Jump to content

Cheney: Old and Forgetful

This topic is 6627 days old and is no longer open for new replies.  Replies are automatically disabled after two years of inactivity.  Please create a new topic instead of posting here.  

Recommended Posts

WASHINGTON, Oct. 5 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Following is a release of Kerry-Edwards 2004:


Cheney Met Edwards In and Out of the Senate


During The Vice Presidential Debate, Cheney Said The First Time He Met Edwards Was At The Debate That Night. During the first vice presidential debate, Vice President Cheney said: "In my capacity as vice president, I am the president of the senate, the presiding officer, I'm in the senate most Tuesdays in session. The first time I met you was when you walked on the stage tonight."




Cheney Thanked Edwards At the National Prayer Breakfast. Addressing the National Prayer Breakast, Cheney said: "Thank you. Thank you very much. Congressman Watts, Senator Edwards, friends from across America and distinguished visitors to our country from all over the world, Lynne and I honored to be with you all this morning." (FDCH Political Transcripts, Cheney Remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast, 2/1/01)


Senator Edwards Escorted Elizabeth Dole When She Was Sworn In As North Carolina's Other Senator. Elizabeth Dole was sworn in as North Carolina's other senator on January 8, 2003. Gannet News Service wrote: "As per Senate tradition, Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., escorted her." (Gannet News Service, 1/8/03)


-- Dole Took The Senate Oath Administered By Vice President Dick Cheney. According to Gannet News Service: "(Dole) raised her right hand and took the oath administered by Vice President Dick Cheney, the Senate president." (Gannett News Service, 1/8/03)


-- Dole Was Also Escorted By Her Husband, Bob Dole. Gannet News Service wrote: "Her husband, former Senate majority leader and GOP presidential candidate Bob Dole, also was by her side." (Gannett News Service, 1/8/03)


"(Elizabeth Edwards) carried her grandmother's Bible and was escorted by her husband and Edwards as Vice President Dick Cheney administered the oath." (Charlotte Observer, 1/8/03)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Repiglicans are either so out of touch with reality that they actually blieve the lies they tell, or they are really without conscience or shame. They think that no matter how outrageous the lie, we are so stupid that we'll believe it.

How can anyone with this kind of aversion to the truth ask for our trust, much less our vote??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glad someone pointed this out. While my comments directly after the debate were that I thought Cheney won the debate by a nose (from a purely objective standpoint; I am a Kerry/Edwards supporter), at this point, I'd have to declare Edwards the victor.


Part of that is definitely this. Cheney's strongest moment in the debate, to me at the time, appeared to be when he told Edwards he'd never met him prior in no uncertain terms.


Of course, then last night, NBC aired this story and showed SEVERAL pictures of the two together at various different events.


Between that and the news stories about no weapons in Iraq, I'd say the debate now favors Edwards with all the new information. (Oh dear! Bush would say I'm a flip flopper!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They think that no matter how

>outrageous the lie, we are so stupid that we'll believe it.

>How can anyone with this kind of aversion to the truth ask for

>our trust, much less our vote??



I ask myself this question over and over. I visited family in North Carolina last month and after a steady dose of fair and balanced Fox News, I returned home wondering how they could be so oblivious to what seems so apparent to me. It is the nature of politics I guess, that allows a "coin to be viewed from both sides" or even one side with two completely different descriptions of it's engraving.


I believe there is a line of dialog from Arthur Miller's The Crucible which goes something to the effect that people have only to tell a lie and swear to it for truth to be perverted.

I fear that many Americans are just too busy to glean the facts for themselves and therefore rely on either long standing party loyalty or supposed character traits as a bellwether for the truthfulness of a candidate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today Cheney is reported as claiming that the report on WMDs in Iraq JUSTIFIES the invasion! The man lives in an alternate reality zone, evidently. Hello? There weren't any WMDs, and Saddam had no programs in place to produce them, according to the report. If Bush/Cheney hadn't stopped the U.N. inspectors from completing their work (the same way the Supreme Court stopped the State of Florida from completing its work to recount the 2000 election) we'd have had confirmation that there was no imminent threat and 1000+ American lives would have been saved, not to mention thousands more lives of Iraqis and other nationalities who've died in this needless war.


There's no doubt in my mind that Saddam wanted WMDs and was trying to figure out how to get them again, but sanctions seem to have worked in this case and there was all the time in the world to figure out how to get rid of Saddam without plunging the entire world into turmoil. The war on Iraq has been one of the most gigantic frauds in American history. It's been nothing but a tissue of lies from the administration. At the very least they deserve impeachment (except that it would be much easier just to vote them out). A murder trial, for killing thousands of people for their own personal pleasure, would be appropriate, too. And the death penalty for Bush, who supports it so vigorously, would be appropriate. He and his gang have turned out to be among the greatest mass murderers in American history. ;(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moveon has very conveniently compiled a short list of just a few of Cheney's lies and distortions from the debate:


CHENEY'S MISLEAD: "I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11"


THE TRUTH: As the Washington Post reports today, Cheney has repeatedly insinuated and "strongly suggested" that Saddam Hussein was behind the attacks on September 11th.[2] And in its fact check column today, the Boston Globe says "Cheney has consistently asserted strong prewar links between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, even after the 9/11 Commission definitively concluded that there had not been a collaborative relationship between the two. In a radio interview in January 2004, Cheney said: 'I think there's overwhelming evidence that there was a connection between Al Qaeda and the Iraqi government.'"[3]


On December 9, 2001, Cheney went on "Meet the Press" to perpetuate the now entirely debunked theory that one of the 9/11 hijackers met with an Iraqi official.[4] He went back on a year ago to describe Iraq as part of ""the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault for many years, but most especially on 9/11."[5]


Most recently, Cheney has claimed that Iraq harbored the terrorist Abu Musab al Zarqawi, and said Zarqawi "is an al Qaeda associate who took refuge in Baghdad, found sanctuary and safe harbor there before we ever launched into Iraq."[6] But yesterday, a report Cheney himself requested found that there is no conclusive evidence to support that claim. An administration official said, "The evidence is that Saddam never gave Zarqawi anything."[7]


CHENEY'S MISLEAD: "900,000 small businesses will be hit" by the Kerry-Edwards plan to roll back tax cuts for people in the top income bracket.


THE TRUTH: As the Washington Post writes this morning: "This is misleading. Under Cheney's definition, a small business is any taxpayer who includes some income from a small business investment, partnership, limited liability corporation or trust. By that definition, every partner at a huge accounting firm or at the largest law firm would represent small businesses. According to IRS data, a tiny fraction of small business "S-corporations" earn enough profits to be in the top two tax brackets. Most are in the bottom two brackets."[8]


CHENEY'S MISLEAD: "We have added 1.7 million jobs to the economy."


THE TRUTH: On November 2nd, George Bush will be the first president in 70 years to lose jobs. There will be about a million fewer jobs than there were when Bush took office -- and about 7 million fewer than Bush's own post-9/11 estimate. Cheney's using fuzzy math: 1.7 million jobs have been added, but millions more have been lost.[9]


CHENEY'S MISLEAD: "The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight."


THE TRUTH: This one-liner was one of Cheney's best zingers of the night, but even it isn't true: Cheney and Edwards have met in public at least twice. They met when Edwards escorted Elizabeth Dole to be sworn in by Cheney as Senator and at the National Prayer Breakfast. At the Breakfast, he even called Edwards out by name, starting his remarks with the words, "Thank you very much. Congressman Watts, Senator Edwards, friends from across America and distinguished visitors to our country from all over the world, Lynne and I are honored to be with you all this morning."[10] You can actually watch video of the two of them shaking hands at http://www.democrats.org.




1. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/05/opinion/polls/main647648.shtml

2. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6188565/

3. http://www.boston.com/news/politics/debates/articles/2004/10/06/fact_checking_the_debate/

4. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6188565/

5. Same as 4, above.

6. http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0406/21/asb.00.html

7. http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/politics/9836114.htm

8. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6188565/

9. http://www.boston.com/news/politics/debates/articles/2004/10/06/fact_checking_the_debate/

10. http://blog.johnkerry.com/rapidresponse/archives/003153.html#003153

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RE: Doug69 and the other Republicans


Where is Doug69 and the other republicans reaction to the lies Cheney told during the debate? If you guys are so proud of your candidates and are so much in favor of how they've run this country, why haven't we heard from you guys on this string of clear and present fraud and fibbing.


He has no charactor, he lied to the US public and congress, he ilegally gave his former company, Hallaburton "Inside Information" to prepare to be the only company set up to take on this multibillion dollar contract to rebuild Iraq and he is cooperative responsible for over 1,000 lives lost when there was no threat.


Dougy, Log Cabin Boys........Where is your commentary on all of that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RE: Doug69 and the other Republicans


Good reply Hawkster, "Bring'm on!" as your dear president would say. Now answer this one: We are now doing premptive wars based on a someones intentions??


Cheney: Weapons Report Justifies Iraq War



Published: October 8, 2004


Filed at 12:26 a.m. ET


MIAMI (AP) -- Vice President Dick Cheney asserted on Thursday that a finding by the chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq that Saddam Hussein's government produced no weapons of mass destruction after 1991 justifies rather than undermines President Bush's decision to go to war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

flip - flop Dick


Updated: 09:35 AM EDT

Cheney Once Pushed to Lift Iran Sanctions




WASHINGTON (Oct. 8) - Vice President Dick Cheney, who has called Iran "the world's leading exporter of terror," pushed to lift U.S. trade sanctions against Tehran while chairman of Halliburton Co. in the 1990s. And his company's offshore subsidiaries also expanded business in Iran.





Cheney makes a point during the vice presidential debate Oct. 5.


Democratic vice presidential candidate John Edwards criticized Cheney in Tuesday night's debate for his position on Iran during the 1990s, and Edwards said he supports expanding the sanctions against Iran.


Cheney countered that he now supports sanctions against Iran but sidestepped the issue of Halliburton's involvement, saying it was being raised by Democrats "to try to confuse the voters."

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

In order to post in the Political Issues forum, all members are required to acknowledge that their post is in compliance with our Community Guidelines.  In addition, you acknowledge that it meets the following requirements: 

  • No personal attacks: Attack the issue not the person
  • No hijacking: Stay on the subject of the thread 

  • No bullying, hate speech or offensive terms/expressions

In addition, if the moderators feel someone is reporting content simply because if it’s political stance (such as but not limited to reporting it as off topic but not other off topic replies by those that agree with your stance), the reporting person may receive a warning as well.

Content that does not comply with the above requirements will be removed.  Multiple violations may result in a loss of access to this forum.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...