Cheney flips out

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The paranoid left is really fun to watch as they run around screaming "the sky is falling".

About as funny as the paranoid right was when they hunted Clinton for whatever petty ####### they could find or make up if there wasn't anything of substance to be found. I imagine you were singing a different tune then.

So not filling out a form or firing a few prosecutors is worse than lying under oath? Whatever you say man.

Why do you think the Bushies refuse to even testify under oath before Congress?

[Mags 112]

Just sticking my hat on to say that can certain members posting in this topic PLEASE keep the insults to a minimum. In fact, no insults, no insults at all, thankyou very much.

[Ban Hammer 14,271]

Just sticking my hat on to say that can certain members posting in this topic PLEASE keep the insults to a minimum. In fact, no insults, no insults at all, thankyou very much.

but aren't you supposed to include the pic when you put on your hat?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The paranoid left is really fun to watch as they run around screaming "the sky is falling".

About as funny as the paranoid right was when they hunted Clinton for whatever petty ####### they could find or make up if there wasn't anything of substance to be found. I imagine you were singing a different tune then.

So not filling out a form or firing a few prosecutors is worse than lying under oath? Whatever you say man.

I got to ask this – why is it that the only criticism of Clinton that is consistently brought is his lying under oath about a fundamentally ‘personal issue’? I mean in his 8 year presidency – you mean to tell me that this is the biggest criticism you can come up with as to why he was a bad president?

You mentioned window dressing earlier – seems to me that the whole Monica Lewinsky thing is window-dressing of the highest order; and getting bogged down in a seedy personal affair (however scandalous it might be) demeans I think the people who repeat it and give it undue prominence – rather than the many tangible issues related to policy that can be laid at his doorstep.

This topic is indicative of Bush et als performance in government going back to 2000, and is hardly a new accusation for all that. Bush has consolidated a disproportionate amount of power in the executive over recent years, and is now apparently ‘allowing’ his Vice President to operate his office without any oversight or accountability, even from himself. That says to me that the accusations that GWB is a political puppet are basically correct.

[Portlander 0]

The lobbyists will physically write their own laws. Doesn't get much more puppet-like" than that. Reading policy papers, it is clear that they have the goal of privitizing everything. In oprder privitaze everything, that make sure that the government is bloated. Corruption is now a policy objective. I have made that conpclusion from reading the policy papers of BushCo. Bush is NOT inept. He is clearly achieving the objectives laid out in policy. This is the stuff the circulates amongst politicians themselves, not included in speeches to the People. Refer to the Heritage Foundation.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The lobbyists will physically write their own laws. Doesn't get much more puppet-like" than that. Reading policy papers, it is clear that they have the goal of privitizing everything. In oprder privitaze everything, that make sure that the government is bloated. Corruption is now a policy objective. I have made that conpclusion from reading the policy papers of BushCo. Bush is NOT inept. He is clearly achieving the objectives laid out in policy. This is the stuff the circulates amongst politicians themselves, not included in speeches to the People. Refer to the Heritage Foundation.

I disagree with you there - he's inept in the sense that he's the figurehead who appears to be there merely to sign the checks and do what he's told. I think all the actual work is done by other people (like the lobbyists). The president is 'necessary' in that sense - but impotent for all practical intents and purposes.

As far as any of the policy issues that he has personally dealt with (rather than by proxy of his advisors) and dug his heels in - appointment of Supreme Court judges, stem cell research, illegal immigration - they have all been complete fiascos IMO. As far as favouring corporate interests - certainly he's been successful, but I wouldn't give him the credit for that success.

[Portlander 0]

He is highly effective at achieving policy. Therefore, he is not inept. He gets done exactly what he wants to get done. Certainly, the lobbyists write thei legislation, but thats part of his agenda.

The Immigration bill is written up by big business. The "Guest Worker" program is a trojan horse that will only benefit the big companies. The big companies get to exclusively handle the visas/passports etc of their workers. The "Guest workers" will have no rights without the company. Its indentured servitude.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

He is highly effective at achieving policy. Therefore, he is not inept. He gets done exactly what he wants to get done. Certainly, the lobbyists write thei legislation, but thats part of his agenda.

The Immigration bill is written up by big business. The "Guest Worker" program is a trojan horse that will only benefit the big companies. The big companies get to exclusively handle the visas/passports etc of their workers. The "Guest workers" will have no rights without the company. Its indentured servitude.

But if he's not involved in coming up with the policy how can he be credited for it - especially if the likes of the VP are running key areas of govt policy in secret, apparently without his knowledge or oversight. That's kind of like a lazy manager who takes credit for other people's hard work.

[Portlander 0]

well, I'm thinking of it like a sports team. A Goalie doesn't come up with the plays, doesn't call the shots, but if nothing gets past him he is very effective, and certinaly not "inept." Bush probably could not write effective policy. I do agree with that. But he doesn't need to. His job is in sales. And he's very good at it. I'd buy a used car from the guy...

The Neocons couldn't do it without him. Can you imagine Rumsfeld, Cheney, or Wolfowitz giving the State of the Union address?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

well, I'm thinking of it like a sports team. A Goalie doesn't come up with the plays, doesn't call the shots, but if nothing gets past him he is very effective, and certinaly not "inept." Bush probably could not write effective policy. I do agree with that. But he doesn't need to. His job is in sales. And he's very good at it. I'd buy a used car from the guy...

The Neocons couldn't do it without him. Can you imagine Rumsfeld, Cheney, or Wolfowitz giving the State of the Union address?

The trouble I have with this is that the person who generally gives those kinds of speeches at least articulate and demonstrates an understanding of the issues they’re discussing. Its no secret that the vast majority of world leaders are articulate, charistmatic people with a gift for rhetorical oratory. I really don’t see that here – especially with regard to that video you linked to about the press conference question about private military contractors). I don’t see what benefit is served by the guy making himself look ridiculous by appearing to not know what his most senior advisors are up to, and turning a serious issue into a joke. That won't make the issue go away - but will make people remember the fact that he passed the buck far more than if he made an (at least) perfunctory attempt to answer the question. Its not genius at work – IMO. It’s the exact opposite.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I'd buy a used car from the guy...

From the "commander guy"?

If you'd buy a car from a guy like that then anyone could sell you sand in the middle of the desert.

[Portlander 0]

Look at how many people STILL believe that we found WMDs in Iraq, or that Saddam was personally responsible for 9-11. He has been able to pass the Prescription Drug Bill that sold our seniors upriver, and without significant backlash. Can you imagine if Clinton tried to lock the US into the highest possible rates for prescription drugs? Conservatives would have screamed bloody murder. Instead, Bush pushed it through no problem. What about shorting veterans of their benefits? People would be trying to kill Clinton. Instead, with Bush... His MO is to say the exact opposite from what it is. Such as "The Immigration Bill is a great victory for the Rule of Law" or "He's got 'em" I might start a thread of blatantly 100% lies he's told straight out that people bought.

Its no secret that the vast majority of world leaders are articulate, charistmatic people with a gift for rhetorical oratory.

Except that people are expecting a weasely answer from a politician. Bush comes off as straight talking and honest. Meanwhile he is saying the exact opposite of what he is doing. It has worked like a charm. Look at what he's accomplished. Certainly "northern liberal elitists" are pissed off at the guy, but Southerners LOVE that. A Texas drawl doesn't mean that the guys stupid. They are aware of the stereotype their drawl has and they hate it. They love pissing off "northern elitist anti-capitalist liberals" and it endears Bush to them even more. Its a brilliant strategy.

Bush Jr. ran H.W. Bush's campaign. He has a photographic memory and is great at coming off as a straight talker. He makes a lot of grammatical mistakes, but he is great at using effective words to frame his speeches, even answering improptu questions. "Your with us or against us" completely misdirects the questioning. It puts the focus on Bush instead of what he's doing. Its total misdirection, and it is still working brilliantly, even with his low approval rating.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Look at how many people STILL believe that we found WMDs in Iraq, or that Saddam was personally responsible for 9-11. He has been able to pass the Prescription Drug Bill that sold our seniors upriver, and without significant backlash. Can you imagine if Clinton tried to lock the US into the highest possible rates for prescription drugs? Conservatives would have screamed bloody murder. Instead, Bush pushed it through no problem. What about shorting veterans of their benefits? People would be trying to kill Clinton. Instead, with Bush... His MO is to say the exact opposite from what it is. Such as "The Immigration Bill is a great victory for the Rule of Law" or "He's got 'em" I might start a thread of blatantly 100% lies he's told straight out that people bought.

Its no secret that the vast majority of world leaders are articulate, charistmatic people with a gift for rhetorical oratory.

Except that people are expecting a weasely answer from a politician. Bush comes off as straight talking and honest. Meanwhile he is saying the exact opposite of what he is doing. It has worked like a charm. Look at what he's accomplished. Certainly "northern liberal elitists" are pissed off at the guy, but Southerners LOVE that. A Texas drawl doesn't mean that the guys stupid. They are aware of the stereotype their drawl has and they hate it. They love pissing off "northern elitist anti-capitalist liberals" and it endears Bush to them even more. Its a brilliant strategy.

Bush Jr. ran H.W. Bush's campaign. He has a photographic memory and is great at coming off as a straight talker. He makes a lot of grammatical mistakes, but he is great at using effective words to frame his speeches, even answering improptu questions. "Your with us or against us" completely misdirects the questioning. It puts the focus on Bush instead of what he's doing. Its total misdirection, and it is still working brilliantly, even with his low approval rating.

But its very, very arguable that its intentional - that 'buck-passing' episode on Private Military Contractors didn't impress me - and I can hardly see how it could impress or convince anyone, except a truly ignorant person who doesn't want to know anyway.

[Portlander 0]

Like I said in another thread, I'm a big fan of reality, and in reality he is doing his job very well. The level and quality of stuff he is still getting away with is incredible. Clinton would have a rope around his neck already.