This blog,originally founded by Blogger, who is listed in Marquis Who's Who and is a recipient of the Albert Nelson Marquis Lifetime Achievement Award. He holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Tuesday, December 1, 2009

Dick Cheney Speaks Out

“Here’s a guy without much experience, who campaigned against much of what we put in place ... and who now travels around the world apologizing,” Cheney said. “I think our adversaries — especially when that’s preceded by a deep bow ... — see that as a sign of weakness.”


59 comments:

Sarkazein said...

I am glad Al Gore made it obligatory for a former VP to bad mouth the current administration. I like VP Cheney's more civilized and informative manner in doing so.

Honest Debate said...

Yea Sark, at least Cheney isn't foaming at the mouth screaming to the top of his lungs "He betrayed this country".

Liberal POV said...

Hate Mongers


Cheney's your poster child.

Simon Jester said...

Cheney's your poster child. - POV

So, you think that is a bad thing?

Sarkazein said...

POV-

You need to create a typed symbol showing hands on hips and tongue sticking out, to hi-lite your comments.

Sarkazein said...

I am going by memory here, but General McChrystal asked for 40,000 troops minimum with 80,000 being the actual request. If Obowma adds 36,000 and tries to make it look like he (finally) took a stance, then one of the cameramen should shout out "You Lie!" during the address.

Anonymous said...

During my reading of the full article cited here, I had to chuckle over Cheney's damnation of informed review and careful analysis. Obviously, he's still of a mind that one should bomb first and confirm WMDs later.

Forget about hunting down and bringing to justice the man named as the party responsible for the tragedy that led to our troops being deployed in the region in the first place. Objective non-revisionists will recall that it was primarily Cheney who convinced W to all but abandon that mission, creating all sorts of confusion, dispair and depression amongst our fighting men.

Now THAT sends a true message of confidence and support to our boys, right? Mind you, these are the same troops who, beginning during Cheney's reign, have been committing suicide at a rate higher than at any time in our country's history.

Just one more example of fundamentalist extremists refusing to recognize what the rest of voting Americans already spoke out about last November.

Honest Debate said...

Nonny,

I find it odd that you are so sure Bin Laden escaped Tora Bora and is still alive while at the same time claiming WMD was not smuggled out of Iraq and never existed.

War was the last option in Iraq. There was no "bomb first". There was WMD Hussein admitted so in 1996. He used them in 1988. We removed 500 tons of yellow cake uranium. He was shooting at our jets patrolling the no fly zone. He attempted to assassinate Bush 41. He stole the oil for food proceeds to build palaces instead of feeding his people. Rape, gouging out eyes, ripping out tongues, dismemberment and murder were the norm. Bush went through all of that and WMD was only part of the rational. Regime change was the official US position on Iraq since 1998 (Clinton). Then 9/11. You are ignoring history or lying. Only a fool would let that situation stand. Gore would have gone to Iraq if elected.

The revenge thing is stupid and futile. We must change the world or die. If Bin Laden somehow survived, so what? If we killed him, so what?

Wake up!

P.S. Tell me more about that White House meeting you attended where you learned it was all Cheney's idea.

Honest Debate said...

Lib,

I have the same question as Simon Jester.

IMHO Dick Cheney is a great statesman, leader, politician, patriot and man. I just wish he had a little more pull with Bush. Scooter Libby should have been pardoned.

Sarkazein said...

H.D-
To add , UN and other officials taking bribes instead of enforcing UN sanctions on Iraq.

Honest Debate said...

That's right Sark. Weren't France and Russia on the take too?

There was a lot I left out. The lead up to the war was excruciatingly slow and deliberate.

Liberal POV said...

Fear Media Groupies

Even with the hind site of history you folks keep sticking to the same lies.

The war was planned during the Clinton Adm by the NEOCONs and Cheney was CEO of Haliburton.

The plan was for Haliburtion to have the concession for the entire war with oil companies having access to the oil fields.

Cheney and Scooter commited treason outing the CIA agent for petty politics.

Cheney should be tried for war crimes.

guy faulkes said...

POV and Anonymous, please explain how Sadam had no weapons of mass destruction when he killed thousands of his own people using them.

Also, what is your explanation of the claims made by Clinton, Kerry, Feinstein, Boxer, and other prominent liberals that such weapons of mass destruction existed and needed to be neutralized.

How many times are you going to ignore these inconvenient truths? Your same old talking points are rather boring.

Anonymous said...

Great video link on this subject:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYI7JXGqd0o

Don't bother watching beyond 4:50. It's just a montage of people yelling "you lied"-types of crap at various Bush administration members.

guy faulkes said...

Once again, there is no doubt Sadam had WMD. He used them on his own people. End of story.

Sarkazein said...

A'mous-

Yours is a BS link, edited to prove a false point.

Sarkazein said...

Sadaam himself told people he was working on a nuclear program. His bad.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"Once again, there is no doubt Sadam had WMD. He used them on his own people. End of story."

Anonymous and I are not here to convince you Sadam was a decent human being, far from it he was a criminal but not worth starting a war to remove. Estimates are over one million Iraqis have died as a result of the Bush Cheney decision to start the war in Iraq.

What was the date of Sadam using those WMDs on his own people? What was the date of the photo of Rumsfelt shaking hands with Sadam? Who was president when Sadam used the WMD's on his own people? Why was nothing said at the time by the Admin in power?
Who sold Sadam the WMD he once had?

Why was the last Ambassador to Iraq Joe Wilson ignored in the lead up to the war?

Dick Cheney has now taken Sadam's place on the world stage of villains along with Bin Ladin.

Sarkazein said...

"Dick Cheney has now taken Sadam's place on the world stage of villains along with Bin Ladin."-POV


Only in the sick twisted mind of an ignorant boob.

Anonymous said...

Yeah.....That's even a bit much for me.

BikerBard said...

President Obama is speaking at this very minute.

Let's see who can talk trash and bad mouth him first.

Ready...set...GO!

Honest Debate said...

Lib,

There are legitimate reasons for criticizing Bush and the war in Iraq. It's impossible to debate them with you because you are either stupid, dishonest or care about ideology more than the truth. I think it is mostly the latter.

We've been through this before.

I think it was Bridle and you (anyone else want to try?) that were unable to spell out for me just how money got from Halliburton to Cheney, how Cheney broke Federal law by having ties to Halliburton after his tenure as CEO ended, why he would help them anyway after his very rocky exit (he was not well liked because of his merger with Dresser Industries). There wasn't a no-bid contract. There was open bidding for the entire package of jobs, winner takes all. That's the way it's been done for decades. The whole Halliburton thing is a talking point blindly repeated by sycophants without any logical explanation.

"Cheney and Scooter commited treason outing the CIA agent for petty politics."

You know better. Why do you spew such BS? Richard Armitage outed Plame but broke no laws or he would be in jail. He wasn't even indicted! Fitzgerald spent millions and millions of our dollars.

Who do you think you are convincing? Hate Cheney, fine but be honest and don't keep repeating the same old BS that you have yet to back up.

You know lib you might get some agreement from time to time if you would just debate honestly. You've lost all credibility and most of us just ignore most of what you say anymore.

Honest Debate said...

BB,

I will, I will!

I thought it sounded good for the most part but I couldn't get past the idea that he trashed the surge in Iraq, said it would not work and voted against it. Now he's all for a surge, I didn't think he was sincere when he praised the military and America when he clearly dislikes both.

He took to long to make the decision.

I didn't hear the word "victory" but I may have missed it.

He emphasizes how crucial it is and then says we will leave in 18 months. Is it crucial or not?

I just don't think he has the will to follow through, especially after the casualties mount. We won't hear about that though. The running war death count has disappeared.

Anonymous said...

HD: You just did the thing you accused POV of.

"He clearly dislikes" America?

C'mon. You're more intelligent than that. You have the tools to properly make your point without resorting to that.

At least state "in my opinion" instead of claiming that it's "clear" that Obama dislikes America. That kind of rhetoric degrades any valid points you may raise.

Sarkazein said...

I can't watch or listen to him, so I will have to wait to hear Blogger's, Honest Debate's, and Rush's comments on what he said. My next door neighbor is an actual communist, (we go to the shooting range together) and I will hear her opinion of his speech from the other side.

Sarkazein said...

It could not be any clearer he dislikes America.
You don't belong to a church that preaches a dislike for America and you don't hang with terrorists that tried to blow-up it's monuments unless you dislike America. You don't marry a woman that has never been proud of America unless you dislike America.
You don't campaign on the platform that says you want to totally change something you like.

Sarkazein said...

"Forget about hunting down and bringing to justice the man named as the party responsible for the tragedy that led to our troops being deployed in the region in the first place."-A'mous

The "Master-mind" of 9/11 was captured and in custody. You want him lawyered up and draped in the US Constitution. What would you do with his inspirational leader, if he was in custody, give him a Chairmanship of a House commitee.

Sarkazein said...

cont'd from 10:41pm comment: And you don't apologize for America all over the world unless you dislike America, you don't bow your head in shame to monarchs of other countries unless you dislike America. What more do you need to know? Does he need to be wearing an "I Don't (heart) America T-shirt for you to catch on?

Honest Debate said...

Nonny,

I edited my post. I had "hates" and changed it to "dislikes". With his constant apologizing, his wife's statement about being proud of America for the first time in her life, his tacit agreement (by supporting with money and 20 years of participation) with Rev. Wright ("God Damn America", even Oprah quit the church) and his evident lack of belief in American exceptionalism it seems pretty clear.

Part of what I do here involves a bit of purposeful rhetorical provocation. Guilty as charged.

You do have a point though, so I'll put it this way: In my opinion it's clear that Obama hates (now that it's my opinion) America and the military. Further, I don't understand how any thinking person could disagree.

Honest Debate said...

Wow Sark, if I'd known you were going to echo my exact thoughts so closely I'd have just skipped my last post. We are definitely on the same page.

Anonymous said...

Wow, guys. That whole "honest debate" moniker just sounds funnier and funnier.

Carry on with your circle jerk.

Honest Debate said...

Nonny you wrote: "C'mon. You're more intelligent than that. You have the tools to properly make your point without resorting to that."

I could say the same thing about you and your reference to ball sucking homosexuals ("teabaggers"). At least I wasn't crude and I had a valid point.

Honest Debate said...

"Carry on with your circle jerk." -Nonny

Ditto last post.

Honest Debate said...

"That whole 'honest debate' moniker just sounds funnier and funnier." -Nonny

I don't know what I've said that wasn't honest but at least I have a moniker that I believe holds me accountable and fits my passion. You should pick one too. Something that fits your passion. I suggest "Shyster".

guy faulkes said...

As BB has brought Obama's speech into this thread, I will post now instead of waiting for a thread on the speech.

Obama just surrendered in Afghanistan when he proclaimed a withdrawal date. In doing so, he has provided targets for the terrorists by leaving our troops in country and sending in an additional reduced number from the minimum needed in the opinion of the commander on the ground,so no victory is possible. Any fool would realize all the terrorists now have to do is to hit targets of opportunity and wait for us to leave at Obama's chosen date of surrender. There is no telling how many of our brave service personnel Obama has killed for no good reason as we cannot now defeat the terrorists. The surge in Iraq worked because we did not give a withdrawal date. As we were prepared to stay the course, we won. Unfortunately now that we have been defeated in Afghanistan due to the weak man child Messiah, we should leave at once to begin preparing for the coming terrorist acts in this country.

I was never a fan of the big government loving Bush and thought he did not pursue the war on terror nearly aggressively enough. However, when compared to Obama on all fronts, Bush looks like the greatest President of all time. The problem occurs when you compare him to any other President except Carter, possibly his father, and possibly Clinton.

POV, you poor party line dolt, if Saddam had WMD at one point, he had them tactically at all points. It would be impossible to tactically believe otherwise.

As both are certainly of a like mind when it comes to being crude, maybe Nonymouse and BB can get together and date.

Liberal POV said...

Guy


What was the date of Sadam using those WMDs on his own people? What was the date of the photo of Rumsfelt shaking hands with Sadam? Who was president when Sadam used the WMD's on his own people? Why was nothing said at the time by the Admin in power?
Who sold Sadam the WMD he once had?

Why was the last Ambassador to Iraq Joe Wilson ignored in the lead up to the war?

Sarkazein said...

POV- you blithering idiot, Saddaam gassed the Kurds (his own people) in 1988 with WMDs. The picture of Rumsfeld as from 1982 or 3 during the Reagan administration.

Sarkazein said...

I should add... hopeless blithering idiot.

Sarkazein said...

Oh, and I should add: and if you'll notice, Rumsfeld is not BOWING to Saddaam in the photo.

Honest Debate said...

Lib you asked: "Why was the last Ambassador to Iraq Joe Wilson ignored in the lead up to the war?"

Because Joe Wilson lied as the Senate Intelligence report said.

Here, read this.

Sarkazein said...

And, Joe Wilson was the ambassador up to the start of Gulf War 1, under George HW Bush, not President George W Bush as POV's lack of historical knowledge is voluntarily displayed for all to witness.

Liberal POV said...

Sark

Joe Wilson was still the last Ambassador to Iraq and was appointed by Republican George H. Bush.
Why was he ignored in the lead up to the war?

The plan was to go to war diplomacy was never an option for the NEOCONs and Bush.

Why did the Bush Cheney waste the good will of the world to start the war in Iraq?

Afghanistan is now a much bigger problem than it was in 2002 after 911.

Chicken Hawk Dick Cheney has been AlQeada best tool for recruitment and morale.

Liberal POV said...

Sark

Joe Wilson was still the last Ambassador to Iraq and was appointed by Republican George H. Bush.
Why was he ignored in the lead up to the war?

The plan was to go to war diplomacy was never an option for the NEOCONs and Bush.

Why did the Bush Cheney waste the good will of the world to start the war in Iraq?

Afghanistan is now a much bigger problem than it was in 2002 after 911.

Chicken Hawk Dick Cheney has been AlQeada best tool for recruitment and morale.

Sarkazein said...

Hold on to your misconceptions POV it's all you've got.

guy faulkes said...

What, pray tell, does Rumsfelt or Wilson have to do with Obama's shameful surrender to the terrorists? Obama has just turned the sacrifices that have already been made by our brave troops fighting in Afghanistan in the war on terror to wasted lives and efforts. Due to his traitorous act, many more lives, both there and here will probably be wasted. I am ashamed of him and fear for the Republic.

May I suggest we move this discussion to the proper thread?

BikerBard said...

HD: You win! Just like when I worked at the returns dept of a store and timed when the first idiot ran up 2 flights to get his money back. Sorry - you can't return our election. But it seems it took 1 hour & 24 minutes. Bad time. No refund for you.

guy faulkes said...

Sure we can return the election. Its called impeachment and removal from office. This is becoming more likely every day. All we have to do is wait until after 2010 in order to get some badly needed investigations started.

Sarkazein said...

Guy Faulkes-

AG Holder going out of his way to rule that ACORN can get Federal money even though a majority of the people's representatives say NO, can only mean they are hiding something big time (Obowma and Holder) and they need to get the hush money (our money) back flowing to the criminal enterprise ACORN.

Honest Debate said...

Nonny,

I've got my snark gun holstered, put yours down for a minute.

I've been thinking about your admonition: "At least state 'in my opinion' instead of claiming that it's 'clear' that Obama dislikes America."

If one says "it's clear" it is by default an opinion unless you are literally talking about a piece of glass. The word is subjective isn't it? There is no set of criteria that makes an idea "clear". To say "in my opinion it's clear" is redundant.

So there's that but I am interested to know if you think it's clear that Obama dislikes the military. Sark and I gave strong evidence of his dislike of America but we're biased. Despite the evidence it's possible that it's not clear to you.

Chris Matthews described Westpoint as an "enemy camp" for Obama. I'm not sure if he meant Obama was West Point's enemy or the other way around. It does suggest a avowed liberal who voted for Obama thinks that Obama dislikes the military.

It's "clear" to Matthews. Is it clear to you? Seriously.

Sarkazein said...

With Chris Matthews, West Point seemed like enemy territory because the Cadets didn't appear all giddy and star-struck in the audience of the messiah.
Chris's legs get all tingly as he swoons in the presence
of Obowma and at just the sound of his voice. So anyone not re-acting in this manner must be the enemy.

Liberal POV said...

Hate Blinded Conservatives

I watched the speech on CNN and saw Cadets moved and inspired by the president's speech.
I saw a rush forward after the speech to shake hands and photograph the president.

The hate media's Cameras may be giving a skewed view of reality as they usually do.

Honest Debate said...

Lib,

Did you click the link, "Cadets' reaction"?

Sarkazein said...

POV, Chris Matthews disagrees with you.

guy faulkes said...

HD, I must disagree with you. Claiming Obama disliked the military with no proof shows bias. Making this claim and providing proof does not.

guy faulkes said...

I misspoke. I was also thinking of a post from another blog. It should have been America, not the military,

Honest Debate said...

Guy,

I'm not sure I understand. I admit bias and wrote: "Sark and I gave strong evidence of his dislike of America but we're biased." It' isn't proof but there is "strong evidence". My point to Shys...er...Nonny was that it's impossible to prove what is in someones heart. One can only judge by the actions and words of the accused.

I do understand that accusing Obama of disliking the military and America is a serious charge. I don't make it lightly.

guy faulkes said...

HD, it seems we are having a problem with the context of our wording. To me strong evidence is the same thing as proof.

I think it is irrefutable from the evidence or proofs that have been exposed on this blog and others, in many separate threads, to arrive at the judgment that Obama does dislike this country and its military. Quotes from his own mouth, his associates, his choice of the church he attended, and his actions make this conclusion undeniable to any rational person. This is much stronger than mere circumstantial evidence. I think it is indeed proof of what is in Obama's heart.

You may have a bias toward Obama as do I. However basing your opinions and comments on facts that may run counter to your bias is not being biased. In my opinion both you and Sark have regularly done this. An example is the approval you both gave of Obama's order to take down the pirates. I believe one of you did join me in tempering this approval by thinking he should have done it quicker. If it is not biased to use evidence or proofs to agree with someone you do not like, i is not biased to use the same kind of evidence or proofs to criticize him.

Not liking someone may be an indication of bias. Reasoned response to his actions after deliberation of facts is not. If not, then the majority of comments on anyone or any topic would be either favorable or biased.

guy faulkes said...

HD< I am not certain I made myself clear. My point is that being biased and acting in a biased manner are many times two different things, at least on this blog.

Honest Debate said...

Thanks Guy, I concur. I call it "honest debate".