Cheney Attacks

Pelosi fires back:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Cheney's remarks prove that "the administration's answer to continuing violence in Iraq is more troops and more treasure from the American people."

I still don't feel that Democrats have located the appropriately disrespectful tone for responding to Cheney's foreign policy pearls of wisdom. If David Duke were to slam Pelosi as insufficiently committed to white supremacy, she wouldn't start quibbling with him. Getting smeared by Cheney isn't the same as that (but let him complain then come back with, sorry, it's easy to get confused when you're talking about one of congress' foremost supporters of the apartheid regime in South Africa), but it's still a situation where his attacks should be worn as a badge of honor. Substantively, the man is a horror. Conveniently, he's also wildly unpopular. I mean, he's got to be one of the least-popular major American political figures ever. It seems to me that "When Dick Cheney criticizes the House Democrats, that's how we know we must be doing something right" is along the right lines. I mean, I think the period during which Cheney and his "gravitas" were well-respected around the nation is long behind us at this point.

Comments

Cheney's cup is 29% full, not 71% empty.

Posted by Frank Furtive | March 13, 2007 3:02 AM

Somebody asked Biden whether he'd like to respond to some churlish comments of Cheney's a while back, and he handled it pretty well- something like, "No, I don ’t want to respond to him. He’s at 20 percent in the polls. No one listens to him. He has no credibility."

Posted by Dan | March 13, 2007 3:10 AM

How about,

"As the architect of a failed war, Dick Cheney has no credibility on foreign policy. He continues to be an embarrassment to the Bush administration."

Posted by mk | March 13, 2007 3:32 AM

How about, "The only time in the past six years Cheney has been on the mark was when he shot his friend in the face"?

Posted by Media Glutton | March 13, 2007 3:51 AM

i cast my vote for Media Glutton's submission

Posted by bs23 | March 13, 2007 4:24 AM

I prefer Pelosi's response. Cheney has nothing more to lose in terms of personal popularity, but he still has the abilty to get quoted in the media. An argument made and repeated is not completely negated by fact that you don't like the speaker. And it's hardly an argument to point to someone's poll numbers.

We should rather be figuring out how to get politicians to stop calling military spending "treasure". "Treasure" as in "blood and treasure" sounds kind of grave in an John Warner speech, but not as a standard substitute for "the defense budget". If you're pumping it into a slot machine or a vending machine it's coin or dough. If you're buying bullets, humvees, mess hall food and latrines, it's apparently "treasure".

Posted by Jeremiah J. | March 13, 2007 5:04 AM

How about Pelosi just telling the truth?
"Dick Cheney is a lying fuck who deserves to be handcuffed and marched off to prison."

Posted by Willy | March 13, 2007 5:51 AM

"No one has been more influential in turning Iraq into a haven for terrorists. When he apologizes for that, when he explains where he went so wrong, when he stops dividing the nation in a time of war, then maybe he will be worth responding to."

Then tack on what Media GLutton wrote.

Posted by theCoach | March 13, 2007 7:05 AM

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Cheney's remarks prove that "the administration's answer to continuing violence in Iraq is more troops and more treasure from the American people."

Ummm...this isn't even a properly critical response. If spoken with an appropriately respectful tone - and maybe changing "treasure" to "financial commitment", this statement could come from one of Cheney's supporters.

Posted by Dan Kervick | March 13, 2007 7:55 AM

Far more people self indentify as conservatives than liberals. Therefore Cheney has a larger pool of people to tap than Democrats when lobbying for support on an issue. Bush isn't the only conservative that values loyalty above all else in his compatriots. That trait extends throught the community on the Right. Cheney may poll poorly but I'd wager fully half the population (the half that elected this administration TWICE) would still stand solidly behind him in an all out scrap with Democratic leadership. We on the left were weary of this war even before it was started. Conversely those I observe on the Right are perfectly happy to keep pulling the trigger until their fingers seize up in exhaustion. I don't see Cheney in big trouble with most people, nor do I see Pelosi the winner should she choose to aggressively call him out. Regardless of what Democrats do the Right will record the history of this war and it will be Democrats tagged (wrongfully) with the responsibility for losing it. Vietnam redux.

Posted by steve duncan | March 13, 2007 7:55 AM

How about a response more on these lines:

The only thing this sad, weakened man has left is repetitive fear-mongering and bluster. You can clench your jaw as much as you want, but it doesn't make you strong; and no matter how many times you say the same thing over and over, it doesn't make you any smarter.

Nothing gives more comfort to our enemies than the thought of almost two more years of Bush and Cheney at the helm. For the sake of our troops, it's time for these two to step aside and defer to Congress.

Posted by Dan Kervick | March 13, 2007 8:09 AM

Cheney says we are undermining the troops in Iraq. Having troops in Iraq is undermining our fight against those who attacked us on 9/11.

Then what Media Glutton said.

Posted by Th | March 13, 2007 9:05 AM

How about this:

"Dick Cheney is the worst Vice President in history. His idea of supporting the troops is outing a CIA agent who risked her life on behalf of the American people, and then covering it up, having his Chief of Staff commit perjury.

Vice President Cheney has been disastrously wrong about everything connected with the war in Iraq (last throes, Atta in Hungary, etc.). He has absolutely no crediblity on the issue, and the idea that he would criticize Democrats over Iraq policy is absurd.

The best thing Vice President Cheney can do for effort in Iraq, and the American people more generally, is resign."

Seriously though, why aren't the Dems calling for Cheney to resign?

Posted by Dave | March 13, 2007 9:13 AM

Cheney is not at all healthy, and is heavily medicated. I would really like to know whether he's taking mood-enhancers of some sort. Some drugs make you a lot happier and more energetic while making your judgement worse. (I'm not up on today's pharmacology, but back in the day it was forms of amphetamine). To make serious decisions you have to think of the down side, and artifically-cheerful people don't do that.

Old friends have commented that the Cheney of today is not the man they remember, and medication could explain that. (At one time it was speculated that Cheney suffered from a specific problem called "pump head", but as I understand that idea has been discredited).

For the record, this is not one of my provocative joke posts. I think that over the decades a fair number of big-time policy people have relied on mood enhancers and energy pills, whether amphetamines or something else, and I think that some of the bad judgment you see can be traced to that.

Posted by John Emerson | March 13, 2007 9:19 AM

There's a problem-- Chaney is, as a matter of fact, Vice President of the United States. He's ill, he's irrational, he's unpopular, but you can't just dismiss him.

Posted by MattF | March 13, 2007 9:31 AM

"No one has been more influential in turning Iraq into a haven for terrorists. When he apologizes for that, when he explains where he went so wrong, when he stops dividing the nation in a time of war, then maybe he will be worth responding to."

I like it...

Posted by Eric Martin | March 13, 2007 10:05 AM

Here's how I would respond.

Dick Cheney wants to talk about supporting the troops. But this administration has failed to support the troops at every turn. They got the intelligence wrong and sent the troops into harm's way. They sent the troops to war with inadequate armor and equipment. They ignored the phase for rebuilding Iraq, leaving the troops in danger without a plan for success. They ignored the cost of multiple redeployments, repeatedly tearing soldiers away from their families. They failed to care for the injured troops in the military and VA hospitals. And they plan to keep this up indefinitely, with no exit in sight.

This administration has no idea how to support the troops. And that's why the Congress must consider bringing them home.

Posted by cisko | March 13, 2007 10:17 AM

I don't think that anyone "dismisses" Cheney. I find him terrifying, given his influential position. But he doesn't deserve any respect or deference at all; we should be looking for ways to get him out of there. I think that there are probably adequate grounds for impeachment.

Up to a certain point, you give people the respect due their office, even though you think that they personally don't deserve respect. There comes a point when you have to stop doing that, just because of the fact that their office is so powerful. At that point you have a collapse. You go from conditional respect to strong opposition. If they're bad enough that they no longer to deserve even conditional polite respect, they're almost certainly a clear and present danger which soemthing has to be done about.

Posted by John Emerson | March 13, 2007 10:22 AM

I nominate "Would somebody please give Cheney a rabies shot?"

Posted by JP | March 13, 2007 10:40 AM

I blame the Dems who let this nutball run for VP twice and never laid a glove on him. You really expect them to start laying into him now?

Posted by Steve | March 13, 2007 10:58 AM

Badge of honor is exactly right. Every time Cheney tries out his traitor rant the Dems should loudly proclaim how honored they are and then start talking about the disgraceful way this administration has treated wounded veterans and their families.

Posted by Jmo | March 13, 2007 12:07 PM

I nominate Eric Martin to come up with a song title or lyric to respond. ;)

Posted by theCoach | March 13, 2007 12:16 PM