Dick's 1994 view on Iraq

Indeed, Pat Buchanan is no neocon. He's an old-line conservative not into foreign military adventures of choice. And if you ever watch the McGlaughlin group you'll know he's been no fan of this war or this administration.

 

Dick loves money.
Money helped change Dick's mind.

Make no mistake:
Cheney's a smart man. Deadly smart.

Hope he remembers all those dead soldiers and their families in his heart (or what's left of it) when he leaves Bush's side. Oh ... sorry. He IS the President. My bad.

Play through ....

 

Did anyone watch the Daily Show last night? Jon ran this clip under the title "Even Dick don't know Dick." It was funny.

But he had a biographer of "Cheney" on during the interview portion. Another great job by TDS and Mr. Stewart. Great stuff... if anyone can find a clip of it I'd be eternally grateful.

 

did he ever give his opinion of dick's words on the link?

 

Not obfuscation, I just don't think he knows what he's talking about. Honestly, I don't think you do either. Obviously both of you can google a definition & educate yourself, but he is using the term to mean "conservatives I hate who support the war".

 

thanks for the input neocon.

now what do you think of dick's words?

 

That was great TV. I know we pile on the praise for Stewart, but it's kind of sad that he does a better job of shining a light on bullshit than 90 percent of the MSM.

I almost felt sorry for the Cheney biographer. He had no answer. His explaination was that 9-11 changed everything. Stewart said, OK, but why wasn't Cheney straight with us on how difficult it would be to invade Iraq -- as he said in the video clip. And, why did Cheney question the loyalty/patriotism of anyone who said essentially the same thing that he did in '94 -- you know that it would be a quagmire, very difficult to find a new government, it wasn't worth the loss of American lives.

Hayes had no (good) answer and he was booed by the audience. Outstanding.

 

neocon rebuttal ... anyone?

 

So, you've tried to (re-)define my point, but have made no point of your own.

Why don't you educate all of us as to why you think I don't know what I'm talking about? Obviously we haven't been able to educate ourselves on the issue, at least not up to your standards. I'm sure everyone would love to hear you make a substantive contribution to the thread by expounding.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservative

There you go. Now we are all educated.

So how about a response from the obfuscator?

 

Not sure, I'm not him. I could think of a few reasons why he might have changed his mind. First, at both times he was not the man on top, but working for a president. The presidents had different opinions, his job then became to make the case for the president. Next, maybe he saw how Hussein followed up being "spared" and regretted his former stance. Maybe he saw Hussein on his way to amassing nuclear weapons (that's the impression he gave off till the very end by shunning the UN resolutions and not allowing inspectors to prove otherwise) and decided that that was unacceptable. Maybe the attack on New York showed him that in the modern world there is no longer the luxury of ignoring stated enemies of America on the basis that they are far away. Or (he's a bright guy) maybe something I didn't think of. Or maybe he just changed his mind over the course of 7-8 years as many of us do on many subjects.

Now define a neo-con.

 

Or wikipedia. I just think it is a good idea to know what a word means before you use it 4 times in every post. I'm old fashioned that way.