Vice President Dick Cheney, one of the most unpopular politicians in America, was in Tulsa Friday night singing the praises of his boss, President George W. Bush.
Cheney spoke to about 400 party faithful at the Oklahoma Republican Convention at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in downtown Tulsa.
Never one to reflect on the Bush administration's many foreign and domestic failures, Cheney painted an optimistic portrait of the president and his policies. "When the history is written it will be said this is a safer country and a more hopeful world because George Bush was president," Cheney told the convention.
Cheney's sunny prediction overlooks his own dismal performance as a Iraq war prognosticator, where few if any of his predictions have come true. This was the guy, after all, who said made it perfectly clear that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. As Cheney famously put it, there was "no doubt" about this fact.
Cheney's optimism also flies in the face of public opinion polls this week that show Bush's approval at a record low, with less than 30 percent of the public favoring the president.
With gas prices at record highs, a housing crisis, a credit crunch and no end in sight in Iraq, Cheney (and his Oklahoma supporters) are hoping history will vindicate their policies. That could happen, we suppose, but it's a faint hope at this point.
Based on their multitude of mistakes over the past seven years, Bush and Cheney are unlikely to escape the verdict of history.
3 comments:
Y'know, I'm none too wild about Dick Cheney and the rest of the neocon crowd, either, but some of this material just amazes me in that there is not the slightest indication that your own party bears any responsibility.
Cheney...was the guy, after all, who said made it perfectly clear that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. As Cheney famously put it, there was "no doubt" about this fact.
Any guesses who said this?
Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them. Not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq.
The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again.
And this one:
We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.
And this one:
I believe in negotiated solutions to international conflict. This is, unfortunately, not going to be the case in this situation where Saddam Hussein has been a repeat offender, ignoring the international community's requirement that he come clean with his weapons program.
And this one:
...there is every evidence, from the dossier prepared by the Prime Minister of Britain, to President Bush’s speech at the United Nations, that Saddam has rebuilt substantial chemical and biological weapons stocks, and that he is determined to obtain the means necessary to produce nuclear weapons. He has ballistic missiles, and more are on order.
And this one:
intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.
It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.
I could go on for quite a while collecting quotes from Democrats who thought Saddam was a whale of a threat. Many of them thought that pre-emptive strikes were wrong or ill-advised, but still voted to give the President that power, an act of political cowardice that staggers the imagination.
The simple reality is that if Democrats at the time didn't want to go to war, it would have been a simple enough matter to just vote no. They didn't. They are complicit in whatever happens in Iraq. When you paint Dick Cheney as a fool or a liar for saying these things, you are whitewashing Democrat history, for they said exactly the same thing.
...public opinion polls this week that show Bush's approval at a record low, with less than 30 percent of the public favoring the president.
I am continually amazed at how you will cite Bush's low approval ratings when any idiot can look it up and see that this Democratically-controlled Congress's ratings are even lower--by about seven points! Whatever else is going on, those figures would indicate that bad as the public perceives the President to be, they think he's doing a better job than your Democrat Congress. It would be hard to blame someone for thinking that you live in an alternate universe altogether, so persistent is your failure to note this.
With gas prices at record highs, a housing crisis, a credit crunch and no end in sight in Iraq...
Every scrap of which has taken place or continued with a Democratic congress in place. In some cases, they've aided and abetted!
I'm not denying, as you know, that there are serious problems in the Bush administration or with Dick Cheney. But to portray the situation as being all bad Republican and no bad Democrat is silly.
I can't stand Cheney; AT ALL. I've gotten tired of Bush spending like a liberal lately. But Dan makes several valid points with his referenced material.
But where's the mention of the Democratic controlled Congress and it's faults? Hmmmmm.
democrats should have looked beyond the trumped up information provided by bush's administration.
to do so, of course, would have branded them as traitors, as enemies of america. they went with the information they had. who would have imagined that the CIA, the FBI, the pentagon, our generals, would lie? would twist the information?
that's the outrage here and that is the thing for which they should be impeached.
cheney is a wretched, horrible pig. i don't know how he can sleep at night.
Post a Comment