< link rel="DCTERMS.isreplacedby" href="http://www.sotr.us" >
Republic. I like the sound of the word. It means people can live free, talk free, go or come, buy or sell, be drunk or sober, however they choose. Some words can give you a feeling that makes your heart warm. Republic is one of those words. - John Wayne

Wednesday, October 06, 2004
 
VP Debate: Cheney Style
by Bonjo
Follow are quotes from last night's VP debate between Dick "Big Time" Cheney and John "Breck Girl" Edwards. As background for your reading, you might consider this.

"With respect to the cost [of the war in Iraq], it wasn't $200 billion. You probably weren't there to vote for that."
Zing! Ouch, the truth of attendance records hurts, doesn't it, Senator Edwards?

"The effort that we've mounted with respect to Iraq focused specifically on the possibility that this was the most likely nexus between the terrorists and weapons of mass destruction."
In other words, there's more than one threat to our nation at any given time, and we have the troops and forces to deal with said threats concurrently. Of course, there is no need to tell John Edwards that.

"A little tough talk in the midst of a campaign or as part of a presidential debate cannot obscure a record of 30 years of being on the wrong side of defense issues."
Ever hear of "talking trash"? That's what Cheney was referring to here. In other words, talk is cheap... until you hire a lawyer. Or even worse, a pair of lawyers.

"Your rhetoric, Senator, would be a lot more credible if there was a record to back it up. There isn't. And you cannot use 'talk tough' during the course of a 90-minute debate in a presidential campaign to obscure a 30-year record in the United States Senate and, prior to that by John Kerry, who has consistently come down on the wrong side of all the major defense issues that he's faced as a public official."
See above, re: "talk is cheap... until you hire a lawyer."

"We've never criticized John Kerry's patriotism. What we've questioned is his judgment..."
Finely clarified and delineated!

"...And his judgment's flawed, and the record's there for anybody who wants to look at it ... When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait and occupied it in 1990 and '91, John Kerry stood up on the floor of the Senate and voted against going in to liberate Kuwait and push Saddam Hussein back to Iraq."
Yes, that's correct. Kerry wanted to let Saddam and his thugs retain control of Kuwait in 1991. As Cheney said, "the record's there for anybody who wants to look at it." Apparently, no one in the mainstream media has thus far felt the need.

"So they, in effect, decided they would cast an anti-war vote, and they voted against the troops. Now, if they couldn't stand up to the pressures that Howard Dean represented, how can we expect them to standup to Al Qaeda?"
Howard "I Have a Scream" Dean strikes again! Kerry worried many Democrats when he leaned in favor of the war. In order to deal with Howard Dean, and changing public opinion polls, he had to change that stance. Cheney's point is right on the mark: how would they ever stand up to Al Qaeda?

"It's hard, after John Kerry referred to our allies as a coalition of the coerced and the bribed, to go out and persuade people to send troops and to participate in this process. In effect, you demean the sacrifice of our allies when you say it's the wrong war, wrong place, wrong time, and oh, by the way, send troops."
Don't forget how Kerry offended a U.S. ally in the War on Terror during the debate!

"And Senator, frankly, you have a record in the Senate that's not very distinguished. You've missed 33 out of 36 meetings in the Judiciary Committee, almost 70 percent of the meetings of the Intelligence Committee. You've missed a lot of key votes: on tax policy, on energy, on Medicare reform."
Including a vote to keep my taxes low. Thanks for shafting those of us in the middle class, Senator Edwards! But, as I always say, an absent liberal politician is better than one who sticks around town just to spend my money.

And with that, I return to my capitalist endeavors.
5 Comment(s):
Well said. VP Cheney did well. The guy from my state will not help win NC for Kedwards.
Yes, last night we saw a clear contrast: competence vs. incompetence, in-command of fact vs. searching for words, steady vs. shakey -- the contrast between Cheney and Bush couldn't be more obvious!

"With respect to the cost [of the war in Iraq], it wasn't $200 billion."

Let's see... buy a car for $30,000. Paid $20,000 so far in down payments and monthly payments. It still cost me $30,000!You say "the truth of attendance records hurts, doesn't it, Senator Edwards?" but a little research shows that Cheney only presided over the Senate on two Tuesdays in the last four years, and so did Edwards!Ask yourself if ever during the run-up to war you believed that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. If so, you have been deceived and the person most responsible for your being among the misled is Dick Cheney. He denied it last night, but this morning NPR played four different excerpts from Cheney speeches where he clearly made the connection as a support for going to war.
FYI, Texas Liberal, we welcome you Dixie Chic fans here at the Sons of the Republic.

I never once believed that Saddam had any connection to the 9/11 attacks. Maybe he had heard about them, or knew Al Qaeda was planning something, but I don't believe he had anything to do with the planning, execution or funding of the attacks. I think Osama's neurosis would preclude Saddam from any joint undertaking of evil plots.

I do believe Saddam had his own designs to attack us, or to facilitate an attack against us. He hated (well, hates) the United States, and would have found a way to hit us, and to hit us hard. Whether he had ties with Al Qaeda yet or not, in my opinion, it was only a matter of time. The man and his regime were bad news, as John Edwards and John Kerry have both said on various occasions.

There can and there are concurrent threats to a nation as powerful and as high profile as the United States. Just because Osama is the one to attack us doesn't mean that we didn't have to also rid the world of Saddam.

That being said, various intelligence reports indicate connections between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Did he ever sit down for tea with Osama? Doubtful. But consider this... As has been said elsewhere, Al Qaeda is in Iran. Al Qaeda is in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda is in Sudan. Al Qaeda is in Lebanon. Al Qaeda is in Europe. Al Qaeda is in The Phillipines. Al Qaeda was in Florida, New York and Arizona. But according to the liberals, for some magical reason, Al Qaeda was never in Iraq!
FYI, Texas Liberal, we welcome you Dixie Chic fans here at the Sons of the Republic.

I never once believed that Saddam had any connection to the 9/11 attacks. Maybe he had heard about them, or knew Al Qaeda was planning something, but I don't believe he had anything to do with the planning, execution or funding of the attacks. I think Osama's neurosis would preclude Saddam from any joint undertaking of evil plots.

I do believe Saddam had his own designs to attack us, or to facilitate an attack against us. He hated (well, hates) the United States, and would have found a way to hit us, and to hit us hard. Whether he had ties with Al Qaeda yet or not, in my opinion, it was only a matter of time. The man and his regime were bad news, as John Edwards and John Kerry have both said on various occasions.

There can and there are concurrent threats to a nation as powerful and as high profile as the United States. Just because Osama is the one to attack us doesn't mean that we didn't have to also rid the world of Saddam.

That being said, various intelligence reports indicate connections between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Did he ever sit down for tea with Osama? Doubtful. But consider this... As has been said elsewhere, Al Qaeda is in Iran. Al Qaeda is in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda is in Sudan. Al Qaeda is in Lebanon. Al Qaeda is in Europe. Al Qaeda is in The Phillipines. Al Qaeda was in Florida, New York and Arizona. But according to the liberals, for some magical reason, Al Qaeda was never in Iraq!
One final thought for the Liberal Texan:

As Bonjo has very effectively eviscerated your remarks on Big Time's alleged act of connecting Saddam to the attacks of September 11th, I will not inflict any more enlightement upon you (on that specific subject).

I will, however, remind you of certain details regarding the duties of the Vice President in regards to his role as President of the Senate.

The VP is the President of the Senate, a largely ceremonial role that really only comes into importance in the event of a tie vote on something. The VP, Big Time in this day and age, rarely sits in with the Senate. Big Time usually shows up on Tuesdays to mingle with the Senators, and perhaps gavel the proceedings to order. He then lets them get about their business. Unless you're Pat "Beaker" Leahey, that's usually all that happens. Don't believe me? Fine, go check out CSPAN on Tuesday mornings.

The bottom line is, your golden Breck Girl shows up so seldom on the senate floor that he never made an impression on Big Time - at least not a memorable one. Edwards is a boy among men, and it showed during the VP debate.
Post a Comment

<< Home


Powered by Blogger eXTReMe Tracker

Mormon Temple
Dusty Harry Reid Dusty Harry Reid Drunk Ted Kennedy Sons of the Republic