Letters posted here are associated with the following article:

51
Letters
Thursday, November 24, 2005 12:00 AM

The long march of Dick Cheney

For his entire career, he sought untrammeled power. The Bush presidency and 9/11 finally gave it to him -- and he's not about to give it up.

The letters thread is now closed.

View:
Thursday, November 24, 2005 05:48 AM

Nelson Rockefeller's brother David's WTC buildings

If Americans really believed that steel buildings would melt and topple over why hasn't any effort been made for four years to retrofit all the other tall buildings we work and live in? It's like OJ's hunt for Nicole's killer. No effort has been made because the official verdict is not believed. Shouldn't all metal buildings be off-limits until heat tolerances are better understood? This issue is never written about and no one seems concerned. Interesting.

Thursday, November 24, 2005 06:03 AM

Cheney's long march

Can you say, "impeachment"? If Bush is impeached Cheney will be President. If both are impeached who's next, Hastert? Better to keep Junior in as the ineffectual boob he really is.

Thursday, November 24, 2005 08:38 AM

Howdy Doody Time

It's pretty plain that Dick Cheney IS president of the United States. He doesn't need to be elected to the highest office to promulgate policies; he'd doing it right now. This man is the most vile and dangerous figure in the Administration, and that's saying a lot.

Bush from day one has been a puppet who does whatever his handlers say to do and says whatever his speechwriters tell him to say. I have never had the sense that this man could function on his own outside a tightly controlled and choreographed support system. He simply does not have the knowledge, instincts or confidence.

Recall how at the presidential inaugural ball in 2000, Bush was crudely wearing boots emblazoned with the presidential seal like it was a Tommy Hilfiger logo, hiking his pants up to show it off, as if to say "Looky, I'm president!" THen at a press conference with Blair, he was wearing a bomber jacket with the seal on it. It was almost as if he thought the clothing would make the man, add legitimacy to his stature. And what about that unbelievably tasteless and inappropriate "joke" video showing him on his knees looking for WMD's in the oval office? The tactless act of an undisciplined child.

I've never seen a person so uncomfortable and ill at ease in the role of president as Bush Jr. 9/11 was the case in point: the prez was totally clueless as to how to act in this unscripted crisis, and Cheney is issuing shoot-down orders to the national guard!!

Thursday, November 24, 2005 08:58 AM

Dick Cheney - the ultimate unprincipled militarist

This article is a sign of the rising awareness that Dick Cheney is not only a hardcore militarist but an unprincipled one, with a long history of falsifying the case for war. My hope is that we the people (because the corporate media will not do it until years from now) will stop giving him ANY benefit of the doubt regarding the raging conspiracy theories about 9/11. Would Dick Cheney be above orchestrating the 9/11 attacks to falsify the case for the war on terror? He has watched 2,000+ American soldiers and 100,000 Iraqi citizens go to their deaths in a war falsely justified--would he be above sacrificing 3,000 on 9/11 to justify a war on terror? Please open your mind for a moment. The image you probably have of 9/11 is that of a plane flying into one of the towers. But the far more important image is that of the 10-second collapse of each of the twin towers or that of Building 7. If you watch the videos of these collapses, you will be seeing the equivalent of the Zapruder film of the Kennedy assassination, where you saw with your own eyes that the official story was a lie--Kennedy was not shot from behind. You can see clearly that there were explosives going off as these towers collapsed and that these collapses showed all of the hallmarks of controlled demolition. These buildings did not fall in on themselves because their steel girders softened due to fire. That has never happened to a steel-framed building before or since, and if it did, the collapse would be asymmetrical and not at freefall speed. Steven Jones, PhD, a tenured professor of physics at BYU, has written a scientific paper on this. You may be saying to yourself, there is no way anyone could plant those explosives and get away with it. But before you dismiss the possibility, you owe it to yourself to review what happened more closely. You have been trusting the mainstream media for your perceptions of the 9/11 attacks, but how well has that media served you in understanding Dick Cheney? When he ran for VP, how many articles like this one by Sidney Blumenthal did you see, telling you the real story? Even the most hardcore skeptic should go to a website (such as the one I have associated with my signature below) and watch the video of the collapses. Give it 15 minutes of your time before you dismiss it as wacky. You might wind up joining the ranks of those calling for a real investigation. Unfortunately this possibility is the logical extension of the sad life and career of Dick Cheney.

Thursday, November 24, 2005 09:25 AM

Sidney, please

I am not a big fan of the current administration myself but any objective, rational person would have to admit that Sidney Blumenthal is hardly the man to turn to write the biography of Dick Cheney. Sidney Blumenthal and his friends, like Dick Cheney and HIS friends, constitute just another politcal faction in our Imperial Politics.

According to Sidney Blumenthal, Dick Cheney has never failed to accomplish any of his nefarious goals, from torturing prisoners to invading Iraq to defeating the Soviets. That's very impressive, and all the more so because PRESUMABLY at every turn in his career Dick Cheney has been resisted in these schemes by enlightened, good natured politcial players like Sidney Blumenthal. I think, therefore, the real question, which Sidney does not discuss AT ALL, is how can Dick be so powerful and effective whereas Sidney is so powerless and ineffective?

When Sidney Blumenthal and Bill Clinton were in power, THEY ALWAYS FAILED to uphold leftist policies. We had to compromise with the Republicans ON EVERYTHING. Was there a single Republican policy that Sidney and his pals DID NOT cave into during the 1990's? I am still, for example, totally angry at Bill Clinton for signing onto Welfare Reform. The Republicans FORCED Bill Clinton sign welfare reform, thereby destroying decades of Leftist activism in a single moment. Another example: The Republicans FORCED Bill Clinton to drop the idea of Universal Health care. By contrast, Sidney Blumenthal and his friends cannot FORCE Dick Cheney to do anything. Dick Cheney, for example, can invade Iraq for no reason whatsoever. Sidney and his friends can't even effectively get Dick Cheney to stop torturing people even though it's completely illegal to torture people and everybody knows about it.

So, seriously Sidney, give me a break. Dick Cheney may suck, but you gnaw, blow, and wheeze. One final point: Dick Cheney working for Haliburton is the EXACT SAME THING as Sidney Blumenthal writing for Salon. It's a job that helps you maintain your political connections while you are out of power.

Most Active Letters Threads

678

Obama's exceedingly familiar justifications for escalation

The "new" approach to Afghanistan touted by White House officials seems quite old
543

The crazy, irrational beliefs of Muslims

Tom Friedman explains the real problem: stupid Muslims think the U.S. is about war and aggression.
440

The face of rotted Washington

Evan Bayh demands more debt-financed war - fought by others - while boasting that he's a stern "deficit hawk."
240

The commendably missing element from Obama's speech

There was no pretense that human rights is our goal, or the likely outcome, in escalating the war
233

Yes, it's Obama's war now

An uninspiring speech sells a dubious policy, but progressives who feel betrayed have only themselves to blame

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon