Biden Wishes Cheney Well

It was good of Joe to call on Dick, who had a mild heart attack. I was under the impression that Dick didn't have a heart.

Vice President Biden called former Vice President Cheney on Tuesday to wish him well and to “get better soon,” according to a Biden aide. via Politico

In other Joe news, he talked to mayors today about the stimulus. Mayors on the conference call:

Mayor Ron V. Dellums (D-Oakland, CA)
Mayor Bob Foster (D-Long Beach, CA)
Mayor Tom Martin (R-Lubbock, TX)
Mayor Raul G. Salinas (D-Laredo, TX)
County Commissioner David Ferdinand (R-Canyon County, ID)

Dick At CPAC Says Obama a One Term President

Poor Dick. He's so useless.

President Barack Obama will be a one-term president, former Vice President Dick Cheney confidently predicted Thursday.

During a surprise appearance at the end of his daughter Liz's speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington, D.C., the former vice president said Republicans would have a "phenomenal year" with the midterm elections, and said Obama would be defeated in 2012.

"I think 2010 is going to be a phenomenal year for the conservative cause," Cheney said to raucous applause from the conservative audience. "And I think that Barack Obama is a one-term president." The Hill

I don't know why everyone keeps calling it a surprise appearance. I didn't know anything about the CPAC lineup but is it a surprise that Dick would be there?

Dick Cheney on This Week Feb. 14 Video

I haven't watched this yet. But do I need to? Dick is rather predictable. He never has anything new or reasonable to say. Watch Dick here and the roundtable here. Here's a clip.

Update: Okay, I watched Dick and found him tolerable today. He has softened his stance a bit.

Sending in Joe to Beat Back Cheney

Dick has to ruin Valentine's Day by dragging he and his pacemaker out of the bunker to wildly complain about the Obama administration on This Week. But the White House is sending out Joe:

Vice President Joe Biden's appearances on two Sunday morning talk shows this week are part of a White House strategy to both pre-empt and potentially respond to former Vice President Dick Cheney's interview on ABC's "This Week," where administration officials expect he'll continue to advance his sharp critique of President Obama's record on national security. Read more at Politico

The Bidens, valentines for real:

Cheney Rears His Head on Valentine's Day

Politico gives us the heads up--Dick will rear his ugly head on This Week next Sunday, Feb. 14. I won't watch (but I'll post video) because he makes my stomach turn and I already know what he'll say. At times like these, we need Cheney to stay in his bunker. His daughter is more than enough sunshine.

Lugar Says Cheney Criticism Unfair

Richard Lugar, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, called President Barack Obama’s handling of recent terrorism threats “strong,” disputing former Vice President Dick Cheney’s criticism.
“It’s unfair,” Lugar said in an interview for Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt,” airing this weekend. “I think the president is focused.” More at Bloomberg

Ron Paul Says Cheney Had His Turn

Obama and John Brennan, assistant to the president on counterterrorism and Homeland Security

Nice. Ron Paul is the only republican that I've heard so far speak out against Cheney.

Ron Paul, the Texas congressman and upstart 2008 presidential candidate, told CNN's Larry King Monday night Cheney is in no place to criticize Obama's handling of the war on terrorism.

"I think he had his eight years, and he's caused a lot of trouble for our country and perpetuated a war in Iraq unnecessary and wrong-headed," said Paul. "I would say it would be best he not be so critical right now." CNN

Brennan Backs Obama on Meet the Press

All signs point to the fact that Cheney is just a terd.

I'm not a fan of name calling but Cheney has earned the name. Furthermore, he's the one who is dangerous because he has sway over wingnuts. What we don't need is violent wingnuts. We have other extremists to fight.

On Meet the Press, Deputy National Security Adviser John Brennan says he's disappointed in Dick and comes out strongly for Obama. "I see it on his face," he said of Obama's resolve to fight Al Qaeda.

Two former Bush administration intelligence officials, Michael Chertoff and Michael Hayden, also showed support for the Obama administration's efforts against terrorism as well. Chertoff says he has confidence in Homeland Secretary Janet Napolitano, and Hayden said minus some political differences, he's confident that the Obama administration is doing its best to fight terrorism. Hayden says that everyone (Dick) needs to calm down, stop hyperventilating and let Brennan do his work without the blame games. In other words, the real work can't get done in that environment, so stop politicizing terror. See that video below.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The full interview with Brennan.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The Bush administration was already trying to reduce detainee numbers at Guantanamo

Chertoff and Hayden. Hayden says "we are faced with a learning enemy."

Historian Doris Kearns Goodwin says Obama has made strides in getting more help from the international community. The roundtable:

Terrorists Need to be Treated Like Common Criminals

Obama has this down. Why elevate the stature of a terrorist?
Obama's not giving the terrorists what they want, but republicans seem to want to elevate the status of a common criminal to "enemy combatant." Republicans don't think Obama is tough enough on terrorism, which has nothing to do with Obama and everything to do with their own ignorance.
The GOP is behaving like small idiots, and frankly, I'm sick of their nonsense, especially when it comes to national security. Obama is the president. HIS foreign policy is the one that we voted for. Pete Hoekstra, Peter King, Dick Cheney, losers.
I don't want to see anyone pointing fingers. I want to see people fixing things. They need to be helping. If not, find something else to do. I still can't help seeing the GOP as a giant troll under the bridge.

Wouldn't it be refreshing to see someone like Hoekstra act like an adult and say, hey, what can I do?
Two good pieces today on the importance of treating terrorists, not as worthy enemies, but plain and simple criminals:

Nothing plays more right into the hands of Al Qaeda than glorifying them as some sort of special and unique class of warriors -- enemy combatants -- rather than treating them as the lowly, common, murderous criminals they are. When we deny them due process and imprison them without charges because they're something stronger and scarier than mere criminals -- when we pronounce that they are our enemies waging holy war on America -- we do more to elevate their stature and, in the eyes of their followers, justify their violence than anything they could hope to do themselves. The more fearful and extreme our reaction to them is, the better their cause is served. Is there anything they can do or say to make that clearer? Salon

From the Washington Post:

Mr. Cheney and others argue that Mr. Abdulmutallab, who is accused of trying to down Northwest Flight 253 over Detroit on Christmas, should have been held as an enemy combatant and pumped for information, rather than read his Miranda rights and provided a lawyer. They further argue that the decision to shuttle him to federal court shows that President Obama is in denial about the dangers of terrorism.

This last claim has no merit. Just as it would be a mistake to approach all terrorist acts as a law enforcement challenge, so would it be imprudent to dispense with strong and available law enforcement tools, and to deal with all such incidents as acts of war. Recall that the Bush administration prosecuted shoe bomber Richard Reid in federal court for attempting to down a transatlantic flight using the same type of explosives allegedly found on Mr. Abdulmutallab. No one then questioned the Bush-Cheney administration's judgment or its resolve -- and rightly so.
.....
So why not bundle the Nigerian suspect to a secure location for intensive questioning by the CIA? First, because he already has been talking to authorities about his affiliation with al-Qaeda and the possibility of other attacks. Second, because he is no Khalid Sheik Mohammed -- he is not a seasoned al-Qaeda operator but a disturbed young man whom the group tried to use as cannon fodder.

Most important, the Bush administration's own experience has showed that holding suspects as enemy combatants creates more problems than it solves, because of the lack of due process and legal accountability. WaPo

White House Shuts Down Cheney

Wackadoo! Setting Dick, the coward, straight (read Dick's critiques here): I'll start with the end part from the White House blog:

The difference is this: President Obama doesn’t need to beat his chest to prove it, and – unlike the last Administration – we are not at war with a tactic (“terrorism”), we at war with something that is tangible: al Qaeda and its violent extremist allies. And we will prosecute that war as long as the American people are endangered.

And that takes care of that. Of course, Dick or one of the other GOP coffee klatch members will surely fire back, but Dan Pfeiffer, a White House spokesman, pretty much sums it up.

There has been a lot of discussion online and in the mainstream media about our response to various critics of the President, specifically former Vice President Cheney, who have been coming out of the woodwork since the incident on Christmas Day. I think we all agree that there should be honest debate about these issues, but it is telling that Vice President Cheney and others seem to be more focused on criticizing the Administration than condemning the attackers. Unfortunately too many are engaged in the typical Washington game of pointing fingers and making political hay, instead of working together to find solutions to make our country safer.

First, it’s important that the substantive context be clear: for seven years after 9/11, while our national security was overwhelmingly focused on Iraq – a country that had no al Qaeda presence before our invasion – Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda's leadership was able to set up camp in the border region of Pakistan and Afghanistan, where they continued to plot attacks against the United States. Meanwhile, al Qaeda also regenerated in places like Yemen and Somalia, establishing new safe-havens that have grown over a period of years. It was President Obama who finally implemented a strategy of winding down the war in Iraq, and actually focusing our resources on the war against al Qaeda – more than doubling our troops in Afghanistan, and building partnerships to target al Qaeda’s safe-havens in Yemen and Somalia. And in less than one year, we have already seen many al Qaeda leaders taken out, our alliances strengthened, and the pressure on al Qaeda increased worldwide.

To put it simply: this President is not interested in bellicose rhetoric, he is focused on action. Seven years of bellicose rhetoric failed to reduce the threat from al Qaeda and succeeded in dividing this country. And it seems strangely off-key now, at a time when our country is under attack, for the architect of those policies to be attacking the President. Read more at WH blog

At Last Cheney Offers Statement on Terror

Update: The White House shuts down Cheney.

I figured after Eric Holder's Newsweek interview, the loathsome Dick wouldn't be able to keep his pie hole shut, even though he should, given that it was the Bush administration that set free Gitmo detainees -- it didn't even bother to convict them in federal courts -- in Saudi Arabia for art therapy, after which they returned craftier than ever, making underwear bombs. There's no question, that this is about Dick's precious ego. He's very concerned that Obama isn't using useless worn out rhetoric such as "war on terror." I can't stand that phrase. It makes me sick to my stomach, mostly because it reminds me of how we invaded Iraq and killed scores of Iraqi women and children for "weapons of mass destruction" that weren't even there and how the U.S. engaged in torture. Torture. Disgusting.

But where's Sarah? She hasn't chimed in:

Cheney: Obama 'trying to pretend we are not at war' – says goal of presidency seems to be 'social transformation' -- The former vice president, in a statement to POLITICO: 'As I've watched the events of the last few days it is clear once again that President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war. He seems to think if he has a low key response to an attempt to blow up an airliner and kill hundreds of people, we won't be at war.
He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won't be at war. He seems to think if we bring the mastermind of 9/11 to New York, give him a lawyer and trial in civilian court, we won't be at war. He seems to think if he closes Guantanamo and releases the hard-core al Qaeda trained terrorists still there, we won't be at war.
He seems to think if he gets rid of the words, 'war on terror,' we won't be at war. But we are at war and when President Obama pretends we aren't, it makes us less safe. Why doesn't he want to admit we're at war? It doesn't fit with the view of the world he brought with him to the Oval Office. It doesn't fit with what seems to be the goal of his presidency – social transformation-the restructuring of American society. President Obama's first object and his highest responsibility must be to defend us against an enemy that knows we are at war.' Politico

Eric Holder on Cheney

It's the rule of law, stupid (Dick).
Of course, since Eric Holder is speaking on Cheney, we'll likely have to hear from Dick shortly. Or maybe not.

I'm going to read a quote from President Obama. This is from the National Archives speech: "We uphold our most cherished values, not only because doing so is right, but because it strengthens our country and it keeps us safe. Time and again, our values have been our best national-security asset." By that definition, did Vice President Cheney's vision make us less strong and less safe?
I think we are strongest when we adhere to what has always made this country great, adhering to the rule of law, following our moral precepts, and we are weakest when we have failed to do that. Great presidents have sometimes deviated from that path. Roosevelt did, with regard to the internment of the Japanese. Lincoln did, to some degree, with regard to the whole question of suspending habeas corpus. And I think the past administration, though they were under enormous pressure after 9/11, made some mistakes.

The Constitution is strong and vibrant:

As you see it, what's the most important difference between this administration's approach to combating terrorism and the previous administration's?

I think that too often the past administration is now seen through the voice of one person. And that's not necessarily, I think, reflective of …
Are you talking about the president or …

No, I'm talking about the vice president. And I'm not sure that accurately reflects where the prior administration was. So there is that caveat. But having said that, I think that one of the things that distinguishes this administration is that we believe that our Constitution is a strong and vibrant document that, at the end of the day, is perhaps our best protection against those who would try to do this nation harm.

Dick baffles the thinking person:

How do you feel—how do you react, personally—when you see the former vice president going on about how this administration is not keeping the American people safe, or has abandoned important policies? Are you dismissive of it? Does it tick you off?
I frankly don't understand it. There's a part of me that doesn't really believe that he believes what he's saying. Read the whole thing at Newsweek

The Reason for Cheney's Silence Amid Terror News?

I was wondering today why Dick was so quiet. Sarah Palin too. But she's on a book tour.

Perhaps this is why we've heard nary a peep from Dick. The Bush administration let go the very terrorists alleged to be behind the underwear bomb plot. The terrorists were released in 2007 in Saudi Arabia for some art therapy. People don't realize, especially the wingnuts, that Bush-Cheney let go hundreds, 270 to be exact, of suspected terrorists from Gitmo. I don't think we should be pointing fingers, because there's plenty of blame to go around, but republicans ought to be working with the Obama administration, not piling on. If there's one place where politics doesn't belong, it's in national security:

Two of the four leaders allegedly behind the al Qaeda plot to blow up a Northwest Airlines passenger jet over Detroit were released by the U.S. from the Guantanamo prison in November, 2007, according to American officials and Department of Defense documents. Al Qaeda claimed responsibility for the Northwest bombing in a Monday statement that vowed more attacks on Americans.

American officials agreed to send the two terrorists from Guantanamo to Saudi Arabia where they entered into an "art therapy rehabilitation program" and were set free, according to U.S. and Saudi officials. Read more at ABC

Rachel Maddow's show pretty much sums up the inanity coming from the GOP:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Update Dec. 31: Video of ABC's Brian Ross' correction. Only one of the Gitmo detainees was free to claim responsibility for the underwear bomb plot. The other had been captured:

Petraeus Speaks on Afghanistan Plan

David Petraeus speaks to Joe Scarborough on the Afghanistan plan. "We're not trying to make Sweden in Afghanistan."

Petraeus says Obama was not dithering. "This process was quite good," he said. It sharpened objectives in a much more detailed and nuanced way, he said. Petraeus says he hasn't heard Dick Cheney's blathering.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Republicans Wishing Dick Cheney Would Hush?

The quality of Dick's voice on this tape in the video is fitting of Dick's ickiness. Dick was caught again behaving very, very badly. Politico editor Jim VandeHei who interviewed Dick says it comes down to how do you use power--the Obama way or the Cheney way. VandeHei says republicans want Dick to hush but I haven't seen any republican take a stand against Cheney. They're not as fervent as Dick, but I've only seen them agree and back up Cheney.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

See Dick Behave Badly

I'm convinced that Dick, perhaps motivated by revenge (for being called out for torture and a host of other things) and the desire to rewrite the history of the Bush administration, is going after Obama in personal way.

Dick isn't concerned for the nation's security. If he was, he would be talking to Obama behind closed doors. He'd phone Obama and say: "We need to talk." He wouldn't be playing games in public. Dick's behavior could be undermining our nation's security.

On the eve of the unveiling of the nation’s new Afghanistan policy, former Vice President Dick Cheney slammed President Barack Obama for projecting “weakness” to adversaries and warned that more workaday Afghans will side with the Taliban if they think the United States is heading for the exits.

In a 90-minute interview at his suburban Washington house, Cheney said the president’s “agonizing” about Afghanistan strategy “has consequences for your forces in the field.”

“I begin to get nervous when I see the commander in chief making decisions apparently for what I would describe as small ‘p’ political reasons, where he’s trying to balance off different competing groups in society,” Cheney said. Poltico

Newsweek Comes Out For Dick Cheney

Newsweek's editor Jon Meacham thinks Dick would be good for the country. I couldn't disagree more. The world may not end in 2012 but if Dick runs for office, it will be one awful time. Dick's presence is chilling. How forgetful we all are. It was Dick who advocated torture and invading a country under false pretenses.

Also, Meacham's mention of liberal and latte in the same sentence is a useless stereotype and is tired journalism. I'm weary of the country being characterized as a battle between the left and the right. There are more people who are in the middle, but those views aren't media worthy because they're not controversial. Our media greatly dis-serves this nation with its mindless chatter and little appreciation for nuance and complexity. Maybe it's what we deserve.

Gallup is not asking about him in its prospective polling, and his daughter Liz's recent Fox News Sunday allusion to a presidential run provoked good-natured laughter, as though the suggestion were just a one-liner. Float the hypothetical in political conversation, and people roll their eyes dismissively.

But I think we should be taking the possibility of a Dick Cheney bid for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012 more seriously, for a run would be good for the Republicans and good for the country. (The sound you just heard in the background was liberal readers spitting out their lattes.)

Why? Because Cheney is a man of conviction, has a record on which he can be judged, and whatever the result, there could be no ambiguity about the will of the people. The best way to settle arguments is by having what we used to call full and frank exchanges about the issues, and then voting. A contest between Dick Cheney and Barack Obama would offer us a bracing referendum on competing visions. One of the problems with governance since the election of Bill Clinton has been the resolute refusal of the opposition party (the GOP from 1993 to 2001, the Democrats from 2001 to 2009, and now the GOP again in the Obama years) to concede that the president, by virtue of his victory, has a mandate to take the country in a given direction. A Cheney victory would mean that America preferred a vigorous unilateralism to President Obama's unapologetic multilateralism, and vice versa. Read more if you want.

Dick Still Trying To Defend His Miserable Vice Presidency

On Morning Joe (see video below), Joe Scarborough gets a dig in saying that Obama has delayed the decision on Afghanistan (which by the way is coming Dec. 1) because he doesn't want to make one. Are people really that stupid? Why can't anyone understand the enormity of engaging in war? Obama actually asked for an exit strategy. He asked for "off ramps" if things aren't going well.

By having these war council meetings he made everyone accountable and aware of what's at stake.

Escalating war in Afghanistan makes me sick because Hamid Karzai is a despicably corrupt man and Stanley McChrystal should've been fired for insubordination.
Making things worse, Dick has emerged from Hell again and is saying that the reason Obama is taking a long time to make a decision is because he's inexperienced. Even if that were true, it isn't something to be saying.

If he really believed it, then he ought to have the decency to approach the Obama administration in a helpful and non combative way. But that's not what we've got here. We have a little competition going on with a meek Dick Cheney being shown up by a competent man with real power.

Dick can't stand it. He can't stand the fact that the U.S. is taking on a diplomatic role in the world. That's not the way Dick ticks. Dick is the playground bully who believes that powerful nations dominate. Obama and Dick are so very opposite.

Dick would never ever think to reckon with the fact that he nearly destroyed our country, so he's out at every chance blaming Obama. Dick isn't the thoughtful, contemplative sort. Dick is an old fashioned, neo conservative war monger. Dick is out of date. He's what the country was. He's just in the way.

The irony of it all is not only does the Obama administration have to put up with Dick, it's out there cleaning up Dick's mess at every turn.

Dick is like Sarah Palin. Neither know their own ignorance. Dick and Palin are both made up mostly of ego, cut from the same cloth. They both operate on gut because they think they're entirely right about everything. Their boldness compensates for thoughtful consideration. They are two peas in a pod.

Like Sarah, Dick is a danger because he incites wingnuts to stupidity. Dick needs to shut his pie hole.

The Morning Joe team takes the White House to task this morning. The way they tell it, Obama is the worst president ever. Not even Gayle King, an Obama supporter, makes a good argument. Everyone is buying the media narrative:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Obama Tours Forbidden City

BEIJING — Millions of people come here to look at the delights of the Forbidden City. Now add President Obama to that list.

Mr. Obama, his hands jammed into the pockets of his distressed brown leather jacket to ward off the frigid Beijing temperatures, took a moment out of his day of meetings to check out the storied old residence of China’s former imperial leaders.

Situated just behind Tiananmen Square, the Forbidden City was called “forbidden” because normal people weren’t allowed in, the better to conceal how well the rulers were living. Apparently there is now a new “forbidden city,” where China’s present leaders live, and normal people don’t go in there much either.

But we digress. Mr. Obama arrived around 2:15, and was escorted by the Forbidden City Museum director, Zheng Xinmiao, and a cast of, well, a lot of people: the senior advisers David Axelrod and Valerie Jarrett, and the White House spokesman Robert Gibbs. NYT

I'll post video when it's available. Watch a Chinese reporter talk about Obama's visit here.
Obama's schedule for today and tomorrow and next up, South Korea:

On November 17, Obama will hold a bilateral with Hu, followed by a joint press conference, after which he will sightsee in Beijing. There will be a state dinner that night.

On November 18, Obama will hold a bilateral meeting with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, and do more sightseeing, before traveling to South Korea.

November 18-19 - SEOUL

Obama arrives in Seoul the night of November 18. The morning of the 19th, he holds a bilateral meeting with South Korean President Lee Myung-bak, after which the two will hold a press conference.

Obama will then meet with U.S. troops stationed in Korea, before leaving on his trip back to the United States, where he is scheduled to arrive early on November 20. Reuters

Where U.S. and China agree and disagree. Gibbs says it best:

Meanwhile, Dick Cheney is blustering about how Obama shouldn't be bowing. I can't believe that showing respect and to our allies is even being discussed. Those with REAL power and might don't have to belittle others. But Dick wouldn't know anything about that. His ego is so large that he can't see how he helped bring the nation to tatters. If I were him, I'd do a little soul searching. But noooooo. Then Liz Cheney has to taunt everyone with the suggestion that her father might run for president and worse, it could be a Cheney Palin ticket. I'm sure she was mostly jesting but the thought of that makes me nauseous.

Kerry Slams Cheney Big Time

Sen. John Kerry, speaking to the Council on Foreign Relations, has the best response to Dick so far. "Because of the gross mishandling of this war by past civilian leadership, there are no great options for its handling today." Take that Cheney! Go fishing and get out of the way of progress.