Category Archives: Cheney

Dick Cheney — Will save Republican Party

In a Newsweek article Jon Meacham states his case for “WHY DICK CHENEY SHOULD RUN IN 2012.”

He says, “A campaign would also give us an occasion that history denied us in 2008: an opportunity to adjudicate the George W. Bush years in a direct way. As John McCain pointed out in the fall of 2008, he is not Bush. Nor is Cheney, but the former vice president would make the case for the harder-line elements of the Bush world view. Far from fading away, Cheney has been the voice of the opposition since the inauguration. Wouldn’t it be more productive and even illuminating if he took his arguments out of the realm of punditry and into the arena of electoral politics? Are we more or less secure because of the conduct of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq? Does the former vice president still believe in a connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda? Did the counterterror measures adopted in the aftermath of the attacks go too far? Let’s have the fight and see what the country thinks.”

Other questions we might be able to settle —

  • Would his war criminal record be a selling point with today’s new anti-war right?
  • Since he embodies the America of old white men, could that myth be dispelled?
  • Can Cheney prove he is actually alive?  It’s rumored he died of his last heart attack and some are saying they’ve seen his long-form death certificate — complete with the seal!
  • Is he truly devoid of knowledge of recent U.S. history, history over which he himself presided?  He led the charge into Iraq in 2003 even after having warned in 1991 that such a strategy would lead to a quagmire.  The U.S. wars of the last six decades (including the four for which Cheney shares responsibility) have all been marred by mishap, bad intelligence, flawed geopolitical analysis—and lack of necessity.
  • Is it true he supported the McCain / Palin ticket because he knew only that keystone cops duo could have made the tragic incompetence of the previous fools look good in the history books?

What would be his campaign promises and slogans, would he emphasize his lack of civility, his well-known health problems, would he continue to loudly defend torture?

fnord

Advertisements

25 Comments

Filed under Cheney, Elections, hate groups, Radical Rightwing groups, Republicans

Close to a Record Tonight…

cheney_short_of_breath[1]Given that we are close to beating a record, thanks to the very great work of one fnord, I have a poll shamelessly devoted to that goal:  Would you bloggers rather 1) see Dick “Darth” Cheney violently sodomized by an angry alien, or 2) all U.S. citizens having healthcare?  One or two?

Love you all…

23 Comments

Filed under Cheney, Uncategorized

The Dept of Homeland Security, Sans Confusion, Anxiety and Fear?

napolitano2[2]Janet Napolitano, Head of the Dept of Homeland Secuity, on Wednesday said, “For too long, we’ve treated the public as a liability to be protected rather than as an asset in our nation’s collective security.  This approach, unfortunately, has allowed confusion, anxiety and fear to linger.”  Well, Janet, your points are exactly 100% true.  Do you not get that sowing confusion, anxiety and fear was the express purpose of the Dept of Homeland Security.  George and Dick had a good thing going with this schtick, too.  They won the presidency in 2004 after allowing the worst attack in history on American soil.  They won that contest by convincing voters that they would be better at keeping America safe.

So, you’re talking about educating U.S. citizens on recognizing terrorism precusors, working with foreign governments in processing their intelligence data, and improving the communication among local and federal law enforcement in this country.  All that sounds good, but what about this self-defeating plan of reducing confusion, anxiety, and fear?  Do you need a job, or not?

iggydonnelly

22 Comments

Filed under Cheney, Crimes, History, Political Reform, Republicans, Wingnuts!

Bush-era Intelligence Issues: Moving On?

President Obama has been clear that he wishes to look to the future and pursue an active domestic agenda, rather than dwelling on the mistakes of the prior administration.  Unfortunately, revelations like the recent report that Vice President Cheney ordered the CIA to not  reveal to Congress a program designed to assasinate Al Qaeda leaders, make this desire more difficult.  See this very good Question and Answer article on this subject.

Will we really be able to move on from the Bush-era controvesies if we don’t confront them? I am of the opinion we cannot.  What do you bloggers think?

Iggy Donnelly

13 Comments

Filed under Cheney, Enhanced Interrogations, Political Reform, Republicans, The Economy, torture, Wingnuts!, World Politics

Cheney’s Secret Al Qaeda Plans

P1-AQ645_Cheney_G_20090712184300According to an article in The Wall Street Journal the mysterious program Cheney kept hidden from Congress involved an executive order to capture or kill Al Qaeda leaders.  It appears that the CIA recognized that parts of the plan, which involved targeted assassinations, were not feasible.

So far, the controversy surrounding the ultra-secret plan is focused on the decision to not inform Congress, but as details unfold it seems more serious investigations will be warranted.

The Journal cites an unnamed source who described the plan’s ambition: “It was straight out of the movies. It was like: Let’s kill them all.”

fnord

5 Comments

Filed under Cheney, torture, WAR

If anyone ever needed protection, this guy does

dick-cheney-smilingVice presidents typically are cut off from their security detail once their stint in office ends, so extensions must be approved by the president.  President Obama granted continued Secret Service protection to the former vice president for an undisclosed length of time.  Read more here.

fnord

8 Comments

Filed under Cheney

The American Psychological Association and Bush Era “Torture”

This is an open letter to the membership of the American Psychological Association from the Board of Directors.  It is quite interesting.

June 22, 2009

An Open Letter from the Board of Directors

Dear Colleague,

As a psychologist and member of the American Psychological Association (APA), you no doubt share our serious concerns about reports regarding the involvement of psychologists in torture and abusive interrogations as part of the Bush administration’s “war on terror.” We recognize that the issue of psychologist involvement in national security-related investigations has been an extremely difficult and divisive one for our association. We also understand that some of our members continue to be disappointed and others angered by the association’s actions in this regard. Although APA has had a longstanding policy against psychologist involvement in torture, many members wanted the association to take a strong stand against any involvement of psychologists in national security interrogations during the Bush administration.

Information has emerged in the public record confirming that, as committed as some psychologists were to ensuring that interrogations were conducted in a safe and ethical manner, other psychologists were not. Although there are countless psychologists in the military and intelligence community who acted ethically and responsibly during the post-9/11 era, it is now clear that some psychologists did not abide by their ethical obligations to never engage in torture or other forms of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. The involvement of psychologists, no matter how small the number, in the torture of detainees is reprehensible and casts a shadow over our entire profession. APA expresses its profound regret that any psychologist has been involved in the abuse of detainees.

This has been a painful time for the association and one that offers an opportunity to reflect and learn from our experiences over the last five years. APA will continue to speak forcefully in further communicating our policies against torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment to our members, the Obama administration, Congress, and the general public. In so doing, we will continue to highlight our 2008 petition resolution policy, Psychologists and Unlawful Detention Settings with a Focus on National Security. APA will ensure that association communications convey clearly that the petition resolution is official association policy and must be central to psychologists’ assessment of the appropriateness of their roles in specific work settings related to national security. Our association’s governing body, the Council of Representatives, will soon be receiving guidance from various governance groups regarding further steps to implement this resolution. The history of APA positions and actions related to detainee welfare and professional ethics can be found at http://www.apa.org/releases/timeline.html.

On a closely related matter, the Ethics Committee and APA governance as a whole are focused intently on Ethics Code Standards 1.02 and 1.03, which address conflicts between ethics and law and between ethics and organizational demands, respectively. In light of Bush administration interrogation policies and uncertainty among our membership, the Ethics Committee has issued the attached statement, “No defense to torture under the APA Ethics Code.” Invoking language from the U.N. Convention Against Torture, this statement clarifies that the Ethics Committee “will not accept any defense to torture in its adjudication of ethics complaints.” APA will continue to monitor material in official reports related to psychologist mistreatment of national security detainees, will investigate reports of unethical conduct by APA members, and will adjudicate cases in keeping with our Code of Ethics. The association’s focus on these ethical standards is consistent with its position that no psychologist involved in detainee abuse should escape accountability.

In conclusion, as part of APA’s elected leadership, we have an obligation to protect and further psychology’s longstanding commitment to the highest standards of professional ethics—including, and especially, the protection of human welfare.

Respectfully,

American Psychological Association 2009 Board of Directors

James H. Bray, PhD
Carol D. Goodheart, EdD
Alan E. Kazdin, Ph.D
Barry S. Anton, PhD
Paul L. Craig, PhD
Norman B. Anderson, PhD
Rosie Phillips Bingham, PhD
Jean A. Carter, PhD
Armand R. Cerbone, PhD
Suzanne Bennett Johnson, PhD
Melba J.T. Vasquez, PhD
Michael Wertheimer, PhD
Konjit V. Page, MS

5 Comments

Filed under Cheney, Enhanced Interrogations, Psychology Ramblings..., Republicans, torture, Wingnuts!