Dick Cheney: Eight More Years
Well, not Dick Cheney exactly. But if Rudy Giuliani gets into the White House, he wants his vice president to be someone like Cheney.
Giuliani was answering questions from voters in New Hampshire, and one of them asked who would be Secretary of State in his administration. His answer was:
“Let me 9/11 answer with the 9/11 question of what you 9/11 would look for in a 9/11 vice president first — again without any 9/11 presumption that I'm 9/11 going to be the nominee. A vice president 9/11 has to be a partner in the 9/11 administration. The vice president has to know 9/11 everything that's going on, just in case 9/11 the vice president has to step in at a moment's notice.”
He said he spoke with Cheney on September 11, 2001 and felt that the vice president “had a sense that he knew what he was doing.”
Giuliani also said he might choose his current White House rivals to serve in his cabinet. There's something to look forward to: President Giuliani, and the top cabinet posts being held by Mitt Romney, John McCain, Mike Huckabee…
**************************************
With Barack Obama winning in Iowa, the attack is on. Mitt Romney said: “Did you listen to Barack Obama? He is a new face, but gosh when you listen to what comes out of his mouth. It’s like, ‘We're going to just get our troops out of Iraq.’ Have you thought about the consequences?”
Well, Asswipe, that’s pretty much how we got INTO Iraq, isn't it? Were you thinking about “the consequences” then?
Oh, that’s right, there'll be a bloodbath if we pull out of Iraq. If we pull out now, there'll be a bloodbath. If we pull out in 900 years there'll be a bloodbath. Well, as the Great Ronald Reagan once said: “If it takes a bloodbath, let’s get it over with.”
Labels: 9/11, Barack Obama, Dick Cheney, Iraq, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Ronald Reagan bloodbath, Rudy Giuliani
posted by Tom Harper @ 12:29 PM
16 Comments:
I have supported Obama from the beginning and I'm thrilled for his victory in Iowa. I've heard all the tired rhetoric about having a black president or a young president, etc, etc. But looking at his stand on issues and his voting record, then and now, I gotta tell you, I think he is the person that can draw diverse groups together and galvanize the nation. I don't know if you're old enough to remember, but he puts me in mind of Jack Kennedy. I believe if he wins, his tenure will become known as the restoration of America; at least I hope so.
Rockync: I've always liked Obama. I'm skeptical of whether a black (or any minority) person can be elected president, but I think he's the best candidate out there. He's very unifying -- no name-calling, no fingerpointing, no "us against them." JFK, Reagan and Bill Clinton all had that same trait. Whatever you think of those 3 presidents, they were all upbeat and positive, with no slandering or any negativity.
Maybe the public can put race aside and elect a true leader to the White House.
I always assumed that Guiliani would drag Bernard Kerik out of prison and give him Cheney's job.
After all corruption does run within those same mob circles.
We could only hope that people could see beyond a gender or race to see a candidate. As good as hilary could be, she's just too polarizing. Obama does indeed seem to give me the audacity of hope.
Meantime, how interesting of a quote from Reagan? You articulated something I've been kinda thinking: no matter when we leave the Middle East, it's going to suck, so we might as well get a straw now rather than after a few thousand more lives are lost.
Larry: Giuliani and Kerik, that would figure. Talk about birds of a feather.
Mile High Pixie: Yes, that would be nice, wouldn't it, if people would vote for the candidate based on the issues and not on race or gender. Maybe there's hope.
That Reagan quote was from when he was governor of California; he was talking about cracking down on anti-war protesters on college campuses. I just figured I'd steal it from him for a different context.
I really don't think that Guiliani will get the nod for the Republican nominee.
He seems to be playing a scary game with the polls and counting on New York and California too much.
Let's Talk: I hope you're right about Giuliani; he'd make a Godawful president. I'm really hoping there'll be a rift in the Republican party, so that the "family values" types won't vote for Giuliani or Romney and the Big Business-types won't vote for Huckabee.
Tom, that's my 9/11, too, that there will be a 9/11 in the 9/11 party, and that wide stancing will no longer be wide stanced in the stalls of bathrooms throughout 9/11.
I watched bits of pieces of the mouthbreathers last night during commercials (football!) and man, what a collection of completely out-of-touch lunatics.
Apparently, despite all the evidence to the contrary, the free market can solve ALL problems.
What rocknyc said. I've been signed up on the Obama website from the beginning, and the feeling has always been that he would astonish the pundits. Just keep watching!
I'd be really surprised if Guiliani got their nod. But hey, what do I know? As far as the Dem's are concerned, I still don't know who I'll vote for in my primary.
I don't think there's any reason to worry about Guiliani being prez. he doesn't stand a chance, he ended up with 3 percent of iowa. less than half the support for ron paul, the most radical candidate we have this election. the one we have to worry about is clinton. she stands a real chance of winning the nom and the election and she represents the same polarized washington we've seen for eight years, she will not bring change at all. I believe that obama will make some changes if elected. i'm unsure how good they will turn out to be, but something has to change in washington. and that's complete horseshit about not being able to elect a black president. the people that would vote against him simply because he's black are to few in number to stop him from being elected.
Randal: Why yes, of course the 9/11 Free Market is the 9/11 solution to every problem. You aren't in favor of government meddling in the marketplace now, are you :)
Candace: I hope you're right about Obama "astonishing the pundits."
Anna: Yeah, Giuliani sucks. I sure hope he doesn't get the nomination.
Illnoise: I'm more optimistic now about Obama's chances for getting elected. I think his lack of political experience is an advantage. Both parties are paralyzed by gridlock and corruption; somebody "experienced" like Hillary just means more of the same. And no more dynasties. I want a president whose last name isn't Bush or Clinton.
I meant that Obama already has astonished the pundits, during the Iowa caucus. But then I added, "just keep watching." Sorry about not being more clear.
I DO think the Obama phenomenon will continue, and that he will be the nominee. He appeals to a broad range of demographics and has raised an amazing amount of money (without taking from PACs) from first-time political contributors, coming in in amounts as little as $5. Now THAT's astonishing. And electable. (I hope!)
I love what Obama did in Iowa, and I am hoping for repeat performances in New Hampshire and South Carolina. If Clinton starts out 0 for 2 or 0 for 3, it might be tough for her to drag herself up off the mat. While it is true she may do very well in NY and CA, with the media exposure Obama would get from winning a few of these early primaries, it could sway a lot of votes his way. If he wins the next couple of primaries, watch out! After listening to bits and pieces of what the candidates have to say, I believe Obama's is the real message of hope and of, as rockync says, restoration for America. If we want to feel good about America again, I believe he offers us a chance at that. Not just a chance to feel good about us ourselves, but about our country and about its place in the world. He comes from the direction of reason and hope. Edwards is close to that. Clinton? I just don't know...
As for Rudy, I think he is shooting himself in the foot, and good. By avoiding Iowa, he screwed himself out of a lot of media attention. It is no wonder he is running third at best in New Hampshire. If he thinks that with his lack of exposure he will still win big primaries on February 5, I am hoping he is in for a big disappointment. While he may have built up some support in the Super Tuesday states, I don't see how he can hang onto that support while the other candidates are more visible and are building more momentum.
At this point, I'm thinking it is beginning to look like Obama versus McCain. I think the religion thing is going to kill Romney's chances, and that with Huckabee's heavy emphasis on religion (along with his populist persona) it will cause the party to avoid nominating Huckabee. With Giuliani doing a major fade, at least at this time, I'm thinking McCain will start to pull ahead.
That will frustrate a lot of evangelical voters if he indeed gets nominated, but that's fine with me. Let them stay home on Election Day.
Then, the election will be a sort of replay of Clinton versus Dole, in a sense. An energetic, fairly youthful guy who represents the possibility of positive change will be faced off against someone who is 25 years older and less comfortable in the media spotlight.
Bob Dole was 73 when he was nominated, McCain would be 72. Bill Clinton was 46 when he was nominated, and Obama would be 47. Like Dole, McCain would be in favor of basically maintaining the status quo, while Obama, like Clinton, would be promoting the "change" and "new ideas" thing.
I think McCain's strength would be on national defense and terrorism, and if Obama was able to debate well in those areas, I don't think he would have a hard time defeating McCain.
The Republicans are trying to out Iraq each other. It's pathetic. They are also trying to out 'I hate immigrants more than you'.
Each step of the way while they focus on getting the Repug nomination they are just alienating more voters and decreasing any real chance a Repug has at winning the White House.
Frickin McCain said he'd be happy with troops in Iraq for a thousand years....'look at Korea' is his anecdotal evidence.
If we are to look at the past and try to replicate its successes then we will become a barbaric world once again when the Roman Empire enjoyed hundreds of years of peace and prosperity but only after they sacked town after town, country after country, stationed troops there indeffinately, and for the 'specially defiant people they disemboweled them and put their heads on pikes lining the road into the city.
That worked too McCain, wanna try that? It was sooo successful for Rome...
Candace: I hope you're right about Obama. I didn't have much hope for him before Iowa, but now I think he really does have a good chance.
Snave: I think you're right about McCain being the probable Republican candidate. Even though Clinton was called the "Comeback Kid," McCain has had that reputation ever since his days at the Naval Academy. He's always been the underdog, underestimated, and he's always come from behind to win.
Unfortunately I think he'd be the hardest candidate to beat. He's the only one that could unify the Evangelicals and the Big Business types. His main drawback is that he's done too much flipflopping, and his "straight talk" demeanor is just a slick facade. Hopefully the Democrats can get that message out.
Yup, Obama vs. McCain, that's my guess, for now.
PoliShifter: The Roman Empire, now there's a role model for us. Right now there are already too many parallels between our sociopolitical situation and that of Rome just before it became history. The hubris before the fall, or whatever that saying is. I hope we can change our direction before that happens.
Post a Comment
<< Home