Cheney still defending previous administration

MG1962 said:
Because I only explicitly mentioned Cheney, you widened the scope of the comment so that it suited your arguement.
Click to expand...

I applied the argument you gave to another test case, and found that the results were absurd. That you did not intend it to be applied elsewhere is irrelevant: nothing about the argument as you presented it makes it inapplicable to democrats, or to me and you for that matter. If you don't like its results when the scope is widened, perhaps that should be a clue that the argument was problematic (to put it kindly) to begin with.
 
Ziggurat said:
I applied the argument you gave to another test case, and found that the results were absurd. That you did not intend it to be applied elsewhere is irrelevant: nothing about the argument as you presented it makes it inapplicable to democrats, or to me and you for that matter. If you don't like its results when the scope is widened, perhaps that should be a clue that the argument was problematic (to put it kindly) to begin with.
Click to expand...

If my arguement is problamatic, then you should have no trouble showing previous examples of outgoing VPs attacking incomming adminstrations so early in their terms
 
BPSCG said:
People tell me I'm pretty well-educated. But I have no idea what this term means. Could you tell me, please?
Click to expand...
My understanding of an American neocon is that internationally, they believe in using America's military and economic strength to impose their policies upon the world. Domestically, they are primarily concerned with issues like defense and "law and order" and have less concern for fiscal conservatism than their conservative predecessors.

As such, Cheney fits well into the description of a neocon. "Crypto", of course, means "hidden", though it is often used incorrectly as a synonym for "evil". It is silly to apply "crypto" to Cheney's position. Whatever your views of him, it has to be said that he is up-front with his policies. Nothing "hidden" at all, except a few memos and e-mails here and there.
 
Last edited:
MG1962 said:
If my arguement is problamatic, then you should have no trouble showing previous examples of outgoing VPs attacking incomming adminstrations so early in their terms
Click to expand...

Your claim was that Cheney was acting in an almost dictatorial manner, not simply an unusual or unprecedented manner. These are not equivalent claims, and you cannot simply substitute one for the other. Really, you'll have to do better than this.
 
Tricky said:
My understanding of an American neocon is that internationally, they believe in using America's military and economic strength to impose their policies upon the world. Domestically, they are primarily concerned with issues like defense and "law and order" and have less concern for fiscal conservatism than their conservative predecessors.

As such, Cheney fits well into the description of a neocon. "Crypto", of course, means "hidden", though it is often used incorrectly as a synonym for "evil". It is silly to apply "crypto" to Cheney's position. Whatever your views of him, it has to be said that he is up-front with his policies. Nothing "hidden" at all, except a few memos and e-mails here and there.
Click to expand...


Indeed. Seems to me that Cheney is the quintessential image of a neocon. It's the complete opposite of "crypto".
 
tomwaits said:
Indeed. Seems to me that Cheney is the quintessential image of a neocon. It's the complete opposite of "crypto".
Click to expand...

Yeah, but 'crypto' sounds more sinister and evil and also makes TFT sound like he knows loads about politics and is dead street smart and clever and stuff. Right kids?
 
Normal Dude said:
What is Cheney still doing here? Hasn't he returned to his home planet yet? Maybe he left a robot in his place...
Click to expand...

Perhaps, he's a bit miffed the Obama administration does not fully realize they won the election and continue to criticize the Bush administration for, in effect, putting policies in place that prevented further terrorist attacks and kept Americans safe.
 
Ziggurat said:
Don't be absurd. Were the democrats being dictatorial by criticizing Bush? No, of course not. They were, and Cheney is, engaged in one of the most fundamental processes in any democracy: the open debate of ideas. If you want to argue that what Cheney is saying is wrong, go ahead and join in that debate by saying so. But really, the accusation that a man with no position in government is being in the least bit dictatorial by voicing his opinion is itself far more undemocratic than anything Cheney is saying.
Click to expand...
I agree with this 100%. The greatest sadness for me after 9-11 was that it somehow became disloyal to criticize the president. Musicians were removed from the airwaves because of it. It was one of the darkest times in America that I can remember. I am absolutely opposed to repeating it just because there is a president in office that I like better. Cheney has as much right to criticize the country he loves as I do. If by some miracle he makes some good points along the way, then hooray for the country.

Frankly, the funniest thing is to see Cheney trying to keep up the same level of vituperation, even though Obama is moving more and more to the right in some of his policies. He keeps trying, but he seems to be aware of how silly he's looking. I'd say his heart isn't in it, but we all know he has a robot heart.:D
 
Tricky said:
Frankly, the funniest thing is to see Cheney trying to keep up the same level of vituperation, even though Obama is moving more and more to the right in some of his policies. He keeps trying, but he seems to be aware of how silly he's looking. I'd say his heart isn't in it, but we all know he has a robot heart.:D
Click to expand...

Increasing numbers of Americans would disagree about Cheney looking silly...
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22838.html
 
Marc39 said:
Increasing numbers of Americans would disagree about Cheney looking silly...
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22838.html
Click to expand...
Well that's a valid point. There may be a number of explanations for his 8% rise to... ah... 37% approval. It could be that he is simply energizing the Republican base. Or, even more likely, it is simply that he is no longer in office. From the link you cited:
Politico said:
“Is Cheney’s uptick due to his visibility as one of the most outspoken critics of the Obama administration? Almost certainly not,” Holland told CNN. “Former President George W. Bush’s favorable rating rose 6 points in that same time period, and Bush has not given a single public speech since he left office.”
Click to expand...
 
Tricky said:
I agree with this 100%. The greatest sadness for me after 9-11 was that it somehow became disloyal to criticize the president. Musicians were removed from the airwaves because of it. It was one of the darkest times in America that I can remember.
Click to expand...

The Dixie Chicks being removed from rotation on hillbilly radio stations was not a dark time in our history. Stop being a drama queen.
 
Tricky said:
Well that's a valid point. There may be a number of explanations for his 8% rise to... ah... 37% approval. It could be that he is simply energizing the Republican base. Or, even more likely, it is simply that he is no longer in office. From the link you cited:
Click to expand...

CNN is highly partisan, so, I would take with a grain of salt their spin on the rise in Cheney's popularity. Bottom line, Cheney's sudden loquacity is proving effective, such as causing Congress to back down on closing Gitmo.
 
corplinx said:
The Dixie Chicks being removed from rotation on hillbilly radio stations was not a dark time in our history. Stop being a drama queen.
Click to expand...

They weren't the only ones who had their works censored by scared people. Bruce Springsteen and Tim Robbins also suffered backlash for their criticisms. It wasn't exactly Joe McCarthy again, but it was dark nonetheless.

But my whole point is that it is wrong to try to censor criticism of the government. I don't want Dick Cheney to shut up. Neither, I confess, do I want his views to become widespread. We've been there.
 
Ziggurat said:
Your claim was that Cheney was acting in an almost dictatorial manner, not simply an unusual or unprecedented manner. These are not equivalent claims, and you cannot simply substitute one for the other. Really, you'll have to do better than this.
Click to expand...

Na I dont think so - your argument is as irrelevant as Cheney's critisim. Its not warrented, not needed, and if anything it is doing more damage to a rebuilding Republican Party than to President Obama

Seriously we are talking about someone who didn't have the gumption to seek nomination for the Republican party. I wonder why that was? Maybe because even his own party saw him as the irrelevant liabilty he is
 
MG1962 said:
Na I dont think so - your argument is as irrelevant as Cheney's critisim. Its not warrented, not needed, and if anything it is doing more damage to a rebuilding Republican Party than to President Obama
Click to expand...

And yet, none of this supports your original claim that Cheney's statements bordered on being dictatorial. It seems you have abandoned that claim, but without the honesty to admit that you have done so.

Seriously we are talking about someone who didn't have the gumption to seek nomination for the Republican party. I wonder why that was? Maybe because even his own party saw him as the irrelevant liabilty he is
Click to expand...

Are you familiar with the term "ad hominem"?
 
Tricky said:
They weren't the only ones who had their works censored by scared people. Bruce Springsteen and Tim Robbins also suffered backlash for their criticisms. It wasn't exactly Joe McCarthy again, but it was dark nonetheless.
Click to expand...

It was so dark the the Dixie Chicks picked up an entire new audience. Tim Robbins was so blacklisted that every news network carried his "chill wind" speech. Everyone was afraid to criticize the president, that is why I guess Alan Colmes took time off from being "the quiet one" to go on just about every Fox show and warn about an executive branch power grab in progress right away after 911 when he saw Patriot.

The media was so scared, they ran negative stories about us dropping food in mine fields in Afghanistan in week one. By week 2 they had declared it a failure.

Believe it or not, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity are not the entire news media. Your dark age is more of a personal perception than reality. However, there were no blacklists. There were some backlashes against some dumb things. It was hardly a dark time.

The darkest time I can remember in my lifetime was the morning of September 11 2001.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom