Dick Cheney
 

Always a very secretive guy, believed
in the power of the executive branch (especially
the VP part of it) and so he decides he would
like some government information about torture
released to the public to show it is helpful and necessary.

The CIA was requested by Cheney to release the info.

Oh the irony...

A C.I.A. spokesman, Paul Gimigliano, on Thursday explained that under the executive order governing classified information, documents that are the subject of pending litigation cannot be reviewed for release.

“For that reason – and that reason only – C.I.A. did not accept Mr. Cheney’s request for a mandatory declassification review,” Mr. Gimigliano said. “The agency simply followed the executive order.”

the longer dick and rush remain the face of the republican party, the better.

it's an idea that unifies foaming fox viewers and democratic strategists.

long live dick and rush!

I just cannot believe he would ask that
anything be made public after all the crap
he pulled.

he's out of office and Pelosi is not?

He really made it very clear during his tenture
that the public had no business fiddling in government
affairs. And then he goes and asks for CIA documents
be made public?

Pelosi is apparently a liar. She is backtracking big time.
Oh I did know in 2003 about the torture but
was not given accurate information. Digging
herself further in. Now she admits she did get info
about torture early on but it was not accurate.

Take these 2 along with Steele and Palin you got a real nice superfecta!:rolleyes:

I totally believe that some things that pertain to our government should not be transparent......I think Dick is calling Obamas bluff by asking that documents be released about what information was obtained. After great thought it seems the president doesnt think that bringing all this to light was such a brainstorm ..... good call on the presidents part and in hindsight Im sure he wishes that he would have let sleeping dogs lie , but he didnt and so he will do the some back peddling and say its to protect troops when in fact he knows he should have just kept his pie hole shut.

the only individual hurt by this so far is Pelosi and how sweet it is.

Waiting for the 'I was medicated because I had one of my facelifts' excuse from old Nancy.

Probably true.
Cheney has already died a few times.
I guess he just likes making a fool of himself.

i'm wondering why they haven't dug up the corpse of richard nixon and paraded that around.

wouldn't he be more popular?

i'd feel sorry for those republicans trying to turn a page, put the past behind and get the party headed the right direction if it wasn't so delightful watching dick drag them back into the pit every chance he gets.

he's given more interviews since the inauguration than he did the last 2 years he was in office. he's so f'in awesome.

apparently his new "undisclosed location" is the fox green room. i hope he never leaves.

He is just following the lead of the new president , Obama is the one that wanted to say we tortured people, his party is the one that says we should do something to the people who knew it was happening. Now all of a sudden the president decides that maybe it isnt such a good idea to drag all this stuff out , that in fact it might be better to have military tribunals for the terrorists we have in custody , Im just wondering how he came upon such an epiphany.
I often wonder how many Nazi's were shot on site when the camps were liberated , or how many Japanese had the same happen to them? , and where are the pictures of that, shouldnt we prosecute the people who did that ?
Shouldnt we find the people who smacked the **** out of "gooks" so we could get information from them during Vietnam and Korea ?

i'm not arguing.

nothing makes me happier than to have dick in the lead on this.

he's absolutely the spokesperson i'd choose for republicans if, in some fevered dream, i thought it was possible i'd get to choose.

and we get to keep the focus on the prior admin's policies?

it's like winning the lottery.

There were no Nazi's in Germany after the country
was overrun. They all... switched parties. That is
part of the reason for the Nuremberg Trials. People
usually dont just come out and openly admit they are terrorists
or particpated in genocide. Everyone, including Obama, knew this
was going to be tough to determine who did what.

brilliant shoot yourself in the foot strategy
 

big mistake by Obama /Pelosi to keep on this subject of Gitmo, torture etc. It has blown up in their faces. Obama looks like an inexperienced rube taking every position in the book, and finally ending up where Bush was, and Pelosi has been exposed as a fraud while both of them have made enemies at the CIA. All because they cannot resist going after Bush Cheney even though they have nothing to gain from it.

Republicans didn't send Cheney out there, Obama forced his hand.

Then he is not very loyal to his party.
Makes Republicans look old, tired and bitter.
And stupid...

Cheney asking for sensitive information to
be released to the public...
Unbelievable gall.

Pot-Kettle-Black

When Dems flip flop it's the second armageddon..when righties do it it's "good policy"...unreal hypocricy again..

obama/pelosi. did we give up on obama/blago?

the litmus test for dems has to be that so long as republicans are focused on linking him to the somewhat less popular flavor of the moment, things are going pretty well. particularly with dick cheney insisting on being the public face of the opposition.

and i love the evolution of republican arguement.

1) we don't torture.

2) okay. we do torture but it works.

3) so, we're not sure it works but nancy knew.

thats a path back to power if i ever saw one.

haha, not hardly, Cheney standing up for the policies has made Obama look petty, after all, he is recklessly persuing political gains while sacrificing national security.

it wasn't Cheneys choice to have the tortures memos released. after they dumped on our intelligence community by selectively releasing sensitive material that they thought would play well in the media and put Bush/Cheney in a bad light, Cheney requested that they at least be honest and release the documents that showed what intel was gained by using those measures. at this point the only damage that would be done by that is to Obama.

you must really like the evolution of Obama arguments then.
his positions as a campaigner have not held up very well. first he's closing Gitmo and against tribunals, now he finds out that he can't close Gitmo and tribunals aren't such a bad idea.

Cheney is answering the charges against the Bush administration, he is not trying to be the face of the opposition. frankly its not a bad thing for current Republicans because they don't have to weigh in on the issue, they don't have to be dragged into the nonsense. they can sit back and watch Obama take on his favorite demons; Bush, Cheney, Limbaugh, Rove, etc. the guy is transparent and thin-skinned.

so long as other republicans remain invisible, then cheney and limbaugh are the public face of the party. and i'm not saying that's a bad thing. i'm all for it.

and so far as thin skinned goes, i'd have to give that award to the guy who used to be in an undisclosed location but now can't find enough microphones. he really has made more media appearances since jan 20th then he did all of 2007 and 2008 combined.

that despite the fact "current republicans" might want to distance themselves from past failures.

democratic strategists love cheney. he is doing all he can to delay the day when republicans might return to power. don't expect dems to disengage. it's to their advantage to keep cheney worked up.

that isn't being thin skinned. it's being expedient.

cheney must feel he has nothing to lose...he doesn't really. so, he'll be the attack dog for the republicans while they cast about for their new leader....

Cheney is a patriot who wants to see the country's defenses remain strong.

FTFY

That was mature. That was about as intellectual as the current Democratic leadership, you know, the ones who are inviting another attack upon the United States for their own petty political motives.

you can't be serious?!

Why can't I be? Would you assert in the reverse that getting rid of special interrogation techniques is going to help our security? That niavete' is dangerous, especially coming from the White House. It is among the most absurd and ridiculous positions that I've ever witnessed from a president, and yes, that includes the numerous missteps of his predecessor.

Sorry, I'm an adult, so I don't believe that playing nice with the terrorist captives is going to make them stop attacking us. It won't. What Obama and the Congress are sending to the world through their actions is a perception that America is weak. That ultimately will result in another attack. When it does, since the Democrats are in total control (as they are fond of pointing out), all the blame, and all the blood, will be on their hands.

I hope it never happens, but that is the hypothetical situation as it now sits.

SO SAYETH THE PSALM!

It was about as intellectual as calling him a patriot. What makes him a patriot?

Was it the draft dodge or the no bid contracts?

I would think it would be the self-proclaimed "messiah" and his supporters that would use that kind of phrase.

What I said follows from logic: if you end a technique that was adding safety to the country (a supposition), then it must follow that the country is less safe after the practice is ended. That means that the risk for an attack will increase. If the attack, which may or may not happen, actually occurs, than in hindsight it MUST be true, that those who chose to end the practice are to blame for the added risk and increased certainty of the attack that occurred.

What was speculative before the attack is a certainty after, and the people will be very angry with the Democrats. This in spite of whatever euphoria people currently are experiencing with the Obama administration in the first 100+ days.

That's not biblical. That's an equation. If you want to break the argument, break the logic.

OK, I'll grant you: he's not perfect. Nor is he a messiah.

But his stand on this issue is patriotic. So he is a patriot with regard to this issue specifically, and with American security in general as a result. More so than the Democrats who want to release the Guantanamo detained terrorists into the United States.

I dont think obama wants to do that. I think obama wants to keep gitmo open and leave the tribunals in place which is a departure from what he campaigned for.

I applaud his willingness to change his mind.

Well, I'll applaud that too. That makes sense. Of course that also means that Bush was not wrong with regard to using Gitmo and having tribunals. It can't be that Obama was right and Bush was wrong when both had the same stand on the issue.

Agreed. Bush wasnt wrong about everything and Obama won't be right about everything.

I don't know if I agree if he is right here. Time will tell.

Cheers!:)

well a few of my favorites here

d cheney.. just review the movie 'w' i think you will see what i mean

rush..l the 'jimmy the greek' of the republicans

polosi = 5 martini drinker.

im a 'rightie' bob thats rough from you.but these people are just soap scum

again the whole republican party cant be roped into these few things..ill grow tired if we had to defend the past 4 years for the next 4..

Speaking of draft dodgers...
 

So this Big Dick draft dodger





backs this big slob draft dodger





Over this decorated Four Star General





And some of you applaud the draft dodgers....

Figures

i am not naive, nor do i believe that taking a position opposite of george bush indicates a desire to have this country be attacked. that's an overly simplistic view of dems vs reps in my opinion. and, as dala said, the closing of gitmo is not seemingly on obamas list of things to do.

Fox News is based on that 1-2-3 dance method. They often keep going 'til about 10 though.

no one wants a terrorist attack in the united states more than poor sulking rejected conservatives. you can almost smell the relish for that lovely day when they roll out triumphant "i told you so's". if we had just been allowed that 184th waterboarding session, none of this would have happened...

as a nation, you may have moved on america but your old boyfriend still holds a grudge. he's praying you have a car wreck with the new guy. then you'll be sorry.

i hope obama fails and thousands of you die.

i get the feeling you're thinking of folks like rush when you say that. and you're probably right-they would say told you so if it was to happen.

since the rest of the republicans have ceded the field to a foaming rabble, what's the real difference?

it's not like that party is going to nominate another john mccain in 2012.