Oh No, The Truth
Tweet
Joe Scoldborough wanted Ed Schultz to fold when asked if he thought Cheney wants a terror attack to prove his point politically. Thankfully Ed told the truth. Cheney wants that, and his public record makes it pretty clear. (via)
27 Responses to “Oh No, The Truth”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
Ed and the director (when he made the original statement) are 100% correct.
But I do not think they went far enough. IMHO
Scarborough is a very transparent bullshitter.
The CIA, through spokesman Paul Gimigliano, walked back a controversial statement Panetta recently made to The New Yorker while arguing that his quote was misinterpreted in the first place.
“The director does not believe the former Vice President wants an attack. He did not say that,” Gimigliano said. “He was simply expressing his profound disagreement with the assertion that President Obama’s security policies have made our country less safe. Nor did he question anyone’s motives.”
———-
Shameful ruse by Ed Schultz for his ratings-starved show. First he said he’d piss on Hugh Hewitt, now this amusing little armchair Freud impersonation. Pretty much following the normal progression for an MSNBC political show host. Straight by their playbook.
Oh, it’s the truth all right. I guess that would mean that all the people who screamed that Bush and Cheney made us less safe by taking out the murderer Saddam Hussein were also hoping for a terrorist attack for vindication and political gain, wouldn’t it?
Of course, while Saddam Hussein was not much of a threat to many, he could have been handled better, given, of course, that we pretty much made him in the first place. Conservatives love to bring up the Saddam Bogeyman, but it’s only a strawman, anyway.
As intelligence reports have shown rather conclusively, the war in Iraq has made the world less safe, spreading the fertilizer needed for terrorist recruitment to jump by leaps and bounds.
Whether Bush and Cheney were hoping for a terrorist attack may be debatable, but they certainly capitalized on every opportunity to advance their authoritarian objectives once they had one.
You have nothing to say, Dennis.
You have nothing to say, Dennis. –X
People usually tell me I talk too much, X-man. You sound like the former unhinged Bush-hater who is now back in relapse, and you provide nothing new to the argument that hasn’t been stated a million times already by the multitudes of people who are just like you. If we are ever attacked, Cheney would not be vindicated. Not by you, the liberal blogosphere, the Democratic party, or the Democrat-controlled media.
He, and he alone will be blamed. He’s much smarter than you, or Ed Schultz too. He is not naive enough to think that somehow warning us that Obama’s moves are making us less safe would absolve him from that blame. It would come fast and furious and without hesitation. No, X-man, he knows that he and Bush are on the hook for that blame for the next four years, God forbid it happens. Just like no day passes now without Obama blaming Bush for the economy that he and everyone guessed wrong about.
You have nothing to say, Dennis. –X
People usually tell me I talk too much, X-man.
Those statements aren’t in conflict with each other. You do talk to much but you have nothing to say.
Its funny how month by month Dennis becomes more unglued. Matt Drudge said it, so it must be true. Except…
What’s funny, Cousin Oliver, is that you believe Ed tells the truth that Dick Cheney wants to see Americans murdered and that the public record makes it pretty clear, but you don’t tell us what case Schultz made, or what that public record is that would prove he wants Americans dead. Schultz just sits there knowing he looks silly and declares, ‘Hey, you want my opinion, and I’m giving it to you.” Oh, and he has callers in to his show who agreed with him. Neither Cesca not the other link you provided gave even a hint of why they thought Ed Schultz had any kind of a case. All Schultz offers up is that Cheney wants the power. I guess he wanted the power so bad that he declared from the beginning of his first tern as VP that he would never seek the Presidency. What power does he want now, the power of another VP job if ‘the neo-cons get back in power’ if there’s another 9/11? Good grief.
Schultz looked silly and it showed in his face. No one is backing him on this, and Panetta completely nullified Schultz’ intended effect, whatever his bizarre intentions were.
But hey, ‘three cheers to Ed for having a pair’.
At least up until the point they just shriveled up, that is.
Leon ‘Morocco Mole’ Panetta made a stupid comment that was unworthy of a CIA Director. You would think that someone in that position would have many other important things to do. BUT NO! Little Leon had to take a cheap shot, except in this case he shot way over his pay-grade.
Panetta quickly got smacked by Cheney so Panetta trotted out a spokesman to ‘take it all back’
Hillary at State and Panetta at CIA. No wonder the world is laughing at this administration.
cheney and all of tbe bedwetters like dennis are praying for another attack. cheney would probably help organize one.
Cheney can criticize ghis successors ad nauseum on all networks 24/7k, and his daughter takes over when he runs out of breath. He calls Obama a danger to the country, an insult if there ever wAS one.
But if anyone dares criticize Cheney…OH NOES!
This guy didn’t even flinch when he made a mistake that killed tens of thousands of people. But otherwise, he’s just a sensitive guy whose heart is broken by mild criticism.
So Cheney wants another attack on American soil to prove his point that Obama isn’t quite up to the task of handling dangerous foriegn policy decisions. And Panetta says Cheney wants an attack but then back peddles. And the case against Cheney consists of ?
Oliver gets into the act once again putting out inflammatory rhetoric with no link that actually backs up his case.
I can’t believe that anyone’s believing Panetta here. He’s with the CIA, and everyone knows that the CIA lies all the time. Just ask Nancy Pelosi. Hell, if they’ll lie while under oath before Congress, committing a federal offense, it’s nothing for them to lie about Dick Cheney — who doesn’t have the power to have them tossed in jail.
J.
JT,
Turn your head. You’re spraying spittle.
They say our manufacturing base is down, but not the manufacture of rage out of…
Say, what ARE the raw materials? Hot air and…?
Wait, I know. Stupidity.
Take it up with Pelosi, Repack. She’s the one who says the CIA lies to Congress all the time.
J.
“And the case against Cheney consists of ?”
Um . . . ever heard of Iraq?
it’s nothing for them to lie about Dick Cheney — who doesn’t have the power to have them tossed in jail.
Nancy Pelosi didn’t say that, you did. Do you have any, um, what do they call that stuff,,,? Oh yeah, EVIDENCE. Any EVIDENCE that these unnamed spooks are lying about Cheney? No? Well, then, there you have it. Now you know why I don’t take you seriously.
And this is just in, dateline Philadelphia 1787: Cheney NEVER DID have the “power to have them tossed in jail.” His “powers” as VP, according to the Constitution, were limited to casting tie-breaking votes in the Senate.
Now, about that spittle you are spraying… It isn’t toxic, is it?
Sure I’ve heard of Iraq, what’s your point?
So, the standard for Mr. Willis to consider something to be “The Truth”, is that people he agrees with give opinions which he agrees with.
Glad that’s settled.
Repack, where the dickens are you getting this “Jay Tea is frothing mad” bit? On this thread, I’m feeling rather mellow — more mellow than usual.
I realize that Pelosi is trying to shove it down the memory hole, and you’re more than willing to go along with it, but recently she was dealing with reports that she’d been briefed about the CIA’s waterboarding — and had gone along with it at the time. While she was desperately spinning and ducking, she stated that the CIA lied to her, and routinely lies to members of Congress with apparent impunity.
So we have a dilemma here: we have the Democratic Speaker, who says the CIA can’t be trusted. Do we accept her word? If we do that, then we’re taking the side of Dick Cheney, who was the evil genius mastermind who ran the White House for the past four years?
Gosh, I’m glad I’m not a Democrat. I’d get dizzy trying to follow the spin and trying to remember the current version of reality.
J.
Those who purport that Cheney and his ilk want America to be attacked are the same folks who could rightfully be accused of wanting the economy to collapse under Bush to make their point. Fear-mongering works on both sides of the aisle, and on the entire issues spectrum, not just foreign.
I realize that Pelosi is trying to shove it down the memory hole, and you’re more than willing to go along with it, but recently she was dealing with reports that she’d been briefed about the CIA’s waterboarding — and had gone along with it at the time. While she was desperately spinning and ducking, she stated that the CIA lied to her, and routinely lies to members of Congress with apparent impunity.
Didn’t happen. This was backed by Sen. Bob Graham, who, due to having OCD, keeps notes on everything that he does.
‘He, (Cheney) and he alone will be blamed. He’s much smarter than you, or Ed Schultz too.’
Smart enough to shoot a guy in the face while drunk off his ass and lie about it.
That’s the kind of smart we could all do without.
‘Hell, if they’ll lie while under oath before Congress, committing a federal offense, it’s nothing for them to lie about Dick Cheney’
Turnaround is fair play; since Cheney lied his fat ass off regarding the necessity to invade and destroy Iraq for fictitious reasons, why shouldn’t he expect to have those lies come back to haunt him?
‘Gosh, I’m glad I’m not a Democrat. I’d get dizzy trying to follow the spin and trying to remember the current version of reality.’
No shit; imagine having to defend an administration that used a major terrorist attack on their watch to launch an illegal invasion, destruction and occupation of a nation whose dictator the US implanted and supported for decades, all while pushing a stream of lies about his intention to attack the US with WMD he didn’t have, and then employing Gestapo tactics on thousands of innocent prisoners that are held without trial, without evidence and without legal representation, while being consistently tortured for the crime of being Muslim.
Thank God you righteous Republicans don’t have to deal with any of that abhorrent shit.
Those who purport that Cheney and his ilk want America to be attacked are the same folks who could rightfully be accused of wanting the economy to collapse under Bush to make their point.
That would be a fair point if anyone on the left ever did that.
Could you Cheney defenders out there please tell me how the latter’s comments about Obama’s policies making America “less safe” can be vindicated in any way outside the context of another terrorist attack in the U.S? Being out of power, it’s not like Cheney has any ability to reverse these policies.