He can talk his way out of anything
From Meet the Press, 9/10/06. From Videotape, March 16, 2003:
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
|
VICE PRES. CHENEY: Now, I think things have gotten so bad inside Iraq from the standpoint of the Iraqi people, my belief is, we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators. MR. RUSSERT: If your analysis is not correct, and we’re not treated as liberators, but as conquerors, and the Iraqis begin to resist, particularly in Baghdad, do you think the American people are prepared for a long, costly and bloody battle with a—significant American casualties? VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, I don’t, I don’t think it’s likely to unfold that way, Tim, because I really do believe we will be greeted as liberators. (End of videotape) |
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| MR. RUSSERT: In fact, it did unfold that way. It has been a long, costly and bloody war. VICE PRES. CHENEY: It has. MR. RUSSERT: And… VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, the first part, getting rid of Saddam, was not. But clearly, the insurgency and the aftermath has been. MR. RUSSERT: But again, wasn’t your judgment overly rosy? “Greeted as liberators.” Now we’re not… VICE PRES. CHENEY: You, you gave me a choice, Tim, “Will you be greeted as occupiers or liberators?” and I said we’ll be greeted as liberators. And we were. MR. RUSSERT: But I said what about a long, costly, bloody battle, and you said it’s unlikely to unfold that way. VICE PRES. CHENEY: And that’s true within the context of the battle against the Saddam Hussein regime and his forces. That went very quickly. It was over in a relatively short period of time. What obviously has developed after that, the insurgency, has been long and costly and bloody, no question. … |
I love it! Since when have these sleaze-balls limited themselves to responding to only the choices that a news commentator gives them.
You can 't debate with guys like Cheney et al. They’ll revise history, they’ll revise logic, h*ck, they’ll even revise the English language if they need to.
Cheney has no principles. Impeach Bush and Cheney together.
Nah. Let them finish their term and fade into obscurity. No… that’ll never happen because the Dems will go on crucifying them for ANOTHER eight to ten years easily. If they’re impeached, the same thing will happen so whats the difference?
The Dems will have a chance to redeem the government “perception” soon enough. I’m betting they botch the job though. 
D
I’m betting Charlie Tolker won’t think so…
| Quote (Diogenes @ Sep. 11 2006,07:11) |
| Nah. Let them finish their term and fade into obscurity. No… that’ll never happen because the Dems will go on crucifying them for ANOTHER eight to ten years easily. If they’re impeached, the same thing will happen so whats the difference? The Dems will have a chance to redeem the government “perception” soon enough. I’m betting they botch the job though. D |
How could they possibly do that. The country has already been flushed down the crapper. No, they deserve to be crucified well into the next several centuries. That is unless you hate America. Why do you hate America?
Impeach Bush. Jail Cheney. Deport Rummy, Condi and both Attorney Generals. Sterilize all their offspring. Draft all the Christians and Republicans and send them to the middle-east. Send those that refuse to go to Git-Mo. Tax the churches and the rich out of politics. Give tax cuts to the liberals. Make all republicans too old to fight install tubes from their car exhaust into their homes and see if they still think carbon monoxide is good for you. There, Now I don’t think that sounds too touchy-feely for a progressive. I like guns too! In fact, There are very few conservatives who can whip their way out of a paper sack. Most need the sack watered down.
KF
You miss the point KF. The US needs to get over the political BS, get all that s%$t behind us and get some people in office who actually give a d@&n about you and me. I don’t give two hoots if they are Repubs, Dems or little green men. I (a middle east bound Christian 
) and a LOT of other people I know are sick and tired of the game the sleaze balls are playing from BOTH sides of the fence.
D
PS Hey that sounded kinda harsh I suppose… this is just getting old and I don’t think it would be one iota different if Kerry had won the Prez seat. The Repubs woulda bashed the crap outta him and HE would be under fire for the mess. It’s the same old game no matter which party is “in control”. (Now THERE’S a d#$n oxymoron for you!) 
Politicians eh! The universal constant. No matter what differences are claimed between different peoples and different cultures, we’ve all got the same damm politicians.
HEY!?!?!? There’s a little green man!
Pancho fer President! 
Nah. I would not wish that on anybody… Panch has some common sense. Lord knows we can’t have crap like that in public office!
D
| Quote (Diogenes @ Sep. 11 2006,08:14) |
| You miss the point KF. The US needs to get over the political BS, get all that s%$t behind us and get some people in office who actually give a d@&n about you and me. I don't give two hoots if they are Repubs, Dems or little green men. I (a middle east bound Christian ) and a LOT of other people I know are sick and tired of the game the sleaze balls are playing from BOTH sides of the fence. D PS Hey that sounded kinda harsh I suppose... this is just getting old and I don't think it would be one iota different if Kerry had won the Prez seat. The Repubs woulda bashed the crap outta him and HE would be under fire for the mess. It's the same old game no matter which party is "in control". (Now THERE'S a d#$n oxymoron for you!)
|
Hey...I get what you're saying.....but I think they need to be punished because there are still a lot of people who believe those a-holes walk on water and have the American peoples interests at heart. They do not.
Check this out:
Respect?
BTW.....I just needed to give Jermy a rest.
KF
I think I know where you are coming from KF.
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| there are still a lot of people who believe those a-holes walk on water |
Thanks to our “pop” culture and the advance of what I call “feel good” Christianity… you are probably correct. Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not paranoid… but I don’t really TRUST any man to have my best interests at heart. Supposedly, our system of government is supposed to balance out the “powers” so that extremism cannot rear it’s ugly head. Well when both sides wave the same banner of a different color but it’s still the same banner… poop happens eh? Still, I suppose it’s better than serving under a communist dictator or sumpin’…
D
PS The pics in that link look like a Photoshop job to me…
| Quote (Diogenes @ Sep. 11 2006,09:40) |
| I think I know where you are coming from KF. … but I don’t really TRUST any man to have my best interests at heart. Supposedly, our system of government is supposed to balance out the “powers” so that extremism cannot rear it’s ugly head. Well when both sides wave the same banner of a different color but it’s still the same banner… D |
Not in my mind. Not that all Dem’s are saints but Dem’s and Reps are not the opposite sides of the same coin. Dem’s believe in the rule of law and Reps want to rule the law. Two entirely different species. And then there are those disillusioned folks who choose one of the 3rd party’s or go independent. I’ve heard some say they voted Nader to make a statement that they didn’t like the other choices. Some statement. Right now, today, in the present, there are only 2 party’s that have the ability to put a candidate in the White House. There are 2 choices and the 3rd is just throwing away a good vote. Gore could have done better. Kerry would have done better. McCain of 2000 (not the incarnation we see today) could have done better. You would have done better. My Australian Shepherd surely would have done better (smart dog). Even Mel Gibson could have done better.
I’m in a good mood tonight!
KF
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| Right now, today, in the present, there are only 2 party’s that have the ability to put a candidate in the White House. |
Right, and it’s a crying shame IMO. What do you do if like me the last couple of times, you don’t care for either candidate? I did not vote third party because it’s like you said, throwing a vote away…
Run the dog in '08. Couldn’t hurt.
D
| Quote (Mr Soul @ Sep. 11 2006,12:52) |
| From Meet the Press, 9/10/06. From Videotape, March 16, 2003: VICE PRES. CHENEY: Now, I think things have gotten so bad inside Iraq from the standpoint of the Iraqi people, my belief is, we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators. MR. RUSSERT: If your analysis is not correct, and we’re not treated as liberators, but as conquerors, and the Iraqis begin to resist, particularly in Baghdad, do you think the American people are prepared for a long, costly and bloody battle with a—significant American casualties? VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, I don’t, I don’t think it’s likely to unfold that way, Tim, because I really do believe we will be greeted as liberators. (End of videotape) |
MR. RUSSERT: In fact, it did unfold that way. It has been a long, costly and bloody war.
VICE PRES. CHENEY: It has.
MR. RUSSERT: And...
VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, the first part, getting rid of Saddam, was not.
But clearly, the insurgency and the aftermath has been.
MR. RUSSERT: But again, wasn’t your judgment overly rosy? “Greeted as liberators.” Now we’re not...
VICE PRES. CHENEY: You, you gave me a choice, Tim, “Will you be greeted as occupiers or liberators?” and I said we’ll be greeted as liberators. And we were.
MR. RUSSERT: But I said what about a long, costly, bloody battle, and you said it’s unlikely to unfold that way.
VICE PRES. CHENEY: And that’s true within the context of the battle against the Saddam Hussein regime and his forces. That went very quickly. It was over in a relatively short period of time. What obviously has developed after that, the insurgency, has been long and costly and bloody, no question.
...
I love it! Since when have these sleaze-balls limited themselves to responding to only the choices that a news commentator gives them.
You can 't debate with guys like Cheney et al. They'll revise history, they'll revise logic, h*ck, they'll even revise the English language if they need not.
Russert asked for Cheney's opinion and now you're trying to treat it as if Cheney could somehow predict the future. When people say "I believe," do you always hold their feet to the fire?? What part of history did Cheney revise??
I’m am not in favor of impeaching Bush, just like I wasn’t in favor of impeaching Clinton.
ksdb - you’re too funny (and predicatable)! 
| Quote (Mr Soul @ Sep. 12 2006,12:34) |
| I'm am not in favor of impeaching Bush, just like I wasn't in favor of impeaching Clinton. ksdb - you're too funny (and predicatable)!
|
I suppose it is predictable that I will point out nonsense. The fact that you can laugh at your own lame thread is commendable.
I’m laughing at you ksdb. Any reasonable person can see that Russert cornered Cheney with his own words. I picked only one example of Cheney’s mis-speak - the entire interview has lots of other examples.
Cheney’s playing semantics with language & mis-contruing “facts”. Cheney also continues to spread false information on Iraq & Al-Quada (Bush does that too).
You will never admit that Bush or Cheney have lied or that they are wrong, because you are as right-wing as they come. That’s what is predicatable.
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| I suppose it is predictable that I will point out nonsense. The fact that you can laugh at your own lame thread is commendable. |
What’s predictable is that you will find fault and line by line ridicule what he posts. Of course he does the same to you. I find it quite entertaining. At least I believe Mike really cares to get the facts right. You on the other hand sure don’t and have a nack for twisting things in all sorts of directions.
Cheney: WMD or not, Iraq invasion was correct (full transcript)
The fact is, the war was sold on those facts. Cheney is saying that the war is right even if it was started under false pretenses and incorrect information. It’s OK to do that? Really?
How about this question? Are we safer today than we were Pre-9/11? I say look around. The answer is crystal clear, and almost no one has pointed out the obvious. If we were truly safer then we wouldn’t need all this extra security. I’d still be able to take a bottle of water on a plane. I’d still be able to wear my shoes through the medal detector. We wouldn’t be hearing buildings being evacuated because some one lost a backpack, the janitor didn’t wipe up the cleansing power good enough or some or some lady sprinkled sweet smelling powder in a letter to here lover setting off panic in the mail room.
Are we safer? Gosh no…but then again, maybe we’re just paranoid to the max. That’s how fear works. That’s how terrorism works.
| Quote (Mr Soul @ Sep. 12 2006,13:23) |
| I’m laughing at you ksdb. Any reasonable person can see that Russert cornered Cheney with his own words. I picked only one example of Cheney’s mis-speak - the entire interview has lots of other examples. Cheney’s playing semantics with language & mis-contruing “facts”. Cheney also continues to spread false information on Iraq & Al-Quada (Bush does that too). You will never admit that Bush or Cheney have lied or that they are wrong, because you are as right-wing as they come. That’s what is predicatable. |
Nonsense again. Cheney clearly expressed a personal opinion and you’re completely ignoring it because you’re blinded by partisan hatred. The first time, he clearly said “my belief is,” and the second time he said, “I believe.” Cheney wasn’t making an absolute prediction. Only an absolute idiot, and Tim Russert, would try to turn that into a semantic game of ‘gotcha.’ Further, Cheney admitted twice that the insurgency was bloody and costly. What more do you expect??