Cheney's at it again at the Heritage Foundation--
I'm watching VP Dick Cheney speak as I type these words.
Twist, twist, twist..
Fib, fib, fib....
In his speech this morning to the Heritage Foundation shamelessly promoting funds for the Iraq war,
Cheney told them...
"Remember what we saw on the morning of 9-11...."
*he never mentions PanAm 103*
Cheney goes on to say there was a tendency to consider past acts of terror as individual criminal acts..he speaks of Ramzi Yousef....his criminal punishment...how some thought "case closed" once he was convicted.
(**Actually, Yousef won't be back..unless he outlives his 240-year sentence**)
Cheney says the threat was not recognized for what it was..a sustained campaign...
Cheney says for us, the war started 9-11....for them(**whoever them is**), it's been going on a long time.
Cheney says it continues today..
Riyadh(**where actual arrests have ben made and civilized justice is being done today**), Najaf(August 2003), Baghdad(**current*)....
***(notice how he pulls in POSTWAR Iraq...how many "terrorist" attacks do you recall in Iraq before the war began????!)****
Cheney is tying a long line of hatred for America by myriad nations, groups, individuals...
and claiming the culmination of it all was IRAQ.
I'm sorry, that is pure, unadulterated bullshit.
Cheney considers lobotomizing all Americans in case his lies don't go over terribly well....
He cites the Bush docritine..any government harboring terrorists will be held to account.
In that case, we are harboring them in Iraq today since we are the occupying force.
Let's hold US to account!
It's funny, by the way, these "terrorists" weren't there before the pre-emptive strike.
Hussein, as nasty as he was, would not have stood for this..he would have put these terrorists in
torture chambers...perhaps he would have gassed them!
That is the great conundrum, and the source of the Bush Administration lies.
Our war has CAUSED terrorist problems that were never there beforehand.
Cheney says Saddam Hussein had an established relationship to AlQeada--and this has NEVER been proven.
Let's ask Assistant Under Secretary Douglas Feith to show us the proof...he is the one at the helm of the top-secret department who went
terror-connection-shopping..cherry picking...to find enough slim rumor to create enough magnfied innuendo to scare the American people into believing a war was necessary at any cost.
Doug knows.....so why can't he prove it to us?
Now Cheney's defending David Kay's report which turned up with no WMD threat which would have constituted an imminent threat to any American before this pre-emptive war.
Bottom line, Cheney has nothing new.
Only old lies, boldly told, with a captive (fully supportive) audience applauding like zombies.
I'd love, just once, for Cheney and Bush to stand before a group of REAL Americans and speak....
with no one in the audience being held behind police barriers lest they should boo so loudly that the T audience might see how the Media presents pretty lies to them day in / day out.
Cheney mentions that GW Bush says our enemies are waiting to attack us with the most dangerous weapons possible.
In that case, we'd best forget the GRAVE error made in Iraq and move 'em out to North Korea pronto...lest Cheney is to be too clearly seen for the hypocrite he is.
Cheney says we fight in Iraq now so we don't have to fight in our own cities someday.
Iraq would fight us? With what? Old metal shit a redneck Iraqi scientist once buried under the rose bush?
I guess Cheney thinks it's important that we used Iraq as a stomping ground...
..but really--how moral does that sound to you?
The people of Iraq don't deserve the terror of war, either.
Bottom line....Iraq was NOT an imminent threat.
Bottom line...The Bush administration is liable for a great sin.
Whatever was happening in Iraq, it was NEVER sufficient reason to go into that nation without international support.
Americans were lied to and will now pay ever so dearly for the great caper..the great blunder.
THE OTHER SPEECH...THE OTHER "HOT ONE"....
Don't miss Buzzflash's Claims vs. Facts regarding Bush's New Hampshire Speech to Air National Guard Reservists
Friday, October 10, 2003
I was surprised to see Howard Dean confronting General Clark in last night's debate in Arizona.
This is the reference Howard Dean made tonight when challenging Gen Clark on his Iraq stance:
I imagine Gov Dean needs to separate himself from Gen Clark as the more consistent "outsider".
If I hear Dick Gephardt attack Howard Dean on Medicare one more useless time, I think I'll puke.
Gov Dean has clarified the issue so many times..to our complete satisfaction.
Rep Gep's looking ridiculous by dragging this out.
Dick Gephardt's line about the nation of Togo sending ONE soldier to represent them in the Iraq "coalition of the willing" was priceless sarcasm.
John Kerry had the line of the night with his deadpan Rush Limbaugh prescription drug reference.
Dennis Kucinich had the most wonderful idea..a Department of Peace. I can't imagine why we have not yet had a leader with the vision to incorporate the central idea of peace into everyday governing.
John Kerry's campaign seems to have great influence over Judy Woodruff.
She interrupted what was meant to be a "town-hall" style 'Q and A' session in order to facilitate a Kerry campaign attack on Howard Dean. This seemed terribly inappropriate to me.
She asked..out of the blue...:
(From Transcript:) WOODRUFF: Governor Dean, before you sit down, I've just been handed a document. I think it came out of the press room that Senator Kerry's staff has been distributing some comments about what was said. Among other things they are saying that you, Governor Dean, tried to kick Vermont seniors off their prescription drug plan. That's relevant to what you were just saying here, so do you want to respond to that?"
The strangest thing was this: While Dean stood to answer his TownHall question, Kerry could be seen behind Dean and Kerry's lips were definitely moving. It was as if Kerry was feeding information to someone...but who? And why?
In *Slate, William Saletan dubiously voted for Kerry as follows:
Least credible alibi:
"Kerry, after Woodruff read aloud a criticism of Dean that "Senator Kerry's staff has been distributing" in the debate press room. "I didn't raise this, and I didn't know they were saying that."
Speaking of Judy Woodruff, she was terrible annoying to both the viewers and (obviously) the politicians
as she interrupted them constantly. I did not care for this tactic, for this was supposed to be a debate and not an interview.
There seemed to be too much CNN pandering to individual campaigns.
Overall, I give CNN a "D" on their performance.
Time given each candidate was not well-meted and the usual blowhards took advantage.
You know who they are. ;)
I was completely underwhelmed by Joe Lieberman's vow to fight Hollywood. Thinking about the recent chokehold on our civil liberties these past two years with the Patriot Act, the last thing I want to hear is a promise for more censorship in this nation.
*You can see William Saletan's analysis at Slate.
Here's a sampling:
1. Clark's credibility problem:
Wes Clark always looks sincere
2. Stop-Dean Gridlock:
If you're going to gang up on a candidate, get your story straight.
The more Howard Dean gets attacked from the left (by Dick Gephardt on Medicare and Social Security, and by Dennis Kucinich on the Iraq occupation) and from the right (by John Kerry and Joe Lieberman on trade and middle-class tax cuts), the more the attacks blur into a din of contradictory complaints, suggesting that Dean must be somewhere in the comfortable center. Every jab from Kucinich lets Dean show he's no Kucinich. Every jab from Lieberman lets Dean show he's no Lieberman. Dean summed up the effect when, after taking a shot from Gephardt, he said with a smile, "The folks that are running against me have had the greatest time. First they said I was George McGovern and couldn't win, and now they're saying I'm Newt Gingrich and I couldn't win."
Listen to what Dean said in this debate, and you'll get the real story:
Here are the differences between me and the [candidates] from Washington. First, our campaign is changing the political system in this country. Last time, last quarter, we raised more money than any other candidate by three times—200,000 donors, average gift $72. Secondly, I have a record. Everybody is going to talk about health insurance. Every kid under 18 in my state has health insurance. A third of all the seniors have prescription benefits. Working poor people have health insurance. And the third area is the war. ... If you want real change in this country, then I'd like your support.
That's one issue (the war), plus executive experience (legislators can't get their way as a governor can), plus raising money from medium-sized donors. The legitimate rap on Dean isn't that he's too far to the left or right, but that he's parlayed largely procedural differences into an image as the lone candidate who will bring "real change."
An unlikely new source of writing talent: Blogs
By Maureen Ryan
Tribune staff reporter
"....."The media is starting to pay attention to blogs."
Jeff Jarvis, co-founder of Entertainment Weekly
By Jodi Wilgoren
Published: October 9, 2003
"...they all come from Washington, which I think, this year, is going to be a problem for them."
Gov Dean speaking of some of his Democratic rivals