell, I'd pay to see that! It would be interesting to have developed. I think Rush is a good man and serves a very important purpose."

err... you can't 'see' the debate if it's on a radio show... :D

I agree LG. I would watch that if it was televised...

err... you can't 'see' the debate if it's on a radio show... :D

I agree LG. I would watch that if it was televised...

Id watch it if it was in a format where Rush couldnt cut Obama's mic (ie, the only way Rush could do even remotely well).

But, then again, the president has better things to do then 'debate' an entertainer/radio personality.

err... you can't 'see' the debate if it's on a radio show... :D

This is Dick Cheney we're talking about here. Man of a thousand hidden cameras. He sees you when you're sleeping. Knows when you're awake.

He's like Santa, except that he brings rendition and torture in some filthy Pakistani prison camp, instead of happiness and joy.

This is Dick Cheney we're talking about here. Man of a thousand hidden cameras. He sees you when you're sleeping. Knows when you're awake.

He's like Santa, except that he brings rendition and torture in some filthy Pakistani prison camp, instead of happiness and joy.

remind me to leave the 'special cookies' out on Christmas eve.

remind me to leave the 'special cookies' out on Christmas eve.

The ones make from chopped up kittens?

The ones make from chopped up kittens?

And the tears of orphans, with a dash of the hopelessness of the poor, and a nice hearty dollop of the scowls of the elite for extra zing.

The ones make from chopped up kittens?

nah, the one's that induce heart attacks. :D

nah, the one's that induce heart attacks. :D

Dick Cheney laughs at your mortal ailments.

Or would, if he had emotions.

nah, the one's that induce heart attacks. :D

What heart? This is Dick Cheney. Early in his Vice-Presidency he has his heart removed and replaced with a diamond containing the trapped souls of a thousand vanquished foes. *nod*

The vice president has history of health problems, including four heart attacks, a persistent concern since he was picked as President Bush's running mate in 2000. He had three mild heart attacks and quadruple-bypass surgery before he was 50, and one attack since.

so I'm an optimist... :p

so I'm an optimist... :p

Are you sure they were heart attacks and not Transplant Rejections? Because that would say much about Cheney's body refusing to have a heart.

Are you sure they were heart attacks and not Transplant Rejections? Because that would say much about Cheney's body refusing to have a heart.

a bypass would indicate that something's there. and that's what I want to attack!

besides... Like hell I'm feeding kitties to anyone!

You know, drop the radio show and have the debate in the same format as the presidential debates and that would be phenomenal to see. Kind of like a MMA fight between Kimbo Slice and Stephen Hawking. ;)

I say we take him up on it, have Cheney sign a contract stating that he'd pay for it. Then milk him for a trillion dollars and put the debate on neutral grounds well outside of Rush's ability to play dirty tricks. Two birds with one stone.

I say we take him up on it, have Cheney sign a contract stating that he'd pay for it. Then milk him for a trillion dollars and put the debate on neutral grounds well outside of Rush's ability to play dirty tricks. Two birds with one stone.

Rush's dirty media tricks would be countered by Dick's Old Bucky cradled under one arm, fresh from the quail hunt.

Anyone know what Dick is smoking?What's in a name ....?

Awesome.So totally seconded.
:hail:

I say we take him up on it, have Cheney sign a contract stating that he'd pay for it. Then milk him for a trillion dollars and put the debate on neutral grounds well outside of Rush's ability to play dirty tricks. Two birds with one stone.

Just as long as neither one gets to use a teleprompter, or know the questions in advance, much less have pre-approval of them (as the Dems insisted on during the 2008 campaign cycle).

Un-Scripted!

rove, chainey and rumsfield should be the last three prisoners held at guantanimo. and bush to some kind of reform school for retarded excutives.

bush to some kind of reform school for retarded excutives.

They'd have to squeeze him in with everyone from Chrysler, General Motors, AIG, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Bear Sterns.

They'd have to squeeze him in with everyone from Chrysler, General Motors, AIG, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Bear Sterns.

sort of looks that way, but i'm sure they could find room for him somewhere.

Just as long as neither one gets to use a teleprompter, or know the questions in advance, much less have pre-approval of them (as the Dems insisted on during the 2008 campaign cycle).

Un-Scripted!

Source?

By the way...

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/16/cheney.government/

An October 23, 2001, memo from Justice Department lawyers John C. Yoo and Robert J. Delahunty said, "First Amendment speech and press rights may also be subordinated to the overriding need to wage war successfully."

Former Vice PresidentCheney also believes, according to these same memos, that the federal government can send troops to burst into the homes of American citizens without a search warrant, despite the Fourth Amendment's protection against such unreasonable searches. He believes that the federal government has the right to arrest an American citizen on American soil and hold him in prison without charges. He believes that the federal government can listen in on your phone conversations without a court order.

Cheney believes that the federal government can ignore the Geneva Conventions, binding treaties largely written by the United States, signed by the president and ratified by the Senate. He believes that the federal government can commit torture, despite laws and treaties making torture a crime.


Can we throw this fucker in jail now?

Cheney's just setting the scene so that Obama takes the fall for the situations that were created during the Bush/Cheney reign.

Source?

By the way...

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/16/cheney.government/



Can we throw this fucker in jail now?
did y'all miss the almost-story by seymour hersh saying that the CIA has been operating assassination squads that reported directly to dick cheney?

http://www.alternet.org/rights/131153/seymour_hersh:_%22executive_assassination_ring%22_answered_to_cheney,_had_no_congressional_oversight/

did y'all miss the almost-story by seymour hersh saying that the CIA has been operating assassination squads that reported directly to dick cheney?

http://www.alternet.org/rights/131153/seymour_hersh:_%22executive_assassination_ring%22_answered_to_cheney,_had_no_congressional_oversight/
I didn't miss it. I noticed it when Keith Olbermann's head exploded extra loud recently. Sy Hersh is a good investigative reporter. If he says there is smoke, then there is. I'm waiting to see where the fire is. Also he's not the only journalist to conclude that Bush/Cheney were running a dictatorship, even though they kind of got away with it by attempting a take-over by gradualism.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/white-house-watch/2009/03/bushs_secret_dictatorship.html

Journalists and historians have their work cut out for them, and I can hardly wait for more and more facts to be dug up.

I didn't miss it. I noticed it when Keith Olbermann's head exploded extra loud recently. Sy Hersh is a good investigative reporter. If he says there is smoke, then there is. I'm waiting to see where the fire is. Also he's not the only journalist to conclude that Bush/Cheney were running a dictatorship, even though they kind of got away with it by attempting a take-over by gradualism.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/white-house-watch/2009/03/bushs_secret_dictatorship.html

Journalists and historians have their work cut out for them, and I can hardly wait for more and more facts to be dug up.
journalists need to start doing their jobs. i was just reading an ariana huffington editorial on huffington post contrasting jon stewart's interview of jim cramer with john king's interview of dick cheney. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/what-if-jon-stewart-inste_b_175503.html she makes a good point. why are journalists so in love with access that they let bigwigs spout any lies and nonsense that they choose?

journalists need to start doing their jobs. i was just reading an ariana huffington editorial on huffington post contrasting jon stewart's interview of jim cramer with john king's interview of dick cheney. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/what-if-jon-stewart-inste_b_175503.html she makes a good point. why are journalists so in love with access that they let bigwigs spout any lies and nonsense that they choose?
We have been living in a time of form over function, where appearances are more important than results, where acing the interview is more important than actually having the skill. All journalists have had to do for years is get a story. They don't have to check the story for truth, they don't have to follow up the story, they just have to fill their program slot with talk. And if they can get big names to talk during their slot, then they will seem to be good at what they are doing -- which is true. They are good at what they do. What they do is suck balls and waste time, and damn if they ain't good at it.

They're not alone. The world today has a shitload more CEOs of failed investment institutions than Sully Sullenbergers.

But things got pretty much this bad in the 19th century before rampant political and business corruption caused widespread economic and social problems and lo! the muckraking journalist was born. Maybe some more will rise from the muck and do an honest day's work for the public again.

We have been living in a time of form over function, where appearances are more important than results, where acing the interview is more important than actually having the skill. All journalists have had to do for years is get a story. They don't have to check the story for truth, they don't have to follow up the story, they just have to fill their program slot with talk. And if they can get big names to talk during their slot, then they will seem to be good at what they are doing -- which is true. They are good at what they do. What they do is suck balls and waste time, and damn if they ain't good at it.

They're not alone. The world today has a shitload more CEOs of failed investment institutions than Sully Sullenbergers.

But things got pretty much this bad in the 19th century before rampant political and business corruption caused widespread economic and social problems and lo! the muckraking journalist was born. Maybe some more will rise from the muck and do an honest day's work for the public again.
i hope so.

its a sad sad day when a comedian on a fake news show blows all other interviewers out of the water.

i hope so.

its a sad sad day when a comedian on a fake news show blows all other interviewers out of the water.
That's for sure. Stewart, basically, is just a smart guy. That's why I've always thought he was an amazingly good interviewer on serious topics -- he can understand the issues and frame on-point questions about them. But it's not so much dismaying that he, a comedian, can do that, as that there are so few actual journalists who can or will do it. That is just depressing.