Shut up, Dick Cheney

Why does the former vice president hate President Obama more than he hats the terrorists? The bathtub ring of the Bush administration crawled out from underneath his bridge again to make comment on the undiebomber, and revived his prognosis that the world is still coming to an ugly end:

“As I’ve watched the events of the last few days it is clear once again that President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war. He seems to think if he has a low-key response to an attempt to blow up an airliner and kill hundreds of people, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if we bring the mastermind of Sept. 11 to New York, give him a lawyer and trial in civilian court, we won’t be at war.

“He seems to think if he closes Guantanamo and releases the hard-core Al Qaeda-trained terrorists still there, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gets rid of the words, ‘war on terror,’ we won’t be at war. But we are at war and when President Obama pretends we aren’t, it makes us less safe. Why doesn’t he want to admit we’re at war? It doesn’t fit with the view of the world he brought with him to the Oval Office. It doesn’t fit with what seems to be the goal of his presidency — social transformation — the restructuring of American society. President Obama’s first object and his highest responsibility must be to defend us against an enemy that knows we are at war.” (Read more at Politico)

Question: did Cheney volunteer that statement, or did Politico ask? And if it’s the latter, why exactly do Politico and other members of the media keep asking? Funny that they never ask other former vice presidents or say, George W. Bush …

Politico was kind enough to report that it took the then-Bush Cheney administration six days to respond to a similar attempted airline bombing by “shoe bomber Richard Reid.” And when asked about it at the time, the then-defense secretary sounded a note that if said today, would surely be attacked by Dick:

The day before, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had refused substantive comment, saying: “That’s a matter that’s in the hands of the law enforcement people.”

Doh! Meanwhile, the White House continues to demonstrate its most annoying attribute: answering gratuitous, nakedly political criticism by right wingers by apparently taking the wingnuts seriously:

Democratic officials maintain that Obama is, in fact, comfortable with the notion that the U.S. is at war with terrorists. Near the start of his inaugural address, he said: “Our nation is at war against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred.”

And John O. Brennan, assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism, declared in an August speech to the Center for Strategic and International Studies: “[A]s the president has made clear, we are at war with Al Qaeda, which attacked us on Sept. 11 and killed 3,000 people. We are at war with its violent extremist allies who seek to carry on Al Qaeda’s murderous agenda. These are the terrorists we will destroy; these are the extremists we will defeat.”

The senior Democrat said: “There are numerous other such public statements that explicitly state we are at war. The difference from the last administration is that we are at war with that which is tangible — Al Qaeda, violent extremists, and terrorists — rather than at war with a tactic, ‘terrorism’.”

(sigh.) And by the way, why not say this on the record?

A senior Democrat said in response: “It’s telling that in attacking the president and the administration, that Vice President Cheney did not condemn the attack against our nation on Christmas Day.”

Because THAT’s a statement I can believe in.

The rank hypocrisy of Republicans attacking the current administration is molasses thick, since to a man, they failed to mount similar criticisms against the failed state that was the Bush administration over the Richard Reid incident. Meanwhile, can it possibly be long before the junior troll weighs in, too? I’m sure Politico is on the horn trying to raise her even as we speak …

This entry was posted in News and Current Affairs, Politics and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Shut up, Dick Cheney

  1. Pingback: Mr. Stenographer : The Reid Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>