Quote of the day
posted at 10:00 pm on December 15, 2008 by Allahpundit
“RUSH: Talk about the incoming administration for just a second in one regard. One of the unfair, to me — maybe I’m wrong about this — one of the unfair criticisms is that you and the President have spent an inordinate amount of time beefing up, in a separation-of-powers sense, the power of the executive branch. You have strengthened it based on some weakening that you’ve felt that it had experienced in previous administrations. Now, do you think the incoming administration will benefit from the strengthening you have engaged in with the executive branch? Do you expect them to cede some of their power back to the legislative branch?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, my guess is once they get here and they’re faced with the same problems we deal with every day, that they will appreciate some of the things we’ve put in place. We did not exceed our constitutional authority as some have suggested, but we — the President believes, I believe — very deeply in a strong executive, and I think that’s essential in this day and age, and I think the Obama administration is not likely to cede that authority back to the Congress. I think they’ll find that, given the challenge they face, they’ll need all the authority they can muster.”










Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
“they will appreciate some of the things we’ve put in place”
HEH!
/y’know the only guy who deserves to enjoy retirement more than W? — Cheney!
Buckaroo on December 15, 2008 at 10:02 PM
Obarfy is smart enough to read the tea-leaves, and those leaves are currently spelling out “Blagyovich, Jefferson and Rangle.”
2010 isn’t looking good for the DFL, and considering Odummy hasn’t served a day in office yet is already surrounded by controversy, two years from now could see Congress heading back right.
Bishop on December 15, 2008 at 10:04 PM
Ayup.
Bob's Kid on December 15, 2008 at 10:09 PM
Cheney should have been president. At the very least, Muslims would be hunkering in their tents, praying 5 times a day that the U.S. would leave them alone.
notagool on December 15, 2008 at 10:10 PM
Yeah VP Cheney I think you are starting from the wrong point of reference….bambi LOVES what you’ve done with the place and just wants the car keys ok…tahnks dad I’ll be home whenever don’t wait up….
sven10077 on December 15, 2008 at 10:11 PM
Thank you Mr. Vice President, may God Bless and keep you, your family, along with President George W. Bush………..
Thank you VERY MUCH!!!
Seven Percent Solution on December 15, 2008 at 10:12 PM
“notagool on December 15, 2008 at 10:10 PM”
recall cheney didn’t really want the veep job — he had to “move” to WY on deadline day to make it constitutional — it showed the death in the gop ranks for federal office that [sadly] is stil with us — anywho, he did a very fine job as no. 2 and he too wil be vindicated by the history books …
Buckaroo on December 15, 2008 at 10:13 PM
Obama will listen to polite ear to all the historians, poli-sci experts as congressmen as they tell him he needs to reduce executive power, then he shows them door with a smile and goes “Trust Me”.
rob verdi on December 15, 2008 at 10:14 PM
“DEARTH”
/sheesh
Buckaroo on December 15, 2008 at 10:14 PM
I was listening live, and even though I was never a huge fan of either one, they got the job done (especially post 9/11)
Ugly on December 15, 2008 at 10:15 PM
I think Messirs Bush and Cheney have served us well and I thank them profusely.
HawaiiLwyr on December 15, 2008 at 10:17 PM
Dick Cheney was the main reason I supported George Bush. I always felt good that, no matter what, Cheney was there. It was a shame to see his influence wane in Bush’s second term, which explains a lot of why that second term was such a disaster.
I will greatly miss Cheney.
progressoverpeace on December 15, 2008 at 10:18 PM
I can’t imagine the sheer level of awesomeness had this man been President instead of W. Bush was mocked. Cheney would have been feared.
jimmy the notable on December 15, 2008 at 10:19 PM
Didn’t you hear jimmy? Cheney was behind everything all along! /lefty kook
BKennedy on December 15, 2008 at 10:23 PM
Love Cheney, that man can take a lickin and come back ticking twice as hard.
I’ll never forget how he made Edwards look like a spanked pup!
christene on December 15, 2008 at 10:26 PM
Hope he goes duck hunting in Pakistan upon retirement.
There’s a quack named Osama who needs a kisserful of shot.
profitsbeard on December 15, 2008 at 10:29 PM
I think I’m going to miss you most of all, Scarecrow.
Marcus on December 15, 2008 at 10:31 PM
I’ll miss him.
Gothguy on December 15, 2008 at 10:33 PM
We hear praise of a power-wielding, arm-twisting President who “gets his program through Congress” by knowing the use of power. Throughout the course of history, there have been many other such wielders of power. There have even been dictators who regularly held plebiscites, in which their dictatorships were approved by an Ivory-soap-like percentage of the electorate. But their countries were not free, nor can any country remain free under such despotic power. Some of the current worship of powerful executives may come from those who admire strength and accomplishment of any sort. Others hail the display of Presidential strength simply because they approve of the result reached by the use of power. This is nothing less than the totalitarian philosophy that the end justifies the means If ever there was a philosophy of government totally at war with that of the Founding Fathers, it is this one.
- Barry Goldwater
MB4 on December 15, 2008 at 10:33 PM
I think you mean “instead of W. Bush, who was mocked.”
But yes, you’re right, and the Iranian mullahs would would no doubt be hiding in caves with OBL instead of presiding over the imminent birth of a nuclear weapon.
MrLynn on December 15, 2008 at 10:37 PM
+1
sven10077 on December 15, 2008 at 10:37 PM
A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away.
- Barry Goldwater
Hubert Humphrey talks so fast that listening to him is like trying to look at Playboy magazine with your wife turning the pages.
- Barry Goldwater
I think any man in business would be foolish to fool around with his secretary. If it’s somebody else’s secretary, fine.
- Barry Goldwater
I could have ended the war in a month. I could have made North Vietnam look like a mud puddle.
- Barry Goldwater
You don’t have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight.
- Barry Goldwater
It’s a great country, where anybody can grow up to be president …… except me.
- Barry Goldwater
MB4 on December 15, 2008 at 10:38 PM
Who fears a foul-mouthed, cranky old man whose heart attacks (4) are only exceeded by his draft deferments (5)?
benny shakar on December 15, 2008 at 10:42 PM
What about the lefties and the paranoid troofers? Once the evil Cheney/Bush regime is gone, who will be responsible for the chemtrails? What will they do when Haliburton gets a government contract while Obama’s in office? It’s a small consolation, but a consolation still, to see what happens to the left when there’s no more boogeyman to blame for everything. Given the free ride Obama’s gotten for his pivots (they’re not flip flops if you’re the Messiah), He could bomb Iran, expand Gitmo times ten, and light a joint with the successor to Kyoto and the libs will marvel at his wisdom.
The left didn’t disagree with Bush and Cheney, they hated them. Bush and Cheney could have espoused the platform of the Democratic Party plank by plank and the loony lefties would have screeched just as loudly. They started with the proposition that Bush and co were evil, then looked for whatever facts fit the position and ignored the rest. They’ll do the opposite for Obama: he’s the Savior and whatever he does is right, even if we wanted Cheney and GWB arrested for doing the same thing.
trubble on December 15, 2008 at 10:44 PM
Benny, Benny, Benny, I told you that you would again lose your bubbly and pleasant personality if you missed too many of your electroshock treatments.
Sigmund on December 15, 2008 at 10:46 PM
We’re all mad here. I’m mad. You’re mad.
Cheshire Cat on December 15, 2008 at 10:49 PM
Hey Benny … want to go chukar (partridge) hunting next
weekend? We’re one man short for the next hunt, love to have you accompany us for the day.
ORrighty on December 15, 2008 at 10:51 PM
Dick Cheney,thank-Gawd has standed his ground,
through out his eight years,forget the term,
‘Buns of Steel’,Dick Cheney has ‘Balls of Steel’!
Wait till the ‘civil-war’erupts with Reid and Pelosi
who think,their going to outgame Hopey and ‘Use the
Suit’,crap,I should trade mark that!
Anywho,wait till Hopeys Utopia smacks right into
Pelosi’s vision of her Utopia!!!
And again,release the political lions!!
And fire up the popcorn,and put your Bourbon
on ice,and fasten your seatbelts,and disable
your crash bags,its gonna be a bumpy ride!
canopfor on December 15, 2008 at 10:55 PM
A foul-mouthed, cranky old man with nothing to lose, nukes and the world’s most powerful military? Yeah, nothing for enemies to fear there.
Seriously- do you think at all before typing?
Hollowpoint on December 15, 2008 at 10:59 PM
LOL..ever hear of a guy who goes by the name(this year) Barack Hussein Obama? Your gonna just love that thug.
christene on December 15, 2008 at 10:59 PM
Hopey comments on Dick Cheney!
Ah..um..how..can..I..ah..say this..ah..,well,ah..Dick
Cheney is ah Tuff ole bird,shoot..ah..thats..um..not
what..I..um,wanted..to say..um..ah..,crap,wait till,
ah..Dick..catches..um..ah..up..to..me..ah..um…(Snark!).
canopfor on December 15, 2008 at 11:11 PM
Benny? Shut the F*** up…thank you
clinker46 on December 15, 2008 at 11:12 PM
Not true at all. He’s related, you know…
Heh.
john1schn on December 15, 2008 at 11:16 PM
I’ll take Cheney ANYDAY over Biden.
jcheney on December 15, 2008 at 11:17 PM
clinker46 on December 15, 2008 at 11:12 PM
ORrighty on December 15, 2008 at 11:18 PM
Yes, real leaders sunset and we await the new administrations leadership.
Wait a sec….???!!!! Joe Biden, in Dick Cheney’s shoes?
Oh Biden my time, let me count the ways and means. HA!
Kini on December 15, 2008 at 11:19 PM
I love both Bush and Dick, does this make me bisexual? LOL
lavell12 on December 15, 2008 at 11:28 PM
Biden is going to be the most powerless VP ever. He has been put on the backburn b/c the Clintons and the Kennedys are the real “change”.
lavell12 on December 15, 2008 at 11:30 PM
Bush/Cheney will still be blamed. Every screw up the ONE has will be b/c of what happened before him. Except victory in Iraq will some how suddenly appear and the ONE will deserve the credit.
lavell12 on December 15, 2008 at 11:34 PM
FIFY
Oh and bisexual? Naw, as long as it’s Platonic
Kini on December 15, 2008 at 11:44 PM
Thank you George and Dick for keeping us safe since 911. The Dems did everything to make you fail at this, which makes me question them and any group that puts their party above the good of the country.
DL13 on December 15, 2008 at 11:54 PM
You don’t think they are now?
capitalist piglet on December 15, 2008 at 11:54 PM
You, apparently.
capitalist piglet on December 15, 2008 at 11:56 PM
I’m going to miss Dick Cheney. I wish he could’ve been president. He’s a real patriot.
CP on December 16, 2008 at 12:01 AM
Change I can believe in. I hope Darth Vader takes Obama and Ol’ Steak knife Emmanual hunting….
I LOVE Dick Cheney.
HornetSting on December 16, 2008 at 12:20 AM
You, p*ssy boy. You.
HornetSting on December 16, 2008 at 12:21 AM
Cheney is a brilliant man. He should have been President. Bush is a good man too. I will miss them. May God Bless them both, and their family.
sheebe on December 16, 2008 at 12:24 AM
It’s hard to imagine how anyone could be more thoroughly discredited than this man. How he is able to get out of bed in the morning and face anyone, let alone pontificate on what other people will or won’t be doing, is frightening.
alex342 on December 16, 2008 at 12:34 AM
Because HE and President Bush kept your sorry unappreciative ass safe for the past eight years.
Biden’s prediction is that it won’t be so under the great messiah.
You better DUCK, 342.
HornetSting on December 16, 2008 at 12:37 AM
Pants-wetting liberals such as yourself, of course. He’s behind everything you know. In fact, he’s behind you right now.
BKennedy on December 16, 2008 at 12:38 AM
Who fears an inexperienced one term senator who barely voted present when he did happen to show up for work? Who fears an entire administration with nary a single person that has not at some point been a Clintonite, surrounded by scandal, or both? Who fears a renowned plagiarist and gaffmaster who frequently plays Houdini at the whim of his puppetmaster?
Pass the popcorn this is better than T.V.
canditaylor68 on December 16, 2008 at 12:43 AM
Really? Exactly how much did that have to do with Bush and Cheney? Any American president would have responded to 9/11 by eliminating Al-Qaeda’s base in Afghanistan or they would have been out of office. By your logic, Clinton must have been wholly to credit for keeping American safe from Al-Qaeda during his two terms too.
Everything important thing Cheney said prior to the war was
false and many people believe him responsible for silencing those who knew better. He is a disgrace and in a parliamentary system would have been forced from office years ago.
alex342 on December 16, 2008 at 12:50 AM
Sure.
USS Cole. Kobar Towers. Embassies in Africa.
Yeah. Clinton did a GREAT job.
HornetSting on December 16, 2008 at 12:57 AM
I suggest you listen to the British foreign secretary’s resignation speech before the war. He said:
He was exactly right. How was it that he could know this but Cheney couldn’t?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heWJuAPO9zw
alex342 on December 16, 2008 at 12:58 AM
Thanks to all you Dems for hobbling the US for the past 8 years, so that you could try to make yourselves look great by proposing to treat those who would kill our families fairly. Voted for Gore – but never more.
drunyan8315 on December 16, 2008 at 1:00 AM
Hindsight is 20/20 genius.
Guess you would rather live in a world with Saddam Hussein in it.
Did you happen to vote for another Hussein this past November?
HornetSting on December 16, 2008 at 1:01 AM
HornetSting on December 16, 2008 at 1:01 AM
It wasn’t hindsight my friend. He made those statements before the war. Sort of like the statements the Cheney made about how moronic it would have been to occupy Iraq back in 1991.
I wouldn’t rather live in a world with Saddam Hussein; I’d rather live in one where cases for war are made honestly so that if a country is going to lay down 4,000 lives they do it with their eyes open. I, for one, believed Cheney et. al. at the time because I couldn’t believe anyone could be so devious and/or incompetent to start a war on shit intelligence.
alex342 on December 16, 2008 at 1:05 AM
.
Maybe Barry just liked to talk alot.
bagoh20 on December 16, 2008 at 1:11 AM
Wars have been started for less, Alex. The intel was from many countries and they went with what they knew at the time.
It is easy to play Monday morning quarterback. They have kept us safe. If a few terrorist get their rights stepped on with wiretaps, I’m not going to cry.
4000 lives of soldiers that volunteered to fight for their country. I weep for their families, but they died fighting for what they believed. You can shout from the sidelines and sound like a moonbat, but it just makes you sound like an ad for moveon.org.
HornetSting on December 16, 2008 at 1:14 AM
HornetSting on December 16, 2008 at 1:14 AM
Listen, you spend the better part of a year making a faulty case for war and then say “meh, did the best I could…hindsight is 20/20″. What the hell do we elect these people for? If you think that misleading the public is somehow less of a problem because the people who did so have an (R) behind their names then you need to think about what citizenship means. The next time a pol does something you don’t like, tell me about “20/20 hindsight”.
alex342 on December 16, 2008 at 1:22 AM
Yes, because Barack Hussein Obama is SO MUCH BETTER.
Try again.
HornetSting on December 16, 2008 at 1:24 AM
“a faulty case for war”
2+ tons uranium.
vials of bioagents
100s of sarin-filled shells
various long range missle engines
plus whatever the hell chinless wonder still has in syria
PISS.OFF.
Buckaroo on December 16, 2008 at 1:24 AM
Yes, and he had all that since the ’80s. Maybe Reagan should have invaded Iraq.
alex342 on December 16, 2008 at 1:26 AM
I can only take it that you must look back fondly at how well JFK and LBJ made such an honest case for laying down what ended up being 60,000 American lives. Yes, you must as from what you just said you would have to.
MB4 on December 16, 2008 at 1:26 AM
Agreed. Twenty-three years my husband has served, and still does–volunteeringly for the U.S. military. We know what we signed onto,we do it gladly with hearts and eyes wide open for the causes we serve. We would give our last drops of blood to secure the freedoms and rights of this country.
canditaylor68 on December 16, 2008 at 1:27 AM
MB4 on December 16, 2008 at 1:26 AM
Holy God. I’m just going to say this and then stop: this is not a partisan issue. It is not a question of whether Democrats are better than Republicans or vice-versa. If you can’t understand that then I honestly feel sorry for you.
alex342 on December 16, 2008 at 1:32 AM
You sound like a girl.
BTW, sometime read H.R. McMaster’s “Dereliction of Duty: Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Lies That Led to Vietnam.”
I’m not at all sure why JFK’s name was left out as it certainly should have been in there.
MB4 on December 16, 2008 at 1:39 AM
“alex342 on December 16, 2008 at 1:26 AM”
RWR was a bit busy winning the cold war, you STUPID dumbass …
Buckaroo on December 16, 2008 at 1:42 AM
It’s a matter of right and wrong.
You are wrong, 342.
HornetSting on December 16, 2008 at 1:43 AM
We’re going from Bush and Dick to Hope and Change – no wonder we’re farked, from the right to the left.
Entelechy on December 16, 2008 at 1:48 AM
When the executive branch got the power to call up the states reserves I was disappointed and thought that this power could be abused through propoganda. Then I hear O bama talk about a civilian military force just as well equipped as our military. Every was asking him questionas if he was going to create some new force to oppress the citizenry. No such organazation is needed. He can call on the states, the executive branch can simply become the commander in chief of the national guard in times of “emergency.” I’m not comfortable with the executive having that power.
Theworldisnotenough on December 16, 2008 at 1:51 AM
Masterful psychology!
Hornet, don’t hold back. Always right on target!
Entelechy on December 16, 2008 at 1:52 AM
If the majority of the intel from around the world says he needs stopped and you decide no (because you’re just not feeling it, I guess). Then it turns out you are wrong and missed the threat again as on 9/11, then what exactly is your justification? “I wanted to be careful.”? There are serious costs to being wrong with intel regardless of the decision.
1) Saddam being gone (not to be succeeded by two murderous crazy offspring), not to pursue WMDs as soon as the sanctions were lifted which they would have been at least 4 years ago.
2) 25 million people free from a pathologically repressive regime intent on murdering all freedom seeking people in the country.
3) The first democracy in Islam starting a new direction of reform in the powder keg called the middle east.
4) Creating a badly needed ally in the region.
5) Demonstrating to the world how to handle out of control dangerous tyrants
6) Just plain doing the right thing when you can, even if it’s hard or unpopular(American Exceptionalism).
If you think those are mistakes, then your idea of peace sucks.
bagoh20 on December 16, 2008 at 1:52 AM
Goldwater was a philosopher and he also had a sense of humor. Rare.
MB4 on December 16, 2008 at 1:53 AM
Yeah, it’s not hindsight for him, maybe, but it is hindsight for you to pick that particular individual to highlight as some sort of oracle. Odds were that the Patriots were going to win the Superbowl last year. The Giants won in a miracle drive, and I’m sure there is some fellow from Queens who called it for the Giants in advance and got the score exactly right. “Hey, how come Phil Bronowicz from Woodside was able to predict exactly how the game would pan out, but Bill Belichick couldn’t?” It’s an idiotic argument.
shazbat on December 16, 2008 at 1:54 AM
Turkey and Pakistan, just to name two, are considered to be democracies.
Fair weather “friend” when they can use America, like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Wait and see.
MB4 on December 16, 2008 at 1:58 AM
Alright, alright. Fine.
Nuke the whole region and make a parking lot out of it.
HornetSting on December 16, 2008 at 2:00 AM
All warfare is based on deception. Hey, what’s that behind you?
- Sun Tzu’s Nephew
MB4 on December 16, 2008 at 2:02 AM
shazbat on December 16, 2008 at 1:54 AM
First of all, Cook was Foreign Secretary from 1997 to 2001 when successive resolutions were passed against Iraq and when the UK participated in the bombing of Iraq. He wasn’t “some guy”. It was his business to know what was going on, just like it was Cheney’s. Secondly, he wasn’t an oracle, he was one among many who maintained Iraq had no new WMD and none at all that could threaten Europe or America. Thirdly, if Phil Bronowicz was right and others were wrong, shouldn’t we admit he was right and um…others were wrong?
alex342 on December 16, 2008 at 2:03 AM
Millions of our fellow Americans are out of work.
Millions of our fellow Americans will lose their jobs.
Millions of Americans have lost their homes.
There are foreclosures on almost everyones street.
Commercial vacancies fill every strip mall and industrial courts are deserted.
And these are our friends?
ORAN, Algeria (Reuters) – OPEC ministers could make their deepest oil supply cut ever when they meet on Wednesday to combat shrinking demand, bulging stocks and a $100 collapse in prices.
For many in the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, up to 2 million barrels per day (bpd) must be removed to keep up with a slump in consumption that has knocked two-thirds off prices since July.
“We have to act – we see a very sizeable reduction,” OPEC Secretary-General Abdullah al-Badri told reporters on his arrival on Monday in this western Algerian city.
OPEC President Chakib Khelil agreed.
“Everybody is supporting a cut – I don’t have any doubt about it.”
Benchmark U.S. crude rose more than $3 a barrel in early trade to top $50 – still far from the “fair” price of $75 a barrel identified by Saudi Arabia, the world’s biggest crude exporter, at the end of November.
By the blood and treasure of the United States of America, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia are not the respective 19th and 20th Province of Iraq and this is how they treat us.
- Oak Leaf
MB4 on December 16, 2008 at 2:08 AM
Yeah. Those two are the best examples possible (though I have always classified Pakistan as a dangerous basket case) and they fall pretty short, by any Western standards. Ultimate power always rests with the military, in the islamic world. I wish people in the West would start paying attention to Ataturk and note how he understood that islam is always a threat to the state. But … I’m not holding my breath.
Yep. There are no such animals as allies in the arab world, let alone sane countries with self-rule. The minute US pressure starts coming off of Iraq, with minor withdrawals, everything is going to start falling apart. Muslim Arabs can’t help but create a mess of wherever they are. Ibn Khaldun noted this back in the 14th century (The Muqaddimah):
progressoverpeace on December 16, 2008 at 2:46 AM
If you mean by “others” all the democrats that yelled and screamed about Saddam’s WMD’s in the 90′s and up until they voted for war.
If you mean the UN,France,Germany,Britain,CIA,Pentagon,Newspapers,and television media then we are waiting for you to call them out also.
Only someone blinded by ignorance and political ideology can still make the statement that the Bush Administration lied and manipulated this country into war.
The 9/11 commission stated that Bush did not lie about Pre-war intel.
The 2003 Senate intelligence report stated Bush did not
lie.
The Butler report stated that Bush did not lie.
The 2008 Senate intelligence report (chaired by a majority of democrats) stated that Bush did not lie.
The Duelfer Report stated that Bush did not lie.
The conclusion were made by independent sources,democrats and Republicans.
You pulling a few dissenters out to try and prove that all these agencies and the leaders of our country lied us into war is pathetic.
No intel is 100%,there is and always will be different opinions.The President,democrats and Republicans looked at the intelligence and the vast majority of it showed Saddam to be a threat with WMD’s/and terrorist ties.
If you liberals know so much,why the he!! don’t you impeach
Bush.You have had the ability for two years with filibuster
proof majority in the House to start impeachment.
Put up or shut up!!
Baxter Greene on December 16, 2008 at 2:49 AM
Baxter Greene on December 16, 2008 at 2:49 AM
I didn’t mean any of those people particularly, no. I am not a liberal, or a Democrat. You are an idiot for assuming that and it speaks to your pathological partisanship. Try reading something other than political screeds once and a while.
No-one responsible for those reports could have possibly been able to determine what the administration’s intent was, one way or the other. Yes, there will be different opinions on conflicting intelligence and we pay people to make the correct judgments.
If you hire an insurance agent and they lose all of your money through incompetence, do you say “Oh well, nothing’s 100%”? No, you say “F*ck you, you are bad at your job” and you go elsewhere. The Bush administration never said, “Hey, we’re not sure about this but we think they have WMD”, they said “We know they have them”. They were wrong and you are a complete and utter moron for arguing otherwise.
alex342 on December 16, 2008 at 3:08 AM
Enough already. The Iraq War ended up netting more WMD’s than anyone had even imagined. It was because Bush scared the living sh!t out of the arab world, for a while, that Qadafi puked up his whole nuclear industry, along with exposing the true extent of the AQ Khan nuclear black market – much more valuable than anything that was even expected to be found in Iraq.
The fact is that Iraq had to be taken down. Period. The minute Saddam Hussein intentionally dumped 40,000,000 barrels of oil into the gulf (only 40,000,000 because we stopped the flow) and lit just about every single oil well in Kuwait on fire – all as he was retreating in one of the most humiliating military defeats in all of human history – anyone with a brain knew that he could not be allowed to remain in control in one of the most strategic areas of the world. That was it. That was all anyone needed to know. The rest of the reasons,a nd there were many good ones, pale in comparison to this. If you don’t understand that then we are at a very basic impasse.
Now, we should have just gone in, taken down the regime, taken back the oil fields (that were stolen in the forced nationalization of 50 years ago) and the gulf access and let the arabs, now defanged, do whatever they wanted to do in the country, giving them help only if they asked for it. But, Bush decided to gamble on building a nation with self-rule and individual liberty there, and, while I think it will never stick, if it does, the value to all will be immense. So, while I considered it a less-than-optimal strategy, it was a reasonable gamble. We’ll see how it turns out, though I am not optimistic. But, Iraq had to go down, no matter what.
progressoverpeace on December 16, 2008 at 3:26 AM
Not only will O love the power he’ll probably want additional beefing up and the Dems will give him whatever he wants.
Done That on December 16, 2008 at 4:53 AM
President Bush messed up in Iraq. Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and the Democrats flooded the mortgage markets with a liberal’s version of income generators for financial instruments. But it is all good as the media (See CBS with Bwarney Fwank 12/14/2008) will never blame a liberal for anything.
Question: Will the Democrats have the stomach to right their mistake and lead us to victory? Or will they follow the polls and lead us to hyperinflation and destruction?
IlikedAUH2O on December 16, 2008 at 5:04 AM
MB4 — You have the old Goldwater theory of conservatism and the central concept was a suspicious eye toward central power and control.
IlikedAUH2O on December 16, 2008 at 5:07 AM
A philosophical difference I suppose.
It seems those on the Left prefer the law enforcement approach that Clinton was fond of during his tenure. After the 9-11 scale attack this didn’t budge (amazingly enough). I believe that explains why the indignant complaints for perfect intel.
Doesn’t work that way outside of the courts (as if).
After 9-11 happened, reasonable people concluded that our whole Middle East policy had to change. A good idea to start would be the geopolitical epicenter that just so happens to be the same regime who in the past and some up to the point of 2003:
-brutally oppressed its citizens for decades
-attacked several neighbors of hers
-proliferated WMD’s
-used WMD’s a minimum of 10 times on neighbors and citizens alike
-defied sanctions
-broke cesation of war agreement (daily for over a decade) by targeting (some occasions; firing on) our pilots protecting no fly zones (casus belli alone)
The above, whether certain or not, is a threat. Waiting on ‘perfect’ intel akin to gathering evidence beyond all reasonable doubt for criminal prosecution is absurd as it is dangerous. In fact, any president under those circumstances would be derelict in his duty to not wage war.
Letting the above list slide is playing the odds. One thing we all know for sure now is Saddam’s Iraq is of zero percent threat.
any chance > zero chance
anuts on December 16, 2008 at 5:07 AM
I hope that all my good feelings about the present administration can overcome my recent unhappiness with the handling of the financial mess. Why do we need Congress to vote for or against spending money if the President is just going to go behind them and spend the money anyway. Yes, I realize that if Big 3 aren’t bailed out now, they will be in the next administration or at least the unions will be. But I will miss the strength these men have and the determination to keep us safe.
Cindy Munford on December 16, 2008 at 5:27 AM
You took the words right off of my fingertips, 7.
Vice President Cheney will be remembered kindly by history.
Zorro on December 16, 2008 at 6:42 AM
Furthermore, it is their nature to plunder whatever other people possess. Their sustenance lies wherever the shadow of their lances falls. They recognize no limit in taking the possessions of other people. Whenever their eyes fall upon some property, furnishings, or utensils, they take it. When they acquire superiority and royal authority, they have complete power to plunder (as they please). There no longer exists any political (power) to protect property, and civilization is ruined.
I thought you were talking about our beloved Democrats.
Progressoverpeace 2:45 AM above
IlikedAUH2O on December 16, 2008 at 6:56 AM
alex342 on December 16, 2008 at 3:08 AM
The 3rd weekend of January, 2009, my youngest son becomes an American soldier. My wife and I are very proud of him for making a choice to serve the greatest country on earth. Both of my sons make us so proud, both of them see the big picture very clearly.
You would make me puke in my soup. I don’t care what your political ideology is, you are a worthless pussy, who takes freedom and personal liberty for granted.
Enough said, enough time wasted on your worthless ass.
Keemo on December 16, 2008 at 7:44 AM
And while we are on the subject that includes Rush Limbaugh, how bout we at least read a portion of what Rush had to say about Colin Powell telling the American people to stop listening to Rush Limbaugh…
So General Powell, let me explain something. The fact is Republicans did not listen to me. They listened to you. They have not been listening to me for years. The Republican Party nominated your ideal candidate. They nominated your guy, a moderate, who’s willing to buy into an endless array of liberal causes, from global warming — there’s an AP story out today that says we are cooling this year, and by the way, record lows in Denver, we have record lows in Montana. We actually have a story on global warming from the AP today, and in the last couple paragraphs it says — Rachel, you’ll love this, because I know you think Algore is a genius — it says here that this cooling perfectly illustrates how the world is warming. Folks, we got more problems than you can possibly imagine. That’s just lunacy. That is just insanity. And that’s modern journalism. We’re freezing our butts off. We have our fifth cold front that went through here, and we normally haven’t had the first one yet. Five cold fronts! Cold for us, but I mean look it, weather is weather. Record lows in Denver. And all of this freezing cold points out how the world is so rapidly warming, it perfectly illustrates it, the guy says.
He quotes a scientist here that says species are going extinct like never before, and I’ve got a story about 70 brand-new species discovered in the Mekong Delta. We can’t trust anything that we see in the media anymore. It’s all agenda oriented, and it’s all oriented toward the agenda of Washingtonians. As long as you are a Republican, but you buy into an endless array of liberal causes, global warming to amnesty for illegals, and somebody who has the same fetish for compromising principles that you do, then they are going to love you. Then you turn around and you stab this person in the back by endorsing the most liberal Democrat candidate ever nominated days before the election, General Powell? You want to lecture me about how the Republican Party needs to stop listening to me when they are not? They are listening to you. I also have to question something here. How can he say he’s a Republican? He gets the perfect Republican nominee, exactly the kind of candidate he wants, it’s McCain, and then he sabotages McCain a few weeks before the election by endorsing Obama. How can you even claim to be a Republican, General Powell? When have you ever stuck your neck out for Republicans and conservatives? Never. I mean sabotage George W. Bush with the Armitage leak and Scooter Libby, that’s just one thing, but Ronald Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 43 all helped advance General Powell’s career.
Now, there are exceptional military men and women throughout our nation who could have served as national security advisor or chairman of the chief joints of staff, to quote Rita X, many ex-military people who could have been the secretary of state. Hell, Hillary can do it, anybody can do it. I’m sure you did a good job, General Powell, certainly nothing exceptional, you’re no George Marshall. But I can’t think of a single occasion where Secretary Powell stepped up to the plate for the Republican Party or the conservative movement. I think of many times when he has not done so or even worse. I’ve noticed on the one hand General Powell claims to stand above politics as a big claim to fame. Yet, on the other hand, he jumps in from time to time, but only to attack the conservative base of the Republican Party. When’s the last time, the first time, when is any time he has let loose or criticized a liberal Democrat on any issue? Now, here’s the problem. General Powell, and folks, this problem I think is systemic in the Republican Party in Washington. People like General Powell seek to ingratiate themselves with the people who despise the Republican Party and despise the conservative movement. They’re out there preaching moderation all along the way, when instead you should be preaching principle.
Principle is what got you where you are. Moderation is what keeps you where you are with this great reputation, great image but no substance, no principles, no core belief. If somebody had to tell you who Colin Powell is, what would they say? What does he stand for? What does General Powell stand for? What does John McCain stand for? You don’t know. There aren’t any core beliefs you can go rat-tat-tat down the list and say, yep, this is who they are. Was Abraham Lincoln great because he saw compromise during the Civil War or was he great because he insisted on total and complete victory? Great people take stands on principle, not moderation. Some of us think that individual liberty, limited constitutional government, and increased support for the military by civilians are principles worth defending. Maybe General Powell can enlighten us, since he’s failed to do that so far on the great liberal or moderate Democrat principles that seem to intrigue him. What is it about Obama that intrigued him? What are these principles? Or was it the way Obama speaks?
General Powell says we need to reach out to Hispanic, blacks, and Asians. Well, how do we do that? What kind of message does he suggest? I never hear the “how” to do it. I just hear we need to do it. And in my mind, we already have the blueprint for how to do it. We have done it successfully. We abandoned the blueprint. It’s called individual freedom, liberty, and not seeing them as Hispanics and not seeing them as Asians and not seeing them as blacks or minorities, but rather seeing them as Americans, human beings. Liberals look at people and groupify them and then think of them with contempt. I mean are all black people identical thinkers, if we understand what one of them thinks we know how to get to all of them, is that true? Same thing with Asians? Same thing with Hispanics? General Powell has no vision. He is not in touch with the public in any meaningful way. He’s a Washingtonian. He’s not in touch with the public. He lives in a bubble so he doesn’t have to expose himself to contrary arguments. He just has to accept accolades from the people he treasures and values most, his buddies and the media. He doesn’t add anything to the public discussion. What has he added to the public discussion? What has he done to advance a principle? He is constantly peddling his identity and his reputation rather than anything substantive or insightful.
I’m sure he’s a delightful person with his friends and I’m sure he’s charitable with his time and his money, but he has no idea what he’s talking about when he presumes to dictate how Republicans and conservatives should build a governing majority. One of the things he said is he resents Sarah Palin because she kept talking about small towns. He said nobody lives in small towns and that’s why they’re small. “I’m from the Bronx. Something wrong with my values?” he asked. What is this hatred for conservatives and small town people and Sarah Palin? It’s because they are effective. They represent challenges to the Washingtonians’ control of the Republican Party. I know a lot of people that are from the Bronx, General Powell, and if you think the values there in the Bronx today reflect the ones you grew up with, take a trip back and see if the street corners and the activities there are the same as when you were growing up, General Powell. Quick time-out. I spent more time on this than I intended to because we got other things to do.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Let me get this straight. The guy who has supported the Republican candidate for president should be thrown out of the party. That would be me. But the guy who bolted and sabotaged the Republican nominee by endorsing the Democrat candidate should stay in and be part of the team that determines what the Republican Party is going to be. The turncoat, General Powell, is the one who the party is gonna listen to? McCain’s a moderate. I supported McCain. Powell, who wants a moderate, did not support McCain. It’s unreal. It’s just incredible. Look, I’m trying to be a little humble here, but it’s hard when you got all this other stuff going on and Republicans out there now continue to trash me. It’s flattering; it is amazing. At the same time, it’s mind-boggling how I get under their skin. What I’m learning now, folks, it really doesn’t matter about party. It’s not getting under Republicans’ skin now. It’s getting under the skin of Washingtonians. It’s getting under the skin of the Big Government people. These are liberals. There’s no such thing as a moderate Republican. A moderate Republican is a liberal. General Powell, says, “I’m a fiscal conservative; I don’t like the social stuff.” What’s wrong with the social side? It’s abortion. But it’s more than that, it’s Washingtonianism.
Keemo on December 16, 2008 at 7:48 AM
AMEN
The reason I voted Bush in 2000 was a solid VP.
Mercy4Me on December 16, 2008 at 7:56 AM
Congratulations. On both of your sons.
Cindy Munford on December 16, 2008 at 8:09 AM
Thanks Cindy…
Keemo on December 16, 2008 at 8:15 AM
If it were mine to do over, it’d be Bush-Cheney 2000-2004, then Cheney-Bush 2004-2008. Cheney would have been an excellent Prez.
petefrt on December 16, 2008 at 8:30 AM
Keemo on December 16, 2008 at 7:44 AM
Your son must be proud to have a fine gentleman such as yourself for a father.
alex342 on December 16, 2008 at 8:44 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »