Cheney Emerges as Defender-in-Chief for Bush Years, Says He Won't 'Roll Over'

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

As for our country, we have freed and saved more people on this planet than all the other countries combined.

nationalist drivel

I'll bet this is exactly what your favorite websit told you to say!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[piper17 1]

Colin Powell...a Republican? I don't think so. He endorsed and campaigned for BHO. I think he showed his "true colors" in that move. I think Rush had it exactly right about Powell quite some time ago.

McCain is too weak in core conservative values and not enough people know anything about the current governor of FL.

"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

[BikerBabe 0]

Quote

But that indicates to me you blame most of the worlds woes on this country.

lol...what? Now who's reading things into posts?

and when i said "your position" please understand that i'm using you as a representative of a commonly stated position...and because you happen to be replying today.

so saying i want the US to uphold a moral standard that not many other countries aspire to is being on a "high horse"? Why Marc, you're coming dangerously close to endorsing moral relativism now...

if waterboarding isn't torture, then i'm sure it would be OK to do it to you, then, right? or less personal...would it be ok to do it to criminals in the US prison system? How about those suspected of a crime, during questioning?

Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup!

[billvon 2,994]

>Colin Powell...a Republican? I don't think so.

This, I think, is another sign of the times when it comes to the republican party. More and more people are self-identifying as democrats because the republican party has told them "we don't want you." Colin Powell? Too bipartisan. Arlen Specter? Too centrist. Gay marriage supporters? Too anti-family. Anti-torture advocates? You're not patriotic enough for us.

It will take another "big tent" effort to bring the GOP back from its current abysmal position in american politics, methinks.

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

Quote

Cheney's spirited defense of torture is one of the factors that is going to keep the republican party at their current approval ratings (currently 14%.) I keep hoping the GOP will jettison all these anchors around its neck and get back in the game; a one-party system is not good for the US.

If he is so bad for the R's why dont the D's shut up and let him kill the party?

It's more effective to draw him out and length and get him as much air time as possible. So, they engage him to keep him talking, and in the public eye.

Same goes for Rush Limbaugh. Why do you suppose the Democrats keep bringing him up? Because they want to identify the Republicans with him, knowing that he is unpopular amongst the center of the electorate, and that identifying the Republicans with him will damage them in future elections.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Cheney's spirited defense of torture is one of the factors that is going to keep the republican party at their current approval ratings (currently 14%.) I keep hoping the GOP will jettison all these anchors around its neck and get back in the game; a one-party system is not good for the US.

If he is so bad for the R's why dont the D's shut up and let him kill the party?

It's more effective to draw him out and length and get him as much air time as possible. So, they engage him to keep him talking, and in the public eye.

Same goes for Rush Limbaugh. Why do you suppose the Democrats keep bringing him up? Because they want to identify the Republicans with him, knowing that he is unpopular amongst the center of the electorate, and that identifying the Republicans with him will damage them in future elections.

I could not agree with you more.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

Quote

Quote

And liberals do like inclusiveness pretty much across the board

You ought to clarify what you mean by "liberals" here. The least inclusive, most dogmatic, most highly prejudging people I've ever encountered almost universally self-identified as "liberal."

It's been just the opposite experience for me.

Where do you live?

I have a theory that the people in the majority in any given environment tend to be the least accepting and tolerant. Having spent the majority of my life in quite left-leaning places (I lived in Davis, California for 12 years), I theorize that I've encountered more "liberal" dogma than "conservative."

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[billvon 2,994]

>and that identifying the Republicans with him will damage them in future elections.

To be fair, that is coming from more republicans than democrats. He has the head of the RNC kowtowing to him. Whenever a republican dares criticize him, he demands (and nearly always receives) an immediate apology from him.

As an example, take Eric Cantor, the #2 republican in the House:

April 30: Eric Cantor says the GOP will start a listening tour to "begin a conversation with the American people."

May 2: Cantor says Republicans have to "get back to listening to the people."

May 4: Limbaugh says "we do not need a listening tour."

May 6: Cantor says "really, this is not a listening tour."

[wmw999 2,447]

Quote

core conservative values

What do you see as being core conservative values? What makes someone a "real" republican as opposed to (for example) a RINO?

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

But that indicates to me you blame most of the worlds woes on this country.

lol...what? Now who's reading things into posts?

and when i said "your position" please understand that i'm using you as a representative of a commonly stated position...and because you happen to be replying today.

so saying i want the US to uphold a moral standard that not many other countries aspire to is being on a "high horse"? Why Marc, you're coming dangerously close to endorsing moral relativism now...

if waterboarding isn't torture, then i'm sure it would be OK to do it to you, then, right? or less personal...would it be ok to do it to criminals in the US prison system? How about those suspected of a crime, during questioning?

If I was a man with a secrete caught on a battle field or in a fight, I guess I should expect it huh?

Prisoners? you are reaching now dont you think? US citizens are different than mass murdering terrorist enemy combatants.

US citizens ARE covered by the constitution. War prisoners are not

The US treats it prisoner (as a whole) better than any enemy we have faught including the current one.

Any other twists?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,994]

>US citizens are different than mass murdering terrorist
>enemy combatants.

Right. But we're not talking about mass murdering terrorist enemy combatants. We're talking about people like Dilawar, an innocent man who we tortured to death.

As a country we consider anyone innocent until proven guilty in our courts. So if you really think they are "mass murdering terrorist enemies" then try them and put them in jail forever (or execute them.) That's what you do in the USA.

>US citizens ARE covered by the constitution.

Google "Jose Padilla."

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Any other twists?

yes, it appears very likely that cheney was torturing not to get the 'truth' but to fabricate evidence - in this case terrorist links to iraq - what do you think of that?

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

>Colin Powell...a Republican? I don't think so.

This, I think, is another sign of the times when it comes to the republican party. More and more people are self-identifying as democrats because the republican party has told them "we don't want you."

For what it's worth, I think Colin Powell is another example of a (big government) neo-con foreign policy hawk. I welcome any development that involves that wing of the Republican party moving across the aisle, hopefully to create a clearer (anti-statist) philosophy for the Republicans, and also to more clearly show the divide (statist v. anti-statist) that I'd personally like to have a major party firmly on one side of.

But I don't entirely agree. I think that Arlen Specter, for example, is a political opportunist looking out for himself.

I also don't think that "the republican party" is speaking with any kind of unified voice, so when one person says "we don't want you" it's easy enough to find another who says "yes we do."

To say that John McCain isn't a "true" Republican is, I think, a tad far-fetched. If memory serves, he did win a nationwide primary to become the Republican standard bearer. Those who think he's not a "true" enough Republican might want to actually ask if they, themselves actually want to be Republicans.

If you're looking for an easy excuse to switch parties and get into the new, hip fad? Then it's easy to point at Rush Limbaugh and say "boo hoo, he doesn't like me, I better run away..."

Today, nothing is cooler than using your Mac to make a Youtube video about how evil corporations are poisoning the environment, while you drive your Prius with an Obama bumper sticker down to get a latte at (evil, corporate) Starbucks. Everyone wants to be cool. For some people, that's the sum of their political beliefs. For others, there is a real core of beliefs under there that they're not going to stray too far from.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Ha fucking ha, so an hour after a hijacked plane hits one of the largest buildings in the world,those morons allow another to hit the second buliding, and then another to hit the pentagon.

Thanks for showing yet again that you have NO clue about how air defense works.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

CDIF

CDNDIF

WTC 1 (1993)
Saudi bombing (1995)
Khobar Towers (1996)
US embassy bombings (1998)
USS Cole (2000)

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[piper17 1]

and the last politically-successful Republican favoring the "big tent" theory was...?????

"current abysmal position"?....is the Republican party in any worse condition than the Dems in 1994?

These "More and more people self-identifying as" Democrats are people who waffle on issues or let peer pressure influence them. They are lacking in conviction.

Bipartisan, centrist, moderate - these are all pseuodonyms for people who can be swayed to the Democrat positions by peer pressure and the desire to be "liked".

"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

Quote

Any other twists?

yes, it appears very likely that cheney was torturing not to get the 'truth' but to fabricate evidence - in this case terrorist links to iraq - what do you think of that?

I think that we don't know the truth of that, one way or another. Obviously, Cheney is calling for the release of more documents (showing intelligence gained from waterboarding) because he believes they will vindicate his position (presumably by showing that actionable intelligence was generated).

Having only one side of the story makes it hard to come to any clear conclusions.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

and the last politically-successful Republican favoring the "big tent" theory was...?????.

Ronald Reagan. I'm assuming you've heard of him?

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[billvon 2,994]

> I think that Arlen Specter, for example, is a political opportunist
>looking out for himself.

Absolutely, as is everyone. No one is a republican because they are an altruist who wants to help out the GOP, they are a republican because they feel that the party best represents them. (Or in his case feels that will give him the best chance for re-election.)

However, they did a pretty good job of driving him out. The RNC chairman had called for punishing Specter for straying from the party line. Indeed, even his supporters, Cornyn and McConnell, were roundly criticized themselves for their support of Specter. A few quotes:

Limbaugh: "Snowe, Collins, Specter . .you're going to have a number of RINO Republicans. I said earlier today it's great to flush them out, get them out of there. Let it be known that they are not Republicans."

Jim DeMint (R-SC): Specter "cut our knees from under us." Senate conservatives need to aggressively "go after" Specter.

FOX News (Dick Morris):"Specter, Collins and Snowe are Benedict Arnolds."

Get enough of that and you'll leave. I regret that the democrats will have a filibuster-proof majority, but the GOP did that to themselves.

>I also don't think that "the republican party" is speaking with any kind of
>unified voice, so when one person says "we don't want you" it's easy
>enough to find another who says "yes we do."

Agreed 100%. Today the "we don't want yous" are outnumbering the "yes we dos" by a wide margin, though (as the post above demonstrated.)

>Today, nothing is cooler than using your Mac to make a Youtube video
>about how evil corporations are poisoning the environment, while you
>drive your Prius with an Obama bumper sticker down to get a latte at
>(evil, corporate) Starbucks.

Well, other than the smug types that proclaim global warming is all a hoax, socialism is evil, we all have to support the USA and the market will solve everything - while driving their Mexican-built Ford truck down a government built and maintained road to buy a six pack of InBev Bud Lite, glad that the government has mandated airbags so they don't have to wear their seatbelts. They're the truly smart ones who know what's _really_ going on in government, not like everyone else who prays to Lord Obama!

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

What you dont get it that there is torture and there is waterboarding. Two different things.

Torture is a proper superset of waterboarding.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[billvon 2,994]

>and the last politically-successful Republican favoring the "big tent" theory was...?

Reagan. You may have heard of him.

>"current abysmal position"?....is the Republican party in any
>worse condition than the Dems in 1994?

Much worse, yes. We're talking 14% approval ratings for congressional republicans. 14%. That's less than 1 in 7 who think that they're doing a good job.

>These "More and more people self-identifying as" Democrats are
>people who waffle on issues or let peer pressure influence them. They are
>lacking in conviction.

Exactly. Alienate them so you can keep those 14% "true believers" voting for the GOP, and you'll keep the democrats in power for decades.

>Bipartisan, centrist, moderate - these are all pseuodonyms for people
>who can be swayed to the Democrat positions by peer pressure and the
>desire to be "liked".

And let me guess. Once they sway back to the GOP side, you will describe them as "smart" "finally seeing the light" "finally learning about the democrats" etc etc.

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

We're talking 14% approval ratings for congressional republicans. 14%. That's less than 1 in 7 who think that they're doing a good job.

Honestly, I think that number is garbage. As a generalization, everyone thinks that their own (possibly Republcan) representative is doing great, but that the generic "Republicans" are bad. You see the same kind of numbers if you ask people whether "congress" is doing a good job and then also ask them if their specific representative is doing a good job. Unless the US moves to a PR voting system, popularity polls for parties are pretty meaningless.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Colin Powell...a Republican? I don't think so. He endorsed and campaigned for BHO.

So did lots of other Republicans. Even one of the founders of the Heritage Foundation (can't look up his name at the moment) voted for Obama.
Powell could, and I believe did, use Specter's argument that the Republican party left him.

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Cheney is doing what President Bush refused to do when getting punched for eight straight years.

In that environment, the "nobility" of turning the cheek won't work, it will embolden the political perception of the liberal elements.

Or how about another option: Mr Cheney takes responsibility for his role – tacit, complicit, &/or explicit – either individually or as representative of the administration in policy choices made?

That is another *option*. Where are the calls for taking responsibility for one’s actions that one usually encounters in moral choices?

Frankly, as I’ve written consistently for over a year, I see prosecution of Cheney, Yoo, Busbee, et al as not being in the long term interest of the US or US strategic interests. Advocate something akin to ‘truth & reconciliation’ type of process. And I still see no one better to lead such an effort than Sen McCain. Success of such a process does depend on willingness/ability of those responsible to accept responsibility and engage in, minimally, verbalizations of contrition.

Quote

In the end, this will hurt everyone.

It might … in the short term, the metaphorical ‘open wound’ is likely to continue to fester.

***Wouldn’t it have been better to have just not done it in the first place?***

We didn’t need to do it. It was a policy choice that was made in a 'fog of war'. A policy choice made in the wake of the most serious attack on the US in the memory and lifespan of the majority of the citizen's of America. Well-intentioned people making *very* bad decisions.

We also had an option of doing nothing in response to the attacks of 11 September 2001 – we didn’t pursue that option. Doing nothing is always a choice. We also had an option of deploying nuclear weapons – we didn’t pursue that policy option either.


Anticipating the red herring: yes, it would have been *much* *much* *much* better if the attacks of 11 September 2001 never happened. And if a whole lot of other choices had or hadn’t been made. Thank God, Buddha, Jehovah, Shiva, Gaia, Mohammed, Isis, and/or any number of possible deities/religious figures one could invoke that my government isn’t the one is power (or failing/flailing) then or now in Afghanistan. This is about policy choices of our government.


Ignorance of history, i.e., not being aware of the North Korean and Chinese Communist origin of the SERE program training inclusion of waterboarding as a technique used to elicit false confessions, should not be an excuse. It may be a mitigating factor on intent. Maybe ... And at the same time sometimes acknowledging and letting dumb things people do and poor choices people make go may be better in the long term. Is this one of those things?

Or does “torture ha[ve] no place in America, and Americans have no reason to employ it”? These are the ethical and moral components of the issue … not the effectiveness or tactical ones. We should set the metaphorical bar high not lower ourselves.

Among the many reasons, I love my nation is that I want to be “resolute in the knowledge that our nation remains a last bastion of what is right (or ought to be right) in the world.” Torture or whatever euphemism one wants to employ, ain’t right.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[piper17 1]

That is exactly the answer I was hoping to see. Reagan took stands, often unpopular, and stuck with his convictions. He took untold crap from the dems and the media (sorry if I repeat) about stong national defense including missile defense, deploying new missiles (Pershings?, it's been too long a time), the Berlin Wall, low taxes, a smaller federal government. and many other things.

He did not waiver on his convictions. Rather, he stuck to his guns. I loved his statement about liberals when he said "Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorand but that they know so much that isn't so".

"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling