Monday, November 21, 2005

I saw there was something on fox about Cheney criticizing Bush critics about the war.
My beef, at least one among many, is that, I'm told, Bush planned the war before he was elected, but didn't bother to mention it during his campaign. It's not a lie to have a Secret Plan to start the war, but it's a major material omission. I think, pre-9/11, that this would have cost him what was already a very close election. It's not that I think Gore was exactly better - at the moment Gore is the devil we don't know. Public financing of congressial campaigns is one thing he's admitted to - very bad, but a little less bad than a war.
So what I want to know from Cheney is what did he know and when did he know it -
did he know Bush planned to invade Iraq using Halliburton mercenaries? If he knew that and didn't disclose it, he doesn't have much basis now to be a critic of the critics.

The sound bite missed this part, so maybe I'm taking his remarks out of context. I haven't read the whole speeh.
"I do not believe it is wrong to criticize the war on terror or any aspect thereof. Disagreement, argument and debate and the essence of democracy and none of us should want it any other way," Cheney said in a speech to the American Enterprise Institute.

"Nobody is saying we should not be having this discussion or that you cannot reexamine a decision made by the president and the Congress some years ago

Last Wednesday Cheney unleashed a blistering attack on critics of the war, Reuters. It is not known at this time if chemical weapons caused the blisters.
But Cheney added: "Any suggestion that prewar information was... hyped... by the leader of the nation is utterly false."
I can't agree.
Vice-president for torture?
Kerry, the current devil we don't, responds.

(0) comments <$BlogCommentDeleteIcon$>
Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?