Will any media member ask Dick Cheney why HE never released any memos when he was in power? is that too much to ask. He's playing games right now and trying to suck the media and the American people in.
Dick Cheney was having a grand old time defending torture, saying that he wasn't in the torture business, but hey, we waterboarded a few people because his buddies at the OLC helped him out. He was spinning his web and telling us that the OLC and the Bush administration acted within the law when they starting waterboarding prisoners on Face the Nation. He denies that they ever used torture. Cheney also said George Bush knew and approved everything they did. I guess when he said we didn't use torture his was misleading America.

He also used the GOP talking point that we used the same techniques on our own troops in the SERE program so it ain't torture. His daughter (Liz Cheney) learned a lot from him because she used the same defense to Norah O'Donnell which didn't even pass her smell test.

He absolutely wouldn't change a thing and still wants more memos released. When will journalists ask Cheney why he didn't released these documents when he was in power? Bush was taking a tremendous amount of heat over the torture issue at the time.
Schieffer was asking him if he would allow himself to be questioned about these topics and go "under oath." Cheney dodged the question by saying he'd have to look into it legally and see what precedent he would set , but he's talking now. He WILL NEVER go under oath.

SCHIEFFER: Senator Leahy, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, was on this broadcast recently. And I said, do you intend to ask the former vice president to come up? And he said if he will testify under oath. Would you be willing to testify under oath?

CHENEY: I'd have to see what the circumstances are and what kind of precedent we were setting. But certainly I wouldn't be out here today if I didn't feel comfortable talking about what we're doing publicly. I think it's very, very important that we have a clear understanding that what happened here was an honorable approach to defending the nation, that there was nothing devious or deceitful or dishonest or illegal about what was done.

He's just trying to justify torture and he's using TV to promote his views. Let's see if he'll go on with Lawrence O'Donnell and face some real questions. If Cheney will never appear with another guest or interviewer that uses facts to question him with, what makes you think he'll go in front of Leahy?

CBS has the full transcript and you can read more below the fold:

Continue reading »

On Face the Nation today, Dick Cheney said that he chooses Rush Limbaugh over Colin Powell when it comes to the debate about the future of the GOP.

"If I had to choose in terms of being a Republican, I'd choose Rush Limbaugh," Cheney said when asked about whose vision of the GOP he'd side with. "My impression was that Colin was no longer a Republican."

"I don't think the Republican Party ought to move far to the left," Cheney said. "The suggestion our Democratic friends always make is, 'Well, if you Republicans were just more like Democrats, you'd win elections.' Well, I don't buy that."

I'm glad Dick Cheney continues to put his face out there as a spokesmen for the "new" GOP and as a torture apologist, but this brief part of the show demonstrates that Cheney is more impressed with a peddler of GOP propaganda and entertainment than he is defending one of his own and a man who sold the Iraq war to the American people.

Cheney always got into it with Powell over foreign policy so it's not a shock that he would be outspoken against him either.

Powell wanted to stay the course that took the diplomatic route as BushCo. went after Iraq, but when Bush told him we were going to war he signed on without giving his honest opinion. Many people forget that Colin Powell didn't even want to go to the UN for a resolution when they all decided to go to war with Iraq, but since Blair told Bush to get UN approval, he was forced to give a presentation they hoped would swing the country and the world against Saddam. And that presentation has tarnished his record more than anything. It's very fitting. Woodward's book Plan of Attack, reveals all this in detail. And as Digby and Bob Somerby have written, we have to be careful how Colin Powell is described because he's had his hand in a lot of very bad things.

Colin Powell is not only not a war hero, he's actually implicated in war crimes from two different wars --- as one of the "White House Principals" who watched the CIA act out torture techniques for their approval and as one of the men who tried to cover up My Lai. (He was involved in Iran-Contra too.) And that's not even taking into account his pivotal role in energetically selling the Iraq war with bogus intelligence. Certainly, the man cannot be separated from Dick Cheney on that issue.

He was one of the most powerful people in the Bush administration and he failed time after time to step up and use his vast personal popularity to stop them or slow them down. He is, in fact, the worst chickensh*t of the bunch since he had a separate power center and a special authority as an ex-general. Cheney may have been the chief architect, but Powell was the chief salesman and cover artist.

John McCain admitted to Bob Schieffer on Face The Nation that the US violated the Geneva Conventions under George W. Bush regarding the abusive treatment of prisoners.

You know, that torture thing.

SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN (Ranking, Armed Services Committee): First of all let me repeat what you just said, Bob. I have opposed torture. It's violation of the Geneva Conventions. I worry about treatment of Americans in future conflicts.

SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN: The-- the allegations are that they gave the wrong counsel that’s and—- and that bad things were done. And we violated fundamental commitments that the United States of America made when we signed the Geneva Conventions. And we disregarded what might happen to Americans who are held captive in the future. And by the way, those who say our enemies won’t abide the Geneva Conventions they will if they know there’s going to retribution for their violation of it.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Let me ask you about this quickly, Jay Bybee who was one of the people at the Justice department that wrote the memos that gave the CIA what they call the legal reasons to go ahead with all this, he’s now a federal judge. We understand that he very much regrets, or at least he’s told people, he regrets having written those memos. Do you think that he should be impeached or do you think that he should resign or you-- you think he should be left alone?

SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN: Well, a resignation would be a decision he would have to make on his own. But he falls into the same category as everybody else as far as giving very bad advice and misinterpreting fundamentally what the United States is all about, much less things like the Geneva Conventions. Plus--under President Reagan we signed an agreement against torture, we’re in violation of that...

So tell me what are the penalties for violating the Geneva Conventions? John McCain freely admitted that our great country violated the agreements we signed up for. Is it an act of vengeance that the people who broke those treaties should be prosecuted or is it just following the law?

Continue reading »

John Boehner thinks America has forgotten about the last eight years if we're supposed to believe that he cares one iota about fiscal responsibility. On Face the Nation John Boehner continues to hammer on their disasterous request for a spending freeze.

Even David Brooks called this out for what it is, insanity.

CongressMatters has more here on another of Boehner's B.S. on the Republican having any plans for job creation: "Twice as Many Jobs at Half the Cost" - Mythbusting Republican Spin.

But, just for the record, they didn't really offer anything. And there is absolutely no credible data to support that claim a republican alternative would have created twice as many jobs at half the cost. Just like there was never $30 million for any Pelosi's mouse. Just like the stimulus bill doesn't have provisions designed to kill bible study programs.

It's a wonder Boehner, Cantor and the rest of the GOP leadership doesn't have whiplash from the constant spinning.

Video from CBS. Bob Schieffer talks to three governors who are going to take the stimulus money, New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland.

From Face the Nation Feb. 15, 2009 on the stimulus bill and executive compensation.

You Tube

On Face the Nation Mitch McConnell says the GOP is going to require sixty votes for the stimulus bill to pass, but doesn't want to call it a filibuster. Since the Democrats cave in and never actually make them filibuster anything, his response is not surprising.

Schieffer: If it came to it, would Republicans filibuster this bill if it was not to your liking?

McConnell: Well that term is thrown around a lot. In the Senate it routinely takes sixty votes to do almost everything. It doesn't necessarily mean you're trying to slow a bill down. But a super-majority is required for virtually everything in the Senate and certainly for something close to a trillion dollars for a spending bill, it will.

Video courtesy of CBS News.

Bob Schieffer's comments on President Obama's vow that torture will no longer be a part of national policy.

You Tube

Bob Schieffer asks John Boehner whether they're likely to pass Obama's stimulus package and whether the rest of the TARP funds should be released. Of course after his years of concern about how Republicans have driven us into a financial ditch, Boehner is suddenly now all about fiscal responsibility. Even after admitting we've got some severe problems that need to be addressed quickly Boehner doesn't seem to have many real reservations about slowing the passing of the stimulus package down and uses his "Democrat" colleagues for cover.

Boehner: We need to do this quickly but we need to do it in a responsible way. Whether we can do it in a responsible way that quickly is unknown. Earlier this week I thought surely we could have it to the President's desk by the middle of February. [..] As I begin to hear comments from my Democrat colleagues in the House and Senate you know they're raising real questions. [..] ..we have a budget deficit that we need to be concerned about. And I think a lot of members of Congress on both sides of the aisle know that we can't borrow and spend our way to prosperity. That we can't bury our kids and their kids under a mountain of debt. And so, what is responsible?

Yeah. NOW he's worried about our deficit and the debt left to the next generation. I'm so glad to see that timely concern on your part Rep. Boehner. And of course first and foremost Boehner is concerned about keeping those tax cuts in place. Notice how he doesn't mention keeping the ones in place for the richest in the country but talks about working people and small businesses? He talks about Americans using tax breaks to invest. Right now most Americans are either afraid to invest (since they haven't cleaned up the regulatory mess and no one knows what's safe) or don't have any money to invest in the first place. He mentions people saving the money but that's not going to do much to stimulate the economy is it?

Boehner: I think that clearly the most important part is allowing American families and small businesses to keep more of what they earn. If we allow them to keep more of that they earn they're going to spend it. They're going to save it. They're going to invest it. All of which is good for the economy and it can begin immediately. We don't have to wait for some government program to work or some government check to show up. We can do it quickly. And so I think the bigger point here is what's going to be in the package.

He goes on to say that most Americans are a "little skeptical" about government spending. Well gee..why do you think that is? It couldn't be because the Republicans have been completely irresponsible with how they've spent our tax dollars could it?

And lastly Boehner is asked whether the other half of the TARP funds should be released or not.

Boehner: I don't think so. I voted for the economic rescue package. I clearly thought it was necessary. I certainly raised a lot of concerns over the last several months about how it was spent and the TARP board we set up in the legislation to oversee this came out with a report late last week highly critical of the Treasury Department and the way they've proceeded. And I think until there is a demonstrated need in our economy, a plan to address that need I think it would be irresponsible for Congress to release the additional money and I frankly think there are Democrats and Republicans alike who have great concerns about this.

I'm so glad you're willing to do the right thing and actually care that the TARP money is not wasted now that a Democrat is coming into office Rep. Boehner. We could have used a little bit of that while Bush was slipping provisions into the way the money would be allocated for the first half. As usual with everything you do IOKIARDI but if it's a Democrat in charge, you're all about oversight and fiscal responsiblity as are the rest of your cohorts.

Maybe if you'd shown a little more concern over doing one iota of oversight on how our tax dollars have been spent while Republicans were in charge we would not be in the mess we are now.

You Tube

Dick Cheney on Face the Nation doing his last bit of spin on Iraq and Saddam Hussein before we finally get these criminals out of office.

Cheney seems to think that Iraq is better off now than before the invasion and occupation. Somehow I think that the over a million dead and millions more displaced there would tend to disagree with him but hey, what do I know.

Maybe they love living in a country poisoned by DU, with filthy conditions where they're separated from their friends and family that they have left and wondering if they'll have clean water, food or electricity to look forward to in the next day, week or month.

I'm sure other than that all those Iraqis are eternally grateful to Dick Cheney and the Bush administration and all of those in the United States Congress that allowed themselves to be bullied or scared into approving us invading their country for helping to have "liberated" them. Bravo. Mission accomplished. The rest of the world just loves us now, right? But of course, as far as Cheney is concerned, they can just go **** themselves, those ingrates.

I really don't know why he even bothers with the Bush history revision. Everyone knows he could care less what anyone thinks of him or the U.S. or the Bush administration and the damage that's been done while he and Bush have been in office.

(h/t Heather)

Bob Schieffer's closing tells us what we already know: the country does not trust politicians any more to make things better for the citizenry. However, for all of its self-evident truth, it is frustrating to hear him take such a passive stance in not pinpointing that this impotent lip service to public good is as much a hallmark of Republican politics as union busting, corporatism and privatization. That doesn't absolve the Democratic Party, who have been frustratingly as impotent as the Repubs, but in a different, blinded battered spouse kind of way.

(T)his is an observation on how ineffectual both Congress and the administration have become.

Years of political spin, rosy reports that never seem to match the pictures on television (remember "Brownie, you've done a heck of a job"), and endless partisan turf wars have left the country cynical and suspicious of everything Washington says and does.

So Washington is unable to generate the political will to do anything.

Government's credibility has sunk so low that the pronouncements - no matter how dire - from the lame duck President and the even more unpopular Congress go unheeded, if not unheard.

The credibility of Washington was destroyed by the Bush White House (backed by their Republican colleagues in Congress) that Iraq had nuclear weapons in their non-existent WMD arsenal, that NCLB would improve education, that the Healthy Forest Initiative would be good for the environment, and many more, along with they would bring honor and dignity to Washington...all lies on par with the worst Orwellian nightmare. But yeah, let's make this a "Washington" problem, instead of acknowledging that its genesis lies in the Republican platform. I know we're all supposed to be adults and above this kind of partisanship now, but I don't see how we will ever get traction to move past this kind of inertia until we see the problems for what they are.

Transcripts below the fold

Continue reading »

From Face the Nation, Nov. 16, 2008: Newt Gingrich and Bobby Jindall discuss why the Republicans lost this year. As usual there were trying to fob it off on George Bush. Never mind that Bush went along with every single policy that is at the core of Republican ideology. And the fact they they defended him at every turn which led us down a path that has almost left the country completely bankrupt. Jindall tries to pump the "we're a center-right nation" line that is littering our airwaves, but the facts don't support it and neither did the election. And as usual, Newt wraps it up by saying Obama won because he was "Reaganite".

Gingrich: I think that's right and if you look at the [...] you look at Sen. Obama's campaign he's promising a middle class tax cut. That was a Reaganite position.

I seem to recall that what was being spewed by Conservatives and Newt was that Obama is a Socialist leading up to Obama's victory. Maybe the people want Socialism, Newt?

Full transcript to follow.

Continue reading »

From Face the Nation Nov. 9, 2008. Following his interview with Raum Emanuel Bob Schieffer talks to David Brooks and John Harris about what Obama does once elected and Brooks says that he took away from Emanuel's interview that the Democrats are going to try to move too quickly and get everything done at once and that it will "freak people out" if he does that. Harris reminds him that would not happen even if he wanted it to with the make up of the Congress. So again we have more of this don't dare to possibly do what the people elected you to do, or at least don't try to do it too quickly or you'll be punished for it. I'm sure with Republicans determined to obstruct before Obama is even sworn in that won't be a problem.

What's really astounding about this segment though is that Brooks then goes on to say that the Republican party has no belief system, it's a circular firing squad and adds that the conservative movement has failed because it hasn't addressed the problems of today.

Download | play   Download | play   (h/t Dave)

If you ever wondered how it was possible that we could possibly have this close an election when the vast majority of the American people highly disapprove of the job George W. Bush has done, yet there is still a disconnect with John McCain supporters that his would be a third Bush term, look no further than what passes for political debate on this morning's Face the Nation.  My head is still hurting from the stupidity of it. 

Still playing to the media narrative that the selection of Sarah Palin should somehow bring women to the McCain camp, they bring on four female proxies--Kay Bailey Hutchinson and former Mass Gov. Jane Swift for McCain, Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano and FL Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz for Obama--to frame the debate as Obama vs. Palin.  Strange that.  All this time, I thought it was John McCain running for the office.  You know, the same guy that calls his wife an unforgivable slur and laughs at Hillary Clinton being referred to as a b*tch, and now the Republicans saying they're going to call out sexism when they see it? Maybe my silly little female head got confused.

And when Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz throws down the gauntlet on all the GOP distractions and says that the truth matters and Gov. Swift opts to spin this into an inane deflection of whether Palin was actually in Iraq, wasting close to four minutes of airtime.  Wasserman Schultz holds her ground, pointing out that these embellishments to her record just show what a lightweight Palin truly is, but it's host Bob Schieffer that has to side with the Republicans by pointing out that Palin's actions 'have been alleged' to be less than her claim, but it's up to the voters to decide "the truth."

Um, Bob, isn't that supposed to be your function?  To help the voters know the truth from the spin?

Transcripts below the fold

Continue reading »

Download | play    Download | play   (h/t Heather)

What is it about McCain ignoring the actual questions and answering questions never asked?  And of course, Bush golfing buddy Bob Schieffer never points out that he didn't actually answer question about why there are so few African-Americans in the Republican Party and how that might affect the long term outlook on his party but lets him instead go on a five minute, rambling non-sequitur about education vouchers. 

SCHIEFFER: I want to ask you about the composition of the...of the convention. There were 36 African American delegates out of 2300 plus delegates there. How can you survive as a party if you become just the party of white people?

McCAIN: We can't. We can't. I saw a bit of information the other day that by, I forgot, I think...don't hold me to it, 2042 or something like that, white Americans will be in the minority in the population of this country. We can't. We've got to reach out; we gotta do a better job. We have to have the Hispanic as well as the African American voters. I've traveled all over this country. I've been to places where there were literally no Republican votes. I have to convince them I'll be the president of everybody. And the Republican party has a job to do. And frankly, it's a job that also spills over into other issues. You've seen the generic ballot difference that we have...[..]

SCHIEFFER: So what are you going to do about that?

McCAIN: Oh, education, economy, small business, create jobs....education, as I mentioned, civil rights issue of this century. Now everyone has equal access to a school. But what's the point of access to a failed school, or a failing school? We've got to give them more choice, more opportunity, all Americans. Because we know in low income America, the schools are failing, with the exception of NYC, now New Orleans and some others. But so, a quality education is really the dream of every parent. As you know in Washington DC, they have an experimental voucher system. Huge number of parents want to take advantage of that, thousands more than they have room for. So we got to provide the kinds of opportunities in education, one of the keys to it, help for small businesses, and get the economy back on its feet, don't raise the taxes, get it going again. Americans are hurting in a way that they have not hurt for a long time. I would probably argue to you that the 65 appearances - I hate to keep bringing that up - that we probably--you and I-never had a conversation when our economy was in greater difficulty than it is today.

Okay, McSame...obviously continuing Bush's policies will change the economy and the minorities' outlook on the GOP how?  Here's a helpful hint from someone who hopes you never step foot in the Oval Office:  if you really want to attract minorities to the GOP, you have to address these issues: (h/t Don Rumsfeld hater in the comments)

Continue reading »