Monday, August 31, 2009

Bush/Cheney Kept America Safe - Leftists Can't Stand It

I tweeted a New York Times' piece on Dick Cheney's Fox interview last night, and this was the @AmPower response that was returned:

And frankly, that's pretty much how the left views the Bush administration, from the hardline netroots right up to Attorney General Eric Holder (see, "Will the Hard Left Set Our House on Fire?").

Here's the
response at Digby's to Chris Wallace's interview:

Wallace's hourlong fellatio session probably satisfied Cheney immensely, and predictably, the other networks saw fit to publicize Little Dick and his concubine, because what a former Vice President says is automatically news! News! News! ....

You see what Cheney is doing here. He wants to politicize the Bush terror policies - the investigations being sought by the Attorney General are "clearly a political move," he says - so that any attempt to question them becomes a partisan food fight instead of simply the application of law. This is
his metier and he does it very well, judging from all the attention he receives every time he emerges from the bunker. Conservatives, ever on the lookout for victimization, cry that the Justice Department is being all political by investigating torture and murder, and the media cover the ping-pong match.

Cheney won't cooperate with any "improper" investigation. A Justice Department-directed investigation. You know, "fuck you" and all that.
Also, Duncan Black takes issue with Cheney's reiteration that the administration "kept us safe":

One of the more annoying conservative talking points, one which the Villagers have swallowed whole and regularly spit out, is that "since 9/11 Bush and Dick kept us safe." The obvious flaw in this type of statement is that there's a big mulligan in there. But aside from that, they, you know, didn't. As Steve says:
Cheney thinks it was a sterling success when it came to national security and counter-terrorism. Perhaps there's something to this. After all, except for the catastrophic events of 9/11, and the anthrax attacks against Americans, and terrorist attacks against U.S. allies, and the terrorist attacks against U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Bush's inability to capture those responsible for 9/11, and waging an unnecessary war that inspired more terrorists, and the success terrorists had in exploiting Bush's international unpopularity, the Bush/Cheney record on counter-terrorism was awesome.
Well, see Fred Barnes, who lists "Bush's Achievements":

Second, enhanced interrogation of terrorists. Along with use of secret prisons and wireless eavesdropping, this saved American lives. How many thousands of lives? We'll never know. But, as Charles Krauthammer said recently, "Those are precisely the elements which kept us safe and which have prevented a second attack."
See also, PoliGazette, "Cheney on Fox News Sunday."

Plus, more at Memeorandum.


Mark Harvey said...

Libtards: Asshats

Let them fester. We are winning this one.

Dennis said...

I really prefer them that way because the more people they alienate the better. Just think, they will have nothing to say when Obama gets Americans killed and he surely will given his present stance.

Anonymous said...

So let's see, Bush is on watch when nearly three thousand are killed in NYC and then, as if to double down, because he's a Texas gambler and stuff, he starts a war with a nation that had nothing to do with that attack and instead just adds another 45-hundred American names and countless thousands of unknown Iraqis to the death tolls, and we're supposed to hail him for keeping us safe?

You guys surely win the Palin logic prize of the day, that's for sure.

Dennis said...

Another bit of dissembling since the Clinton administration completely disconnected intelligence assets from the process and tried to make it a legal process.
I blame jamie Gorlick for making 911 possible and making it almost impossible to effective gather information in a timely manner.
You are an idiot who demonstrates why you will always win the illogic prize.
What an empty head.

Tom the Redhunter said...

Anon; the modern Jihad started in 1928 with the formation of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. It ramped up in the 1980s with the Iranian revolution, the formation of al Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah, and the Wahabist infiltration of the West using our own oil money. 9-11 was only the culmination of years of effort. These groups have been after us for decades

dave in boca said...

Greenwald and the lefty sockpuppets are the latest proof that the heirs of American Communism have cultivated the skill of accusing your enemies of doing what you yourself are most guilty of. It still works too, because it throws them off balance and nonplusses them.

Clinton had an AG & a Deputy, Jamie Gorelick, who did their best to keep the FBI & CIA divided. This left the 911 team get into the States to keep their plot moving. I'm sure that KSM told the CIA handlers that after they broke him and he began singing like a birdie.

But with KSM the enemy is external whereas with anonymous, brave dude for keeping itself craven & cowardly on the record, is an internal enemy, not a patriot or even a loyal American.

People like anon don't understand the difference between reality and their ideology, or truth and opinion, for that matter. They certainly don’t know logic or argument, but who needs that when you have sophistry? And when you lie about the record using fake statistics and forgetting Saddam Hussein & his daily murder of countless Iraqis?

Dear Leader Brobambi has a loyal follower in anon, but DLB also is loyal to Chavez, Ahmedinejad, Ortega and other enemies of America. Do the math.