Cheney warns Obama: Stick with our policies or risk a WMD attack

posted at 4:45 pm on February 4, 2009 by Allahpundit

Mystifying. Never mind that it’s bad form to criticize so soon after leaving office; why would he want to re-burden the pro-Gitmo side with the weight of his unpopularity? We’ve been carrying that load for years. Suddenly we’re free of it and able to engage purely on the merits and here he is dumping it on us again. For what? To make the sort of by-the-numbers pedestrian points that anyone on this side could make just as well?

“When we get people who are more concerned about reading the rights to an Al Qaeda terrorist than they are with protecting the United States against people who are absolutely committed to do anything they can to kill Americans, then I worry,” Cheney said.

Protecting the country’s security is “a tough, mean, dirty, nasty business,” he said. “These are evil people. And we’re not going to win this fight by turning the other cheek.”…

But he said he worried that “instead of sitting down and carefully evaluating the policies,” Obama officials are unwisely following “campaign rhetoric” and preparing to release terrorism suspects or afford them legal protections granted to more conventional defendants in crime cases.

The choice, he alleged, reflects a naive mindset among the new team in Washington: “The United States needs to be not so much loved as it needs to be respected. Sometimes, that requires us to take actions that generate controversy. I’m not at all sure that that’s what the Obama administration believes.”…

“If you release the hard-core Al Qaeda terrorists that are held at Guantanamo, I think they go back into the business of trying to kill more Americans and mount further mass-casualty attacks,” he said. “If you turn ’em loose and they go kill more Americans, who’s responsible for that?”

Rush, Hannity et al. recycle this argument on radio or TV every day, so Cheney chiming in brings plenty of cost but no real benefit. I hope he’s not planning to make a practice of it. Exit question: Does this mean if we’re attacked by jihadis who were freed during Bush’s term — which isn’t unthinkable — he’ll hold himself responsible?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

You seem to be under the impression that we have 2 presidents at a time…. how many times did you flunk that citizenship test?

Noneya on February 4, 2009 at 5:23 PM

Idiot.

because shrub left us with a surplus like Clinton did?

Noneya on February 4, 2009 at 5:24 PM

Idiot.

You can’t help yourself, can you?

LimeyGeek on February 4, 2009 at 5:30 PM

Or maybe, Allah, he is sincere in trying to head off a disaster.

notagool on February 4, 2009 at 5:30 PM

because shrub left us with a surplus like Clinton did?

Noneya on February 4, 2009 at 5:24 PM

Or that Obama’s aiming to make a deficit 5 times worse than Bush left him?

Chuck Schick on February 4, 2009 at 5:31 PM

Noneya on February 4, 2009 at 5:23 PM

I’ve noticed you have conveniently skipped over every comment that addresses your claim that Bush is solely responsible for the 9/11 attacks yet you have had time to respond to other comments that have come afterwards.

Do you not have an adequate response?

Have you already responded to those rebuttals to your argument in another post you could link us to?

Do you not intend to address the issue because you already have your mind made up on it and would prefer not to think about it as that might require you to account for uncomfortable evidence that doesn’t fit into your world view?

I must confess I’m not sure what your purpose here is. You do not add much to the conversation beyond pithy 1-liners and you are unable/unwilling to back up your positions. That makes it hard to believe that your goal is to educate/convert people. It seems like your goal then is to agitate. But to what end? Seems like an epic waste of time to me.

JadeNYU on February 4, 2009 at 5:31 PM

The buck stops… with the guy in office before me!

Noneya on February 4, 2009 at 5:15 PM

Fair enough. Every job lost from 2 weeks ago forward is Obama’s fault.

Chuck Schick on February 4, 2009 at 5:32 PM

Please don’t feed the troll…let her post.
When Krispy Kreme puts their day old out, she will stop posting…all this liberal thinking is HEAVY on her, it is WEIGHING her down…

right2bright on February 4, 2009 at 5:32 PM

Noneya needs to read The Path to 9/11.

According to her reasoning we can blame the first WTC attack, the embassy bombing, the attack on the USS Cole..what have I missed?

So Bill Clinton had many more terror attacks and deaths under his watch,than George Bush did.

becki51758 on February 4, 2009 at 5:32 PM

Deficits and surpluses are all BS anyway, Noneya. If you honestly want to measure a president’s success that way, go ahead, but its just a measure of how much money the government has, not a measure of how well the country is doing. Since Dems like higher taxes, they’re going to have more money in the bank.

jimmy the notable on February 4, 2009 at 5:32 PM

Now that he’s a private citizen, I think I would take his word. Much more so than I would an elected official in the present administration.

oakpack on February 4, 2009 at 5:32 PM

kirkill on February 4, 2009 at 5:28 PM

But for noneya, Al-Qaeda isn’t the enemy. Mormons, Catholics, and Evangelicals are the real problem. AQ is a distraction.

PimFortuynsGhost on February 4, 2009 at 5:33 PM

If Mr. Cheney was someone who craved the limelight I would have a problem with this but in truth it just worries me. As to those who were released from Gitmo on the Bush/Cheney watch, I am sure those are decisions that haunt, especially when they turn up on recruitment videos. Unfortunately anyone can and will be wrong. I never blamed Mr. Clinton for 9/11, I just don’t think Americans think like terrorists and I think it is unreasonable to think anyone should have guessed that those were the plans.

Cindy Munford on February 4, 2009 at 5:34 PM

The buck stops… with the guy in office before me!

Noneya on February 4, 2009 at 5:15 PM

That certainly has been Obama’s line so far.

Regardless, are you actually stating that the President should have the power to enact any and every policy he wants on his first day in office.

MarkTheGreat on February 4, 2009 at 5:35 PM

because shrub left us with a surplus like Clinton did?

Noneya on February 4, 2009 at 5:24 PM

The pun is cute, but not in a clever sort of way.

But really, the spending under Bush is going to look like pennies in the next few years.

I’ve been here ‘long enough’…further answers would be a little more personal than I care to be on the net :)

LimeyGeek on February 4, 2009 at 5:28 PM

Wise move. Welcome at any rate.

Esthier on February 4, 2009 at 5:36 PM

the islamic nazis are absoutly laughing at obama and the dems

And thats fine IF
It didnt put all of my family and friends in danger of being killed by an iranian Nuke..

you liberals will so find that you wont have to worry about global warming..

Not when the temperature of many us cities reached 10,000 degrees centigrade..

I told you..
you wouldtn listen
God is warning you
you wont listen

so when and i repeat WHEN you are hit
and you go crying to obama you will probably find him
in a fallout shelter crying in disbelief

because he actually is so stupid he believes he can talk to the islamo nazis and convince them to not wipe us out..

you morons this is all your fault,.

jcila on February 4, 2009 at 5:36 PM

When the usa gets hit
and we will ….
You can count on it..

3 things will happen

1. liberals will run screaming to surrender to their new islamic overloards

2. americans who survive wil go HUNTING for the muslim terrorists

3. and after that americans will go out and start hunting
ALL the liberals and laywers who HELPED the muslims to do this..

jcila on February 4, 2009 at 5:38 PM

I did not read all of the comments so if this has already been said then I apologize.
I believe Vice President Cheney is saying, “When we came into office there was just a passing blurb about AlQaeda and their intentions during the transition, I am making sure that there is no doubt that we have informed the new administration of the potential problems”
I call it CYA and if President Clinton’s team had done that maybe 9-11-01 may have been a little different.

Guest1.1 on February 4, 2009 at 5:39 PM

Obama used his FING INAUGURAL ADDRESS to crap on Bush and Cheney. But Cheney’s the one who couldn’t wait to diss the other guy. Mmmmm Hmmmm.

Christien on February 4, 2009 at 5:39 PM

But for noneya, Al-Qaeda isn’t the enemy. Mormons, Catholics, and Evangelicals are the real problem. AQ is a distraction.

PimFortuynsGhost on February 4, 2009 at 5:33 PM

damn straight! I’m with Al-Qaeda because they don’t belong to any antiquated oppressive religion like the mormons, catholics and evangelicals…

oh, wait…

Noneya on February 4, 2009 at 5:39 PM

Trent1289 on February 4, 2009 at 5:26 PM

While there are aspects of some of the Bush policies that certainly infringe on American’s individual right, I don’t see Gitmo as one of them. Last I heard, there were no US citizens being detained there. Make no mistake, The One did not get this right.

I’m glad he didn’t march in and order it closed day one like he seemed to promise in the campaign. However, DCs right — If the terrorists he busts loose come over here and do the things terrorists do, unquestionably it will stain his administration and it may be clear enough that even the mainstream press will point it out.

EconomicNeocon on February 4, 2009 at 5:40 PM

Do you see the difference in substance between Cheney and Obama. Barry, this is what a man is.

marklmail on February 4, 2009 at 5:42 PM

I never blamed Mr. Clinton for 9/11, I just don’t think Americans think like terrorists and I think it is unreasonable to think anyone should have guessed that those were the plans.

Cindy Munford on February 4, 2009 at 5:34 PM

except that in that August PDB titled “Bin Laden determined to strike in U.S.” it outlined how Al-Qaeda was already in the U.S. wanting to hijack aircraft and scoping out federal buildings….

Noneya on February 4, 2009 at 5:44 PM

damn straight! I’m with Al-Qaeda because they don’t belong to any antiquated oppressive religion like the mormons, catholics and evangelicals…

oh, wait…

Noneya on February 4, 2009 at 5:39 PM

How do you feel about Jews? They’re pretty oppressive too, right?

Andy in Agoura Hills on February 4, 2009 at 5:46 PM

I love Dick.

VolMagic on February 4, 2009 at 5:47 PM

Noneya likes what Obama is doing, disarming the country and kissing terrorist ass

runner on February 4, 2009 at 5:47 PM

I don’t think any president can hold himself accountable for something some idiot jihadi has done in the past, it makes no difference to them who is in office when they commit mass murder. Like Chaney says, though, with these inmates the ultimate goal is to kill, maim, brutalize, and behead as many Americans as they can. It should be a president’s responsibility to keep the citizens of this country safe, and letting people loose who have this desire, and are not only capable of killing Americans but are also likely to do so, is just plain irresponsible. Not to mention idiotic.

scalleywag on February 4, 2009 at 5:49 PM

except that in that August PDB titled “Bin Laden determined to strike in U.S.” it outlined how Al-Qaeda was already in the U.S. wanting to hijack aircraft and scoping out federal buildings….

Noneya on February 4, 2009 at 5:44 PM

Armed with that very vague information…how would YOU have stopped the terrorist attack on 9/11?

ArmyAunt on February 4, 2009 at 5:51 PM

damn straight! I’m with Al-Qaeda because they don’t belong to any antiquated oppressive religion like the mormons, catholics and evangelicals…

oh, wait…

Noneya on February 4, 2009 at 5:39 PM

Then buy yourself a ONE WAY ticket to any number of countries, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia…take your pick.

scalleywag on February 4, 2009 at 5:53 PM

P-ssy ran away. Probably has to throw more hamburger patties on the grill.

Andy in Agoura Hills on February 4, 2009 at 5:54 PM

He might have unquestionably has some inside knowledge that Obama is going to take a step that is so wrong, undo what is so important, that he had to speak out.

Holy cow. It’s not like Cheney is saying, “His ears are too big and he’s ugly!” He is saying our nation is in almost C-E-R-T-A-I-N peril for a nuclear or dirty bomb attack. Meanwhile the current president is patting himself on the back in his efforts to “somehow, some way in the future –think about exploring the possibility of maybe–closing Gitmo to placate Code Pink and the Make-love-not-war crowd.”
Jeez Louise, don’t let the trolls get y’all off topic and take this back to the old “Bush lied, people died” shinola!

Dick Cheney’s honor, integrity and patriotism are unquestionable IMHO. If he is saying these things, it’s NOT to “give cover” when someone asks why weren’t we warned. It is not because he’s a pizzy old guy who’s now free to comment. It is not because he was previously muzzled and can now speak his mind. It is because he is scared chitless about what he knows and does not want to see that happen to the country he loves more than his life.

Chewy the Lab on February 4, 2009 at 5:55 PM

Mystifying. Never mind that it’s bad form to criticize so soon after leaving office; why would he want to re-burden the pro-Gitmo side with the weight of his unpopularity? We’ve been carrying that load for years. Suddenly we’re free of it and able to engage purely on the merits and here he is dumping it on us again. For what? To make the sort of by-the-numbers pedestrian points that anyone on this side could make just as well?

These points are better made by Dick Cheney than by you or me, given his acquaintance with the actual conduct of terrorist and counter-terrorist activities. As for Cheney’s being unpopular, he’s more unpopular than you or I am, merely because he’s been in the thick of things, is better known, and has been under relentless rhetorical attack. If you or I gain his standing, we’ll be vilified just as he has been or, for example, just as Mark Steyn has been. For the foreseeable future, the price of engaging this issue is to be unpopular.

As for “bad form,” well, under the circumstances, that’s a trifling critique.

Kralizec on February 4, 2009 at 5:56 PM

If shes with al queda, she best get ready to be raped.

becki51758 on February 4, 2009 at 5:57 PM

as long as they strike a blue-devil area, thats fine…I think people should get the results of their vote..and that really will be CHANGE THEY CAN BELIEVE IN!!

right4life on February 4, 2009 at 5:58 PM

Of course, he lied about retiring out to the ranch and set up an office to work on his failed legacy. At least, w is laying low.

You should thank dick for this economic mess and obl still planning.

getalife on February 4, 2009 at 5:59 PM

If shes with al queda, she best get ready to be raped.

becki51758 on February 4, 2009 at 5:57 PM

yeah I hope she runs into those poor victims of the religion of peace…I’m all for learning the hard way…

right4life on February 4, 2009 at 6:00 PM

You should thank dick for this economic mess and obl still planning.

getalife on February 4, 2009 at 5:59 PM

notice how that MESS didn’t happen until 2 years of a democRAT congress….

right4life on February 4, 2009 at 6:01 PM

Noneya on February 4, 2009 at 5:44 PM

The PDB said quite a bit. It mentioned bin Laden wanted to bring it to America, wanted to retaliate in Washington, that an EIJ member lived in CA, that a cell in NY was recruiting muslim youths and that they were casing federal buildings in NY…

Based on that, what action would you have had the president take?

The first one is generic and not actionable. The second says DC is a target, but, that’s a given since it’s the capitol and contains nothing actionable. The 3rd and 4th mention recruiting in NY and casing of federal buildings in NY. None of the hijackers were American muslims from NYC (or American muslims, for that matter) and they didn’t attack any federal buildings in NY). So, again, none of that would have prevented 9/11.

Here’s one of my personal favorites:

We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a —- service in 1998 saying that Bin Laden wanted to hijack a U.S. aircraft to gain the release of “Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdel Rahman and other U.S.-held extremists.

Had President Bush tried to use this PDB to justify increasing security policies, would you have been alright with that. Would you have given up some of your freedom and convenience based on a report that flat out says that they could not corroborate the more sensational threat of hijackings?

And, the cherry on top is the end of the PDB:

The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full-field investigations throughout the U.S. that it considers bin Laden-related.

Do you think he should have read this very generic PDB and said, “70? By Gaia, I will not rest until we have 71 investigations going. That’s what’s going to keep us safe!”

It was basically a generic memo that had generic information. The only thing that proved (in hind sight) to be accurate was also offset by the statement that it couldn’t be corroborated and that it was a sensational claim. The generic memo recap then states that there were 70 current investigations.

Now, without the benefit of hindsight, please answer me this:

Given the text of this memo, what action should President Bush have taken that would have been likely to prevent the attacks of 9/11?

As a bonus follow up, what are the chances that congress would have passed those changes prior to 9/11?

JadeNYU on February 4, 2009 at 6:03 PM

You can argue this case on the merits and maybe it was a bit mystifying. My caveat= “Mr.Obama dont say you weren’t warned”. Mystery solved.

canditaylor68 on February 4, 2009 at 6:04 PM

Why is this “mystifying”? It’s an issue of surpassing importance, and his concern has probable cause. And “bad form”? Give me a break, Jeeves.

rrpjr on February 4, 2009 at 6:05 PM

Y’know, Noneya, you’ve stated before how much your nieces and nephews adore you. Well, imagine how they would be impacted by a terrorist attack. That is why VP Cheney spoke out. And, if you were born in a country that practiced Islam, you would be dead. They would not tolerate
your “alternative lifestyle” or sexual preference.

As usual your points are “a ray of illunminating sunshine”. /sarc

kingsjester on February 4, 2009 at 6:07 PM

If you see something, say something.
Milhous has been put on notice.

diogenes on February 4, 2009 at 6:10 PM

More dust-up from’s Jennifer’s situation? Understood. Couldn’t catch anyone this afternoon. Will call more tomorrow. Tell Jennifer to hang in there.

kingsjester on February 4, 2009 at 6:11 PM

Oops. Wrong message. Brain Fart. Please disregard. Rebooting.

kingsjester on February 4, 2009 at 6:12 PM

Hey Dick what good were your “policies” on September 11, 2001?

benny shakar on February 4, 2009 at 4:52 PM

They were basically Bill Clinton’s policies in view of the fact that Bush and Cheney had not replaced Dick Clark (who oversaw every major AQ attack on US interest for about 6 or 7 years in a row) or Clinton’s FBI Director, CIA Director or Transportation Secretary.

Big mistake.

molonlabe28 on February 4, 2009 at 6:17 PM

I must confess I’m not sure what your purpose here is. You do not add much to the conversation beyond pithy 1-liners and you are unable/unwilling to back up your positions. That makes it hard to believe that your goal is to educate/convert people. It seems like your goal then is to agitate. But to what end? Seems like an epic waste of time to me.

JadeNYU on February 4, 2009 at 5:31 PM

Very well said and dead on.

Baxter Greene on February 4, 2009 at 6:18 PM

right2bright on February 4, 2009 at 5:26 PM

…the difference is that they were on foreign soil when [Clinton, Carter, Gore, et al] did that… The other was on foreign policy, and undermining it…

So now we’re splitting hairs and added all sorts of nuance. I had really hoped that “my side” actually had some principles on these things… who would have thought that most of the rest of you were just complaining when it was politically expedient!

I kid, I kid… I’ve been noting for quite a while, actually, that most of you are indistinguishable from Kossacks in terms of ideological nonsense.

DaveS on February 4, 2009 at 6:18 PM

He’s defending his (administration’s) record and covering all his bases. If Obama follows his advice and there are no more attcks, he and Bush are vindicated and the far left can gnash and wail all they like. If Obama doesn’t follow his advice and there is an attack, he owns it. If Obama follows his advice and there is an attack, what the hell, the right and left will tear us all apart, each blaming the other. Though the terrorists only have to be lucky once, and we have to be lucky every single time as some wise person once said.
And I agree with the other posters about bad form, AP. Good manners are wasted on Democrats and Islamists. The O’s administration is a sick joke/ bad dream so far, and I think it will get worse in so many ways yet.

Fortunata on February 4, 2009 at 6:21 PM

Given the text of this memo, what action should President Bush have taken that would have been likely to prevent the attacks of 9/11?

As a bonus follow up, what are the chances that congress would have passed those changes prior to 9/11?

JadeNYU on February 4, 2009 at 6:03 PM

Great breakdown on the PDB.
It will do you absolutely no good with noneya because she is all about one liners and trying to do her best Randy Rhodes impressions.
Facts are nothing but an inconvenience to her liberal agenda and far left beliefs.

She has been shown time and again that the PDB had no actionable intelligence and was found by the 9/11 commission
to not be of any help what so ever in stopping 9/11.The PDB contained most of the same broad intel that Clinton received
and both Presidents beefed up securities.

What would have been a big help is Clinton actually taking Osama out when he had over 8 chances to do so and being able to get into the al-qaeda guys computer in Michigan that contained planning for 9/11 but the Gorelick wall and other Clinton policies prevented us from doing it in time.

But hey,give noneya a break,she spends most of her time on her knees in front of this:

Obama Shrine
[Mark Steyn]
A reader took this picture today at a street fair at Hayes and Octavia in San Francisco, of all places:
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTQzNWU3YjliYzQwNDQwYjE1Y2U0MzA5NjU1MTYyZWY=

noneya needs to quit wasting our time whining and spouting her left wing drivel and go help her liberal hero Nancy find those 500 million jobs she is talking about.

Baxter Greene on February 4, 2009 at 6:34 PM

DaveS on February 4, 2009 at 6:18 PM

If you look back, a lot of people were much more agitated at statements made on foreign soil to foreign press than they were about statements made domestically. The whole “Politics stop at the water’s edge” concept was a constant refrain.

I also don’t recall many getting upset at things said by Al Gore either. Well, people got upset, but because what he said was stupid and not because he used to be the VP. I did however see plenty of people get upset at Carter (mostly) and Clinton (occasionally). The meme was former Presidents shouldn’t criticize sitting Presidents. This does not conflict at all with being alright with Cheney speaking out.

I’ve seen Kos-ish stuff on the part of a few folks here, but certainly not for the majority of people. Heck, just the fact that people have been trying to engage Noneya and benny shakar rather than auto-banning them for holding a different PoV puts us heads and tails above Kos.

JadeNYU on February 4, 2009 at 6:34 PM

Suddenly we’re free of it and able to engage purely on the merits

Sometimes AP says things that completely mystify me, and this tops them. On what occasion, ever, on any topic, have Democrats consented to debate any policy on the merits?

I shake my head, and join Ann Coulter in bemoaning the impulse that drives otherwise sensible Republicans and Libertarians to expect that somehow, this time the Democrats will actually like us and begin debating honestly and rationally. They can’t; it’s not only against their religion (seriously,) they’re psychologically incapable of it.

He may as well state the truth, AP. Democrats are going to hate us, and spew their unmasked, unhinged hatred, regardless of who defends.

philwynk on February 4, 2009 at 6:35 PM

I think we’re all pretty much screwed. Maybe I’ve just had a long day and I’m a little tired right now.
We’re doomed.
We were all wondering what Obama was really like. Sure,, we knew he was a Marxist. But,,, did he have an agenda? Was he going to be ruthless? Tough? Carter II.
Obviously,, he is just a moron man child who has to run off after two weeks to escape the pressures,,, even with an adoring media,,,, he can’t handle the pressures. Doesn’t have a clue. Can’t make up his mind. Doesn’t know who to appoint. This is really scary.

JellyToast on February 4, 2009 at 6:36 PM

As I said over at powerlineblog, I miss Dick Cheney. We don’t have adults in the White House anymore.

Keep in mind, too, that Carter, Clinton, Gore, Kerry, et al were doing their trash talking against the Bush administration overseas. Cheney is not trash talking here, though. He is giving sound advice, based on esperience and national intelligence.

Popularity games are what put the current nincompoops in charge. Barry, Joe, and the rest of the Kool Krewe had better recognize that they are not in junior high school any longer.

onlineanalyst on February 4, 2009 at 6:37 PM

The former Veep, who i ultimately and sadly judge to be far less than he might have been, needs to go away for a period of one year and NOT open his controversial pie-hole, for exactly the reasons AP describes.

You could hardly have handed the Dems/MSM a better way to turn people’s attention away from the Clown show that is Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid than for Cheney to pop off in this way. Epic Fail imo. Yet another example of his absolute p.r. tone-deafness, which I believe cost the Bush admin immeasurably in the court of public opinion.

I had such high hopes for Cheney as a communicative asset. I wanted him to run for POTUS in 1996 and 2000. But then he went into the bunker after 9/11 and never came out again. Yes, he was powerful behind the scenes, but he would have been equally valuable sticking pens in the necks of reporters and talk show hosts every other day for 8 years.

He coulda been a Hall of Famer instead, he got one All-Star appearance then disappeared into the weeds.

On balance, imo, Cheney was a net negative as VP. hate to say it but there it is.

Mike D. on February 4, 2009 at 6:59 PM

Allah, you are a pretty good reason why this blog is starting to smell…Whatever you may say about the GWOT related policies of the previous administration, you must conclude that the policies were successful. You dumping on Dick Cheney is a pointless exercise while his addressing the early moves of the Obama administration is reasonable given the nearly eight years of experience he has had taking the fight to al Qaeda.

Nozzle on February 4, 2009 at 7:00 PM

Dick Cheney truly loves this country. When he speaks it isn’t for political gain or the such, but because he truly understands the costs at hand.

President Bush may not be critical in public because he is an ex president, but Cheney has never hid the actthathe doesn’t play political games for his own advancement. And I miss him and miss having an adult in the White House!

Kevin in Southern Illinois on February 4, 2009 at 7:07 PM

If you look back, a lot of people were much more agitated at statements made on foreign soil to foreign press than they were about statements made domestically. The whole “Politics stop at the water’s edge” concept was a constant refrain.
JadeNYU on February 4, 2009 at 6:34 PM

The difference in some people’s minds when figure heads made disparaging remarks about Bush,was that they were “talking truth to power”.

Now all of a sudden dissent is not patriotic.

What Cheney has done in no way compares to the undermining of the Bush administration and our war efforts by the democrats:

Kerry: U.S. A “Pariah” Nation Under Bush
DAVOS, Switzerland, Jan. 27, 2007
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/27/politics/main2404562.shtml

(CBS/AP) Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry slammed the foreign policy of the Bush administration on Saturday, saying it has caused the United States to become “a sort of international pariah.”

The statement came as the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee responded to a question today at the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, where the tumult in Iraq and the Middle East took center stage.

Kucinich Sells Out U.S. to Syrian Infobabe

U.S. Congressman and presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich met with Syrian President Bashar Assad this week and subsequently interviewed with Syrian TV on September 3, 2007. In the interview with a Syrian infobabe, he suggested the U.S. seek the help of Syria and Iran as an international peacekeeping force to replace U.S. troops so there will be no vacuum for the bad guys to fill! He also said the U.S. should pay reparation to Iraqis for freeing them from decades of brutality under Saddam Hussein and that the U.S. is repsonsible for MILLIONS of Iraqis dying in the war.


Gore Laments U.S. ‘Abuses’ Against Arabs

Feb 12 10:08 PM US/Eastern
By JIM KRANE
Associated Press Writer
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8FNUKEO0&show_article=1

JIDDAH, Saudi Arabia (AP) – Former Vice President Al Gore told a mainly Saudi audience on Sunday that the U.S. government committed “terrible abuses” against Arabs after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and that most Americans did not support such treatment.

Gore said Arabs had been “indiscriminately rounded up” and held in “unforgivable” conditions. The former vice president said the Bush administration was playing into al-Qaida’s hands by routinely blocking Saudi visa applications.

These are just a few of our elected leaders undermining the
President and his policies.

This does not include the many liberal heroes like Micheal Moore who actually made propaganda films about how corrupt the administration was that was heralded by democrats here and distributed abroad,even distributed to Hamas/Hezbollah.

Movie stars and entertainers constantly called the President a liar,war monger,and an idiot to foreign audiences live and on television.

Getting all sensitive now because Cheney is basically telling Obama the truth is pathetically laughable,especially
coming from the same crowd that has hurled bigoted and ignorant accusations for 8 years regarding President Bush.

Baxter Greene on February 4, 2009 at 7:16 PM

Damn shame he ignored the 9/11 warnings and failed to get obl.

dick should have stuck to his words and retire out of politics.

He can’t change his failed legacy.

getalife on February 4, 2009 at 7:29 PM

I hope he’s not planning to make a practice of it.

Not me. I love hearing the newbie twerp put in his place on a daily basis.

Mojave Mark on February 4, 2009 at 7:39 PM

getalife on February 4, 2009 at 7:29 PM

So what’s the O’s policy on getting OBL? or does he wimp out and say “Oh, he’s not really all that important anyway?”. Talk about lowering the bar.

Fortunata on February 4, 2009 at 7:41 PM

He speaks the truth. Radical islam is not going to stop it’s quest to destory the west just because Barry Obama has decided to go soft on them.therightwinger on February 4, 2009 at 5:16 PM

Nor even because Obama, in 2006 in Kenya, supported the candidacy of and campaigned with his Sharia-loving cousin Odinga.

Basilsbest on February 4, 2009 at 7:47 PM

AP, what planet do you live on?

Maybe Cheney is speaking out of genuine concern.

I know he’s been reduced to a caricature by the left, but he is actually a man who has ideas, experience, and most likely, real concern for his country, no?

CarolynM on February 4, 2009 at 7:48 PM

So what’s the O’s policy on getting OBL? or does he wimp out and say “Oh, he’s not really all that important anyway?”. Talk about lowering the bar.Fortunata on February 4, 2009 at 7:41 PM

Like all liberals Obama naively believes that if he gets OBL that will somehow end the Islamic war on civilization.

Basilsbest on February 4, 2009 at 7:52 PM

Basilsbest on February 4, 2009 at 7:52 PM

Well, I’m not a liberal, but I’d like us to get him (and kill him) cos’, I’m a you know really, really, vindictive conservative…

Fortunata on February 4, 2009 at 7:58 PM

Getting obl gives the families of 9/11 some justice and tells the world you can’t attack our country and get away.

It is called accountability that is sorely missing in our country.

dick has opened an office in Washington so you will hear more from your hero.

I tend to listen to those with credibility.

getalife on February 4, 2009 at 8:08 PM

Baxter Greene @7:16

Great post. Much better than AP who naively tards us with this:

Suddenly we’re free of it and able to engage purely on the merits and here he is dumping it on us againV

As if anything but another attack will cause a change of policy in an administration whose ignorance is exceeded only by their smug arrogance.

Cheney is simply laying down a marker so that when the time comes we will know why the attacks have resumed.

Basilsbest on February 4, 2009 at 8:09 PM

ALLAHPUNDIT wrote:

Mystifying. Never mind that it’s bad form to criticize so soon after leaving office; why would he want to re-burden the pro-Gitmo side with the weight of his unpopularity? We’ve been carrying that load for years. Suddenly we’re free of it and able to engage purely on the merits and here he is dumping it on us again. For what?

1) Maybe he’s concerned about the safety of Americans.
2) Maybe he cares about American security.
3) Maybe libs aren’t the only ones who get to criticize a sitting president.
4) Maybe real men aren’t as concerned about public opinion, especially when its wrong, as they are national security, especially when its right.

Amy Proctor on February 4, 2009 at 8:09 PM

I would also suggest that what you call “dumping” is actually compelling. Cheney is part of the adminstration that kept America free from terrorist attacks after 9/11 for 7 years, you know. He might know what he’s talking about.

Amy Proctor on February 4, 2009 at 8:12 PM

Well, I’m not a liberal, but I’d like us to get him (and kill him) cos’, I’m a you know really, really, vindictive conservative…Fortunata on February 4, 2009 at 7:58 PM

We’d all like to get him but that won’t end the Islamic war being waged against us.

Basilsbest on February 4, 2009 at 8:14 PM

We’d all like to get him but that won’t end the Islamic war being waged against us.

Basilsbest on February 4, 2009 at 8:14 PM

So?

Fortunata on February 4, 2009 at 8:16 PM

It is called accountability that is sorely missing in our country.

I welcome getalife’s call for Geithner’s resignation. Keep up the good work getalife.

Basilsbest on February 4, 2009 at 8:18 PM

Fortunata

So liberals should stop pretending that there hasn’t been significant progess in the last 7 years just b/c bin Laden wasn’t killed.

Basilsbest on February 4, 2009 at 8:23 PM

So liberals should stop pretending that there hasn’t been significant progess in the last 7 years just b/c bin Laden wasn’t killed.

Basilsbest on February 4, 2009 at 8:23 PM

Well OK, but that shouldn’t stop us trying is what I’m saying.

Fortunata on February 4, 2009 at 8:26 PM

Give ‘em h*ll Richard!

ex-Democrat on February 4, 2009 at 8:40 PM

F@8:26

We’re ad idem.

Basilsbest on February 4, 2009 at 8:49 PM

Obama has been talking nonsense for weeks about extending protections to terrorists for which they do not qualify (Geneva Convention Protections) and limiting interrogation techniques to those outlined in the US Army Field Manual.

Moreover, he has ordered a halt to judicial proceedings and will be closing the detention facility without saying where precisely these terrorists will be incarcerated. Cheney and the rest of America have a right to be concerned. As one of the architects of the system and as Veep, Cheney has spent the last 8 years thinking about these problems and is one of the most uniquely qualified people to offer an opinion.

Obama made an entire campaign running against policies and programs for which he had limited knowledge and next to no experience digesting. Combined with a dangerous level of self confidence that borders on hubris and a demonstrably sycophantic press, I think we should all have concerns when there is talk of upending successful policies born over time and through experience.

I say go Cheney.

moxie_neanderthal on February 4, 2009 at 9:10 PM

Dick Cheney’s honor, integrity and patriotism are unquestionable IMHO. If he is saying these things, it’s NOT to “give cover” when someone asks why weren’t we warned. It is not because he’s a pizzy old guy who’s now free to comment. It is not because he was previously muzzled and can now speak his mind. It is because he is scared chitless about what he knows and does not want to see that happen to the country he loves more than his life.

Chewy the Lab on February 4, 2009 at 5:55 PM

I believe it! It’s bloody frightening.

4shoes on February 4, 2009 at 9:18 PM

I believe it! It’s bloody frightening.

4shoes on February 4, 2009 at 9:18 PM

Don’t you know it my friend!

Chewy the Lab on February 4, 2009 at 9:36 PM

I bet Cheney would b*tch slap Obummer for like 5 bucks… Okay, he’d pay 20, but not a penny more.

RalphyBoy on February 4, 2009 at 9:53 PM

3) Yeah. He ain’t popular. He’s also a guy that doesn’t seem to give a shit what the dumb masses think. Rightly so.

LimeyGeek on February 4, 2009 at 5:01 PM

I think his comments may have been aimed at many politicians and others with influence in the administration, not to the average citizen. And as far as popularity, let’s ask that question again in 4 years…or sooner if we are attacked during the BHO Presidency.

Red State State of Mind on February 4, 2009 at 9:55 PM

I trust him. Cheney basically said we’re f***ked. I believe him, unfortunately.

Chewy the Lab on February 4, 2009 at 9:59 PM

YES! Lets force this SOB to walk the tightrope.

allrsn on February 4, 2009 at 10:11 PM

Cheney is right..

and the real reason on hannity tonight that the liberal lady was so upset was..

She and all liberals DO NOT want any public acknowledgment
that they are tearing down every security apparatus we have in place..

Because the liberals know if they are WRONG
and we get hit again and millions of americans DIE

We will Personally HOLD every liberal lawmaker and lawyer responsible and we will take them to task for
AIding the enemies of the United states of america.

I have read bin ladens letter (unlike all liberals)
and i know exactly what he is doing and planning
it isnt hard you morons

He is telling you
1. convert to islam and join him
2. pay the jizra protection racket tax in the billions and all is well (but you must SHOW your second class status)..
3. DIE…

How hard is this folks?

jcila on February 4, 2009 at 10:27 PM

Cheney is laying the cards on the table.

1. He’s speaking through the media bubble, telling other politicians and citizens to be vigilant. The danger is not passed.

2. He’s laying down a marker- this is the direction we went in, and 9/11 was not repeated. If (when?) Obama changes course, if preventable disaster occurs it’s all on Obama and Cheney wants to make sure he knows it.

3. He’s writing a book. May as well cash in on his years in government. I bet it’ll have some very interesting stories.

4. He’s off the leash. Some comments were considered controversial, but he was actually quite subdued and served well in a supporting role for Bush. They’re out of office, and he’s free to say exactly what he thinks, however he wants to say it. No more “undisclosed locations,” unless that’s what he wants.

I love Cheney.

cs89 on February 4, 2009 at 10:42 PM

Never mind that it’s bad form to criticize so soon after leaving office — Allapundit

Bad form? BAD FORM??? Obama criticized Bush in front of his face and the rest of the world during the inaugural address. Team Obama set the standard, I wish Cheney would get more airtime and call out the hollow deity regularly.

cannonball on February 4, 2009 at 11:40 PM

Dick Cheney’s honor, integrity and patriotism are unquestionable IMHO. If he is saying these things, it’s NOT to “give cover” when someone asks why weren’t we warned. It is not because he’s a pizzy old guy who’s now free to comment. It is not because he was previously muzzled and can now speak his mind. It is because he is scared chitless about what he knows and does not want to see that happen to the country he loves more than his life.
Chewy the Lab on February 4, 2009 at 5:55 PM

Had to bring this quote up because it was sooo good.

More recently, cs89, I am crazy about, almost to the point of hero-worship, Cheney too. Reminds me of my dear deceased dad, decisive, appropriately deferential to his boss, knows his stuff and isn’t afraid to say so, loyal to a fault, never seeking personal adulation for himself. Bush was prescient in choosing such a good, cowboy-up man standing beside and behind him.
Cheney has been thoroughly and unfairly villainized by the opposition media, mostly because he was such an asset, but he still stands tall, proud, and rightly so.

And if anyone disagrees with this, be forewarned: I. Don’t. Give. A. Poop.

marybel on February 5, 2009 at 12:04 AM

Looking back before I sign off and go to bed, I also give kudos to fellow insomniacs: jcita, Red State…, Ralphy, 4shoes, and Ralphie…sweet dreams, my friends!

marybel on February 5, 2009 at 12:13 AM

because shrub left us with a surplus like Clinton did?

Noneya on February 4, 2009 at 5:24 PM

Ah, giving Clinton a pass on both leaving us unprotected from Islamist terrorists (yes, he did have up to a dozen chances to get Osama…) and excusing what it cost.
Clinton only had a surplus, because he gutted the military and used cheap shots like cruise missile hits as a way to “control” both OBL and Saddam.
Only the most pathetic Leftist trolls call President Bush “shrub.”
President Bush was well on his way to halving the deficit when the sub-prime crisis hit and your boy NObama voted for TARP only with the others.

Jenfidel on February 5, 2009 at 1:22 AM

I guess the question is: Who is Al Qaeda more fearful of…???

Dick “Vader” Cheney, or Barack “Please Tea-Bag Me” Obama

Opinionnation on February 5, 2009 at 1:52 AM

I would also suggest that what you call “dumping” is actually compelling. Cheney is part of the adminstration that kept America free from terrorist attacks after 9/11 for 7 years, you know. He might know what he’s talking about.

Amy Proctor

This is why I care about Dick Cheney’s opinion. It would be easier for him to keep quiet and avoid the wrath of AP’s negative opinion (I’m sure it keeps him up an night), but America means enough to him to endure the limp-wristed finger-pointing and tsk-tsking of anonymous bloggers. It was comforting to know that there was at least one functioning set of stones in the white house the past eight years. But for his heart ailment, I’m confident I would be calling him President Cheney today.

SKYFOX on February 5, 2009 at 5:20 AM

I guess the question is: Who is Al Qaeda more fearful of…???

Dick “Vader” Cheney, or Barack “Please Tea-Bag Me” Obama

Good question. All we do know is that Al Qaeda certainly wasn’t afraid of George “Stammering Fool” Bush.

Let’s Roll!!

Vernon Hardapple on February 5, 2009 at 9:57 AM

Good question. All we do know is that Al Qaeda certainly wasn’t afraid of George “Stammering Fool” Bush.

Let’s Roll!!

Vernon Hardapple on February 5, 2009 at 9:57 AM

Morons on parade!

Yeah, your “man” NObama is really showing up George Bush as a stammering fool, all right./sarcasm off
AQ was afraid of GWB: there were no more attacks here after 9/11 and the Bush Administration’s WOT decimated their leadership and ranks considerably and hopefully, fatally.
Taking them on in Iraq and Afghanistan was exactly the right thing to do.

Jenfidel on February 5, 2009 at 10:22 AM

Cheney warns Obama: Stick with our policies or risk a WMD attack

[sarcasm]
Mr. Cheney, is that a threat against this nation on your part? It’s kind of hard to come up with WMD without some significant backing. No, your lunch doesn’t count.
[/sarcasm]

Remove the political context from the military action. That is, remove the names and associations of individuals and their political party. Think of it of as “did the job get done?” and follow that path.

sethstorm on February 5, 2009 at 11:12 AM

Gotta love Cheney.

LtE126 on February 5, 2009 at 11:14 AM

Allah, what a total idiot you are… Geez, with morons like you on “our” side why should we worry about the Messiah and his Commies?

Very simple… He loves his Country and as a Conservative and a citizen has EVERY FRICKING RIGHT to yell and scream and talk to whomever will listen that The Leaders plans are putting ALL OF US in harms way…

With comments like this I can see why PJM is pulling the plug on so called “conservative” bloggers like you!

Geez…

Mark Garnett on February 5, 2009 at 1:45 PM

Allah, you’re reading too much NYT, Time, Newsweek, etc.

When a Medal of Freedom winner (1991) — who served as Secretary of Defense during the Persian Gulf War (which we we won in about 20 mintes — tells us something about the Middleeastern mind-set, we’d we wise to listen.

Dick Cheney is a national treasure, and those in the media who demonize him are traitorous fools, who are only weakening our national resolve.

Or as Colonel Nathan Jessup might say…

“Son, we live in a world that has walls and those walls need to be guarded by men with guns… I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom… I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said “thank you,” and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest that you pick up a weapon and stand a post.”

VastRightWingConspirator on February 5, 2009 at 2:52 PM

Allah-not-so-wise:

The former vice-president is setting the record clearly and from a higher podium (despite what you think of his popularity ratings.)

He stated well-known facts? Yes, and his urging is backed up with not-so-well known facts, including years of security briefings.

What will you say after an al-Queda/terrorist attack and the left says it’s Bush’s fault (somehow)?

That will be their only fall back.

You can pull out this clip. But then an apology would be in order to the guy you think is dumping on the parade.

65droptop on February 5, 2009 at 6:37 PM

Comment pages: 1 2