Reply With Quote
ing hypocrite.
head burned $Ts in Iraq and has nothing to show for it except the love and showers of $$$ on him from the MIC.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/20013.html
Cheney: Obama wants 'massive expansion'
By MIKE ALLEN | 3/15/09 2:32 PM EDT Text Size:
Vice President Cheney charged Sunday morning on CNN that President Obama is using the recession “to try to justify” what is probably the largest expansion of federal authority “in the history of the Republic.”
“I worry a lot that they’re using the current set of economic difficulties to try to justify a massive expansion in the government, and much more authority for the government over the private sector,” Cheney said in his first television interview since leaving office. “I don’t think that’s good. I don’t think that’s going to solve the problem.”
Speaking to host John King on “State of the Union,” Cheney said he thinks the programs Obama has proposed “in health care, in energy and so forth cons ute probably the biggest – or one of the biggest – expansions of federal authority over the private economy in the history of the Republic.”
"I worry very much that what is being done here is saying, 'We've got an economic crisis, therefore, we're justified in fundamentally remaking the health program in America,'" Cheney said. "I don't think that's right."
Cheney has been largely out of sight for the past two months, as he and his wife, Lynne, set up their new home in Northern Virginia. But as in a recent interview with POLITICO, Cheney is as blunt-spoken as ever, and more aggressive in defending the administration’s legacy than President Bush has been so far.
The former vice president pushed back against efforts by Democrats to blame Bush for the current economic valley, saying his administration is not responsible “for the creation of those cir stances.”
“I think there’s no question but what the economic cir stances that he inherited are difficult ones,” Cheney said. "We said that before we left. I don’t think you can blame the Bush administration for the creation of those cir stances. It’s a global financial problem.
“We had, in fact, tried to deal with the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac some years before, with major reforms that were blocked by Democrats on the Hill – [House Financial Services Chairman] Barney Frank and [Senate Banking Chairman] Chris Dodd. So I think the notion that you can just sort of throw it off on the prior administration – that’s interesting rhetoric, but I don’t think anybody really cares a lot about that. What they care about is what’s going to work, and how we’re going to get out of these difficulties.”
In the exchange likely to get the most attention, Cheney told King he thinks Obama has made the U.S. less safe by modifying Bush administration policies on detention and interrogation of terrorist suspects.
Here is the exchange:
KING: Since taking office, President Obama has done these things to change the policies you helped put in place. He has announced he will close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility. He has announced he will close CIA black sites around the world, where they interrogate terror suspects. Says he will make CIA interrogators abide by the Army Field Manual, defined waterboarding as torture and ban it, suspend trials for terrorists by military commission, and now eliminate the label of enemy combatants. I'd like to just simply ask you, yes or no, by taking those steps, do you believe the president of the United States has made Americans less safe?
CHENEY: I do. I think those programs were absolutely essential to the success we enjoyed of being able to collect the intelligence that let us defeat all further attempts to launch attacks against the United States since 9/11. I think that's a great success story. It was done legally. It was done in accordance with our cons utional practices and principles. President Obama campaigned against it all across the country. And now he is making some choices that, in my mind, will, in fact, raise the risk to the American people of another attack.
KING: That's a pretty serious thing to say about the president of the United States...
CHENEY: Well...
KING: ... and commander in chief of the military. So I want to give you a chance, because many people will say, Vice President Cheney just said Barack Obama, President Obama is making us less safe, more at risk, which you just said. I want to give you a chance — and take as much time as you want — to prove it. Because you put that list up there, and I know you say there have been three cases, I believe, of waterboarding in the past, and you say that specific things have been prevented. I know some of this is classified intelligence, but now that you're out of government, to the degree that you can, tell the American people, because of those tactics, because of those, yes, sometimes extreme tactics, we stopped this.
CHENEY: Well, I would say that the key to what we did was to collect intelligence against the enemy. That's what the terrorist surveillance program was all about, that's what the enhanced interrogation program was all about.
It's good to know is against the notion that a President shouldn't use a national catastrophy to further his agenda.
Cough cough 9/11.. invade iraq...cough cough..
ing hypocrite.
head burned $Ts in Iraq and has nothing to show for it except the love and showers of $$$ on him from the MIC.
Trillions? Maybe, but over five years, and an actual war. President Obama's first fiscal budget already has at least a $1.7 trillion deficit, after only 50 days in office, and democrat spending. What will it look like when they're done spending our children's prosperity? At the rate he's going, far above $4 trillion!
Remember. I'm speaking on one fiscal budget.
"an actual war."
L I E
Iraq is a totally unecessary, bogus war for oil, and for enriching the MIC.
The only thing actual is the disrespected vets, who get a whole lot less rspected and support than dead vets.
@ an actual war. Actual = unnecessary?
If so then I agree
And yeah, the irony here is ing hillarious.
Former Vice President Cheney. Thank God.
Actually, spending $1 Trillion on a War like Iraq is much more fiscally irresponsible and risky than $1 trillion of domestic spending.
The Iraq War committment was open-ended. No exit strategy existed whatsoever. Remember McCain's "I dont care if we need to stay there 100 years" comment. As if the cost of doing so was somehow not prohibitive. Open-ended committments with no definitive ending period can become financial guzzlers.
It's a of a lot easier to shut down unemployment benefits to reduce spending or cancel some domestic infrastructure projects on a dime than it is to exit a War when doing so in the case of Iraq, likely means a destabilized clusterfukk that allows a true nuclear and radical Islamic fundamentalist state like Iran to swoop in and expand it's political and economic power.
We're going to have some level of presence in Iraq for probably the next 15-20 years. It's going to cost an assload more than $1 trillion when it's all said and done. Obama can not withdraw all our troops, it simply can't be done. We're half pregnant at this point.
This does not account for one iota of the economic costs imposed by thousands of young men dying or coming home physically and mentally disabled, who could have otherwised been productive members of American soicety or the costs of the reputational capital the Iraq war has imposed on the USA.
You have to be ultracareful before committing to a War, because Wars are ridiculously expensive. Bush wasn't, he made a deplorable, horrendous decision and this country will be paying the price for his completely avoidable mistake for many generations to come. It is what it is.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
