Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

9 other PERFECTLY GOOD REASONS that the assassination attempt on Dick Cheney was justified (a HuffPo tribute post)

  1. “Not that we’re advocating violence, mind you, but let’s face it:  Cheney once got liquored up and shot a ‘friend’ in the face just for making fun of his hunting vest.”
  2. “Pragmatically speaking, killing off Cheney would certainly lower his carbon footprint.  So if we place this in the context of the ‘greater good,’ I think a case can be made that, from a purely empirical standpoint, had Cheney been blown into a million chunks of fat and sinew and bone fragment, the earth would be a demonstrably better place.”
  3. “Let’s be clear: we do not condone assassination as an acceptable political tool.  Still, it’s no accident that one of the reasons They Hate Us™ is that no one in the US has had the guts to step up and pull a Hinkley on this maniacal twist.”
  4. “SEE WHAT GLENN REYNOLDS MADE THEM DO?”
  5. “It is a shame so many innocent people died.  But tell me, how is this any different from inadvertantly killing Iraqi citizens with all the carpet bombing and night time kill raids we’ve been carrying out in our Imperialist Iraqi Adventure—of which Cheney is the real mastermind?”
  6. “You ever see “M*A*S*H”?  I wrote that shit, people.  So when I tell you that Cheney is a legitimate war criminal—and so an understandable target for an assassination attempt, however deplorable we in the West may find such things—I have, like, 11 freakin’ seasons of Emmy-winning TV to back me up on that.”
  7. “What’s with that sneer of his, anyway?  Because whatever it is, it’s very combative.  And some people might naturally take offense.  Just saying…”
  8. “Sure, violence is wrong.  But sometimes to make an omelet, you have to, y’know—KILL WARMONGERING FASCIST DRAFT DODGERS WHO WOULD GLEEFULLY SUCK THE MARROW OUT OF GHETTO CHILDREN’S BONES JUST TO WATCH THEM CRUMBLE LIKE LITTLE BROWN CORN HUSKS!”
  9. “We can’t confirm this, but rumors persist that his ‘undisclosed location’ is absolutely littered with furs and Asian hookers.  And kiddie porn.”*****

****

update:  You knew it was coming.  But so as not to disappoint, here is Glenn Greenwald(s)—the SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT POLITICAL VOICE(S) IN THE COUNTRY, AND ONE SEVERAL OF THE ONLY TRUE CONSERVATIVE LIBERTARIANS LEFT IN THIS WRETCHED FASCIST SHELL OF A ONCE-GREAT DEMOCRACY—lecturing the wingnuts on the dangers of cherrypicking comments.

Greenwald

Let that sink in a bit.

Mmmmm.  Irony so sweet and thick that, were we to sprinkle it with shaved nuts and have a Greek handle it, would make for a fine baklava.

101 Replies to “9 other PERFECTLY GOOD REASONS that the assassination attempt on Dick Cheney was justified (a HuffPo tribute post)”

  1. Steve says:

    The first thing that came to mind when I heard about this was, “What was Cheney doing in Afghanistan?” This indicates first of all some leaky intel, or does it?

    The second thing that comes to mind is that it reminds me why I do not like assassination as a policy.

    The third thing is that it is a rather in-your-face demonstration of the lack of security in Afghanistan.

  2. John Lynch says:

    A five-star post!

    It’s too soon to tell if this is going to be another Kos “screw-em” minute of clarity.  But remarkable that the Kos site seems restrained in comparison to Huff’s.

    Wonder if Kos’s, um, caution is related to proximity to power; while Huff’s is frustration at lack of action from their anointed?

  3. Jeff Goldstein says:

    Ironically I was unable to trackback to Malkin’s site because the title contained questionable content:  “Dick.”

    Maybe I should have just called him COCK Cheney?

  4. John Lynch says:

    Well, just as well: six-stars – ground-breaking as it would be – is just not merited for a HuffPo post.

  5. cjd says:

    “The third thing is that it is a rather in-your-face demonstration of the lack of security in Afghanistan.”

    Well, Steve, it is Afghanistan; it’s always been a little Road Warrior-type of dangerous.  Sometimes, in a good way.  After all, Robert Fisk did get his ass kicked there.

  6. John Lynch says:

    Steve,

    I had a slightly different initial take: I wondered if they would be able to track back on the leak and get some bad guys.

    No questions in my mind that Cheney might visit our mission in Afghanistan, or that bad guys would pull out the vests if they new he was coming.

    Your take seems a bit more .. nuanced.

  7. Dan Collins says:

    I prefer to say “the fisk kicked out of him.”

  8. I can’t help but think that AQ just got lucky and are now claiming “oh, yeah, um, we were targeting Cheney”.  I mean a similar attack was tried a few weeks ago at the base RTO is stationed at.

  9. John Lynch says:

    No questions in my mind that Cheney might visit our mission in Afghanistan, or that bad guys would pull out the vests if they [k]new he was coming.

    Damn.  Spell check can’t fix dumb.

  10. Molyuk says:

    The third thing is that it is a rather in-your-face demonstration of the lack of security in Afghanistan.

    I dunno, Steve: considering the suicide bomber didn’t make it past the front gate, I’d say security worked pretty well.

    They should have let him through. Cheney would have eaten him and his bomb, then crapped out Pashtun-skinned Ugg boots and one o’ them fireworks that lights up the sky with Old Glory.

  11. eLarson says:

    Cheney would have eaten him and his bomb, then crapped out Pashtun-skinned Ugg boots and one o’ them fireworks that lights up the sky with Old Glory.

    Cheney’s good, but I can’t believe he’s Chuck Norris-good.

  12. McGehee says:

    10. HALLIBURTON!

  13. lee says:

    I think your instincts are correct Maggie. From Jeffs link to Hot Air:

    On the flight out of Afghanistan, Cheney told reporters that he had been in his room at the U.S. base where he had stayed the night unexpectedly after bad weather forced postponement of his trip to the Afghan capital, about 40 miles away.

  14. TODD says:

    Steve,

    Intel was not leaky, Cheney showed up as a surprise

    Lack of security? Did you not read he blew outside the gate.

    Assasination policy? Rich, real rich….

  15. No. 10: Bush will have to find a running mate less like Hitler for the 2008 election.

  16. Pablo says:

    The second thing that comes to mind is that it reminds me why I do not like assassination as a policy.

    If you’re Talib, he’s perfectly fair game as targets go, which is why he wasn’t strolling the streets of Kabul, and they didn’t get anywhere near him. Better they splatter themselves on the gates of a base than that they take out a market full of civilians.

  17. mojo says:

    Pardon my unseemly cynicism, but I tend to doubt that any AQ/Taliban/Boomies would stop blowing shit up if the US had a carved-in-stone “no assassinations” policy, Stevie.

    “Is not is not not is”, as the man once said.

  18. cjd says:

    Greenwald, old shoe.  Speaking of someone in need of a good fisking…

  19. lee says:

    Cheney’s good, but I can’t believe he’s Chuck Norris-good.

    I don’t know, eLarson. I think Cheney would wither Norris with just a steely stare.

  20. Pablo says:

    the SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT POLITICAL VOICE IN THE BLOGOSPHERE AND ONE OF THE ONLY TRUE CONSERVATIVE LIBERTARIANS LEFT IN THIS WRETCHED FASCIST SHELL OF A ONCE-GREAT DEMOCRACY

    He’s got to be good. Just look how long his posts are!

  21. T-web says:

    In what world is this cherry picking? Over at Huff’n’puff, the comments are running about 50:50 between people expressing regret that Cheney didn’t die (some jokingly and some not), and those who say that such jokes are inappropriate.

    That’s not cherry picking.

  22. tachyonshuggy says:

    He has becloned himself.

  23. kelly says:

    No. 10: Bush will have to find a running mate less like Hitler for the 2008 election.

    Not bad, jammie. How about:

    No. 10: Bush won’t need a running mate less like Hitler when he calls off the 2008 elections and declares all future elections illegal.

  24. N. O'Brain says:

    The third thing is that it is a rather in-your-face demonstration of the lack of security in Afghanistan.

    Posted by Steve | permalink

    on 02/27 at 12:22 P

    Well, steve just beclowned himself.

  25. The_Real_JeffS says:

    Chuck Norris?  Dick Cheney?  I want George Washington!

  26. Gary says:

    No. 10: Bush will have to find a running mate less like Hitler for the 2008 election.

    President Bush ain’t a candidate any more . . . baitch!

  27. Steve says:

    No Brain: You might want to explain how a truck bombing that kills 23 at a base the US controls in a country we conquered over 5 years ago represents a triumph of security.

  28. PMain says:

    Does this mean we can now demand that Glenn Does this mean we can now demand that Glenn Greenwald apologize for all of the leftist comments rejoicing in an attack on a US military base or his defense of them? Or is his funnel logic appropriate only when condensing pro-troop or conservative view-points?

  29. PMain says:

    My god I cloned my own opening statement, in tribute to the fine political mind that is GG.

  30. Carin says:

    There is a reason why those who seek to demonstrate the alleged extremism and hate-mongering in the anti-Bush blogosphere need to go digging for anonymous commenters. And the converse is also true: those who document the extremism and sociopathic mentality in the right-wing blogosphere do so by citing the twisted writings of leading right-wing pundits, not randomly chosen commenters with no connection to the content or theme of the blog. Perhaps there is a journalist somewhere who can figure out the meaning of that difference and write an article about it.

    My head just exploded.

  31. Hoodlumman says:

    But stray, anonymous comments prove nothing. And those who rely on them to make an argument—especially without bothering to make any effort to prove that they are reflective of anything—should be presumed to have no argument at all.

    How does Glenn(s) do it without his head exploding?  And what does Ellison Ellers Greenfield have to say on this subject?

  32. BJTexs says:

    Aside from the Huff-Poo being slung by the “tolerant” progressives, the situation in Waziristan appears to be quite concerning.

    The guys at Counterterrorism Blog had noted that the so-called “Waziristan Agreement” between Pakistan and the regions tribal leaders was a failure. This has allowed many of the usual suspects to reconstitute in the northern mountain regions of the district. Their sources indicated that the Pakistani Army was getting its butt chewed by the Taliban, al Qaeda and tribal fanatics over the previous 4 years and ended up having to pay tribute in the form of cash payments to the Taliban to rebuild destroyed structures and return all of the arms that were seized during the previous years’ operations!

    A report in the Feb. 19 NYTimes is supported by David Gartenstein-Ross and reflects the logical continuation of the resurgence of both the Taliban and al Qaeda in the relative safety of that province.

    While the moonbats will go loony, this incident with Cheney is probaly a minor action in an already developing strategic plan (no doubt summarized for a squirming Mubarrak during his meeting with Cheney) that will involve us as the hammer in that province, probably with air power and targeted special ops airborne missions.

    Let the caterwauling begin…

  33. TODD says:

    “No Brain: You might want to explain how a truck bombing that kills 23 at a base the US controls in a country we conquered over 5 years ago represents a triumph of security.”

    Once again steve, outside the gates.  You could do better than that.

  34. CraigC says:

    Yes, because it’s so hard to find hateful stuff coming from lefty blog writers.

  35. Beck says:

    Mmmmmmm.  That’s the good stuff.  Goes down smooth, nice clean finish.

  36. ThePolishNizel says:

    Sure, Steve.  The POS didn’t get his target.  Assuming, as you did, that his target was Dick Cheney.  However, your point is well taken that it is not as safe as ANYONE would like.  But then again, no large American city is as safe an ANYONE would like, either.

  37. Hoodlumman says:

    Is it technically even cherry picking when it’s so widespread at the HuffPo?

  38. You guys realize that Greenwald was quoted on the senate floor, right?

    That’s right, I said- the senate floor.

    Just remember that next time.

    Good DAY sir…

  39. estaban says:

    Carin –

    My head just exploded

    Glad to know I’m not the only one picking brain particles off the wall after reading that tasty bit of reportage.

    Can Jeff please give us some warning that our heads might explode before linking us to such dangerous meanderings?

  40. Jim in KC says:

    Greenwald:

    …stray, anonymous comments prove nothing…

    As opposed to multiple sock-puppet comments, I guess.  Good grief.

  41. N. O'Brain says:

    Once again steve, outside the gates.  You could do better than that.

    Posted by TODD | permalink

    on 02/27 at 01:39 PM

    Well, no, he can’t.

  42. BoZ says:

    shaved nuts and have a Greek handle it

    […]

  43. Slartibartfast says:

    From Mona, who ought to be sliding in here any second, now:

    Not quite, close, but with a very important additional point. Glenn’s excellent mission—shared by myself and any number of other bloggers in our own less capable way—is to highlight that prominent pundits, book writers, think tank fellows, journalists, tee vee talking heads & etc on the right routinely utter/publish abominable and foul sentiments and accusations, and that this has become mainstream for Bush supporters and/or conservatives. Vileness is now SOP with this movement, and not especially noticeable due to its pervasiveness.

    Most excellent mission, dude!  But, like, too many words!

  44. Steve says:

    Todd:  You and No Brain seem to have the same difficulty: if an attack on the VPOTUS is unsuccessful in actually KILLING the VPOTUS, then security is “successful.” I don’t think so.  It suggests:

    #1 Remarkable in-security in a country we liberated over 5 years ago,

    #2 Remarkable lack of local intelligence that allowed this attack to go forward, claiming 23 lives,

    #3 Remarkable leaked intelligence that allowed this in-your-face gesture at a time when the presence of the VPOTUS was known.

    Basically, an attack like this is a propaganda win-win for them, and a propaganda lose-lose for us.  Even by failing to kill VP, they still get to send the message that they can attack us whenever they want, and that they know things we are trying to keep from them.  On the other hand, we end up looking like supporters of a regime that asked us to visit that cannot control its own citizens or even knows what they’re up to.

  45. Squid says:

    Steve makes a valid point, lads, though I think we’re looking at two different measures of security.  That the truck bomb went off outside the base proves that base security is up to snuff.  That it went off just outside the base shows that general security around the country still leaves much room for improvement.

    My brain shut off after a little while over there at Salon, but I could swear that the commenters over there were smearing *all* wing-nuts for the sin of painting the moonbats with a broad brush.

    It’s like irony tiramisu over there.

  46. Jeff Goldstein says:

    Christ, if Greenwald were any more full of himself he’d run the risk of getting himself pregnant, or at the very least, being charged with his own rape.

  47. Defense Guy says:

    Rather than take the time to address the issue that the sort of comments that were “dug deep for” are hardly helpful, and are in fact in really bad taste, the intrepid Mr. Greenwald decides to devote his scorn to those on the right who merely point out these nasty expressions.  Glenn should be ashamed of himself for such obvious partisan tripe, but I realized long ago that the man has no shame.

    I’m glad the Vice President of the United States is alive and safe.  May God bless those that were not so fortunate.

  48. Steve says:

    Steve makes a valid point, lads, though I think we’re looking at two different measures of security.  That the truck bomb went off outside the base proves that base security is up to snuff. 

    Thank you.  Yes, I think we are defining security in various ways, however, I have to say, in terms of base security, a death toll of 23 from a frustrated bomber seems too high to me.  I guess it must have happened while there wwa a bunch of civilians crowding around checkpoints, or something.

  49. Slartibartfast says:

    <a href=”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Eugene_Corder” target=”_blank”>More security failure.

    We may just as well cash it in, folks, because it’s a quagmire.

  50. estaban says:

    Carin –

    I’ve been trying really hard to wrap my head around the last paragraph in the Greenwald piece.

    I think I got it now.

    Those who seek to demonstrate the extremism of those I agree with need to dig for that extremism by looking at the reaction of the people who voice their agreement with me; those who document the extremism of those I disagree with do so by citing the opinion of those I disagree with.

    Damn… head

    e x p l o d i n g

    a

    g

    a

    i

    n.

  51. Slartibartfast says:

    Crap.

    More security failure.  And again, even.

    Quagmire, I tell you.

  52. BJTexs says:

    Steve;

    You appear to be overlooking the bolded comments above that the VP’s extra day stay was unplanned, which means that the Taliban would have had to have planned the attack for the previous day if they had had the “inside” intelligence that they claim.

    This looks like a run of the mill random suicide bombing which is less concerning than the fact that we will be dealing with the Waziristan situation very soon. Also; awfully difficult in an insular tribal country to have the kind of spot on intelligence that you think constitutes good security and the attck did, in fact fail to enter the base. Not good, but not necessarily a reflection of some kind of systematic failure either.

    Nuance, the other white meat…

  53. slackjawedyokel says:

    #1 Remarkable in-security in a country we liberated over 5 years ago,

    #2 Remarkable lack of local intelligence that allowed this attack to go forward, claiming 23 lives,

    #3 Remarkable leaked intelligence that allowed this in-your-face gesture at a time when the presence of the VPOTUS was known.

    Steve, it’s so remarkable that I can’t think of anywhere else in the world that such a thing could be possible . . .

    Except maybe the London Tube, Madrid, Bali, . . .

    The fact is that a murderer who is willing to lose his own life in the attempt is extremely difficult to thwart.  Anywhere.

    A suicide killer only has to be lucky once.  Security has to be lucky every single time.

  54. Steve says:

    which means that the Taliban would have had to have planned the attack for the previous day if they had had the “inside” intelligence that they claim.

    No, I have heard the various claims. I get the feeling it was arranged on the fly.  And, again, for a propaganda act, fairly successfully.

    Not sure where Waziristan fits in.

  55. N. O'Brain says:

    Not sure where Waziristan fits in.

    Posted by Steve | permalink

    It’s in Pakistan.

  56. BJTexs says:

    A suicide killer only has to be lucky once.  Security has to be lucky every single time.

    Oh, sure, make excuses you ‘thuglican war eating chicken raptor baby burning imperialist! If anyone dies in the war zone it’s your fault.

    QUAGMIRE! SWAMP! LOON SANCTUARY!!!!!

    BTW: Did anybody else notice that slart’s wiki picture of Duran bears a startling resemblance to this guy?

    Alumni of Psycho U? You decide!! grin

  57. Waziristan is a huge problem. but there’s not a whole lot we can do about it, yet, it being in Pakistan.

  58. Blue Hen says:

    No Brain: You might want to explain how a truck bombing that kills 23 at a base the US controls in a country we conquered over 5 years ago represents a triumph of security.

    Do we even know the make up of the casualties yet? Or their locations relative to the blast? Or the proximity of the blast to the installation itself?

    Try imaging a bomb going off near or at the front gate of many military installations in the continental US. Rt 13 runs right in front of Dover AFB. If a bomb went off near or at the gate, it would probably destroy the gate, wreak havoc to both north and southbound lanes, and cause numerous casualties. WOuld it affect aircraft sitting on the tarmac? No. Would it affect operations? No. Would it gain anyone access? Probably not, unless it was followed up by a moderate amount of force.

    Does this mean that we’ve lost control of Delaware? Speaking as a resident, it ain’t really worth keeping.

  59. slackjawedyokel says:

    Oh, sure, make excuses you ‘thuglican war eating chicken raptor baby burning imperialist! If anyone dies in the war zone it’s your fault.

    And not only that, but after Cheney’s slapdown of Nana Pelosi earlier this week, I like him so much that I’m seriously considering having a sex change operation just so I can bear his love child.

    So there.

  60. Zarathustra says:

    10. Cheney’s death would go along way in securing the identity of all US covert operatives.

  61. grouch says:

    I get the feeling

    That happened to me, once.

  62. liberal jeenyus says:

    Go ahead and clicky on the link to Glenn “Sybil of the Intertubes” Greenwald’s article.

    It says at the top “Glenn Greenwald”…then underneath that it says “A hallmark of idiocy”…(giggle) …it does…really.

  63. BJTexs says:

    Thanks, Maggie! I couldn’t remember where that original article was but I should have figured as Roggio had co-written the original at the Counterterrorism Blog.

    I’d be interested in hearing from RTO (keep your head down, dude!) anmd Major john as to the implications of Cheney’s meeting with Mubarrak.

    Back on topic: Greenwald is a tool.

    steve: Waziristan is where the components for the so called “spring offensive” are gathering, free from interference from the Pakistani Military. Scroll up to my earlier post and click on the links as well as Maggie’s link to get some background. It’s way more important than a random suicide bombing.

  64. Bravo Romeo Delta says:

    Steve,

    I haven’t blown off your posts – I have been so hammered at work (despite my posting right now) that I haven’t had enough time to come up for air, let alone give a proper response to your earlier comments.

    So, indulge my very short, incomplete version.  With the advent of nuclear weapons in the context of the Cold War, fundamentally changed the ways that nation states (or at least those of consequence) use force of arms to adjudicate political dispute.  This lesson took some 25 years to become established canon, but the limited war in Korea, the wave of decolonialization in 1960, and the legal status of the conquered in Palestine after the 1967 Arab-Israeli War all point to the same set of trends.

    For lack of space, I’m not going to go into all of those right now, but the short version is that the rules and thinking that has governed the conduct of nation-states at war since the Westphalian Treaty is in terminal decline.  Moreover, the combination of increasing supragovernmental and intergovernmental institutions, combined with communications and information disintermediation mean that the political unit of “the nation” is becoming less and less relevant.

    A direct consequence of that is that what was a nice cinematic Battle of Kursk in WWII will continue, for the foreseeable future, to be eclipsed by insurgency and proxy conflicts, ala Iraq, et al.

    Whether or not the US is doing well in Iraq or not, this is the face of the future of war.  Global media, modern sensibilities, increasing lethality in conventional systems and so on mean that any cynical decapitation-happy fool with an AK-47 has an almost nuclear capability in terms of information warfare.

    Those (and I don’t mean to pick on you) who are most agitated by this, along with the category of people who have, over the last century, learned to romanticize the noble downtrodden rebel, empower the cynical use of information networks against more civilized, less passionate players – i.e. you and me.

    If you want a vision of the future, think something a lot closer to the Legions of the Roman Empire policing the wilderness and fighting the barbarians at the gate.  We won’t be able to do that forever, but I have to hope that we’ll at least do that much, now that we’ve fought our Punic Wars and can’t find Carthage these days.

    Respectfully,

    BRD

  65. MarkD says:

    I guess steve is really disappointed that we still have people being murdered in NY over 200 years after the American Revolution.  Another failure, we’d better withdraw to somewhere safe.

    Where might that be? 

    You can submit, but that doesn’t mean they might not kill your daughter for the crime of being raped.  Or push her back into a burning school, because her head’s not covered.  You’re a brave man, steve, willing to submit to a world like that.

    Maybe the Twin Towers thing really was a Bush plot, and they won’t come here.

  66. Zarathustra says:

    I remember watching Air Force 1 approaching the landing strip in Pakistan and thinking about all the risk involved in that single audacious act.

    That’s the kind of hubris that could rally a nation, too bad it’s few and far between.

  67. Bravo Romeo Delta says:

    All,

    Some 40 years after the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, and I note the Israelis still don’t speak of quagmire.

    Heck, for that matter, it’s nearly a millenium after the invasion of the Baltics by Islam, and I don’t note that the Serbian attacks on Kosovar Albanians elicited a response of “QUAGMIRE” from the streets from Cairo to Tehran.

    BRD

  68. McGehee says:

    BTW: Did anybody else notice that slart’s wiki picture of Duran bears a startling resemblance to this guy?

    No way. I … uh, hmmm….

    Well, I don’t wear T-shirts under my shirts. Yeah. That’s the ticket.

    Also, I wouldn’t have wasted ammunition shooting at a @#$!!ing building.

  69. TODD says:

    Steve,

    Did you hear that? I think the sky is falling.

  70. dicentra says:

    Just FYI, M*A*S*H ran for 11 seasons, however.

    And it snagged a total of 14 Emmys during that time.

  71. alphie says:

    BRD,

    The Taliban might agree to meet us in a fair fight for control of Afghanistan.

    They even might agree to single combat, champion vs. champion (David, Goliath) for control of Afghanistan if we asked them.

    Sure would save a lot of lives and bucks.

  72. McGehee says:

    The Taliban might agree to meet us in a fair fight for control of Afghanistan.

    What is the sound of brain cells dying?

  73. Michael_The_Rock says:

    Squid:

    It’s like irony tiramisu over there

    A delicious analogy if ever there was one.

  74. Gray says:

    I get the feeling it was arranged on the fly.  And, again, for a propaganda act, fairly successfully.

    Feeeeeeeeeelings…… Whoa Whoa Whoa Feeeeeeeeelings…..

    ‘CUZ OF THE FEELINGS!

  75. Molyuk says:

    Does this mean that we’ve lost control of Delaware? Speaking as a resident, it ain’t really worth keeping.

    Blue Hen, you seem unfamiliar with New Jersey, a.k.a. “Superfund Sites #’s 1 through 68,477”.

    I’d criticize your sentiments further; but as a fellow Delawarean, I’m torn between indignation & agreement.

  76. Jeff Goldstein says:

    Larry doesn’t remember so good these days, dicentra.

  77. cynn says:

    I just read some of the comments at HuffPo.  I may actively dislike Cheney myself, but many of those nasty remarks are beneath contempt.  Plus, I’m not convinced the bombers had any idea Cheney was there; and if this was a random attack, even scarier.

    I am still trying to wrap my mind around the female suicide bomber with the vest full of buckshot that blew herself up in a marketplace the other day.  I cannot conceive of a single cause that would induce me to blow myself up and take others with me.  I truly don’t understand those fanatics, and I’m glad.

  78. TODD says:

    BINGO!!!!

  79. RC says:

    Steve you ignorant slut,

    The fact that there was an explosion has nothing to do with security.  With two common household chemicals, some time and a vigorous shake a suicide bomber could blow up any time.  The security involved is that the suicide bomber was stopped by security, as designed, before he could reach his target.

    BTW, it’s clear that everything Chuck Norris and Jack Bauer knows they learned from Mr. Cheney.

  80. Jim in KC says:

    Alright, alphie just won the highly coveted Silliest Comment of the Day award, I think.

  81. alphie says:

    McGehee,

    It’s not as crazy at it sounds.  The Afghanis are an ancient civilization.  They’d probably go for an anicent form of combat.

    Alexandrus and Menelaus are to fight for Helen in single combat, that she and all her wealth may go with him who is the victor.

    -The Iliad

    Beats draggin’ out a war against the guys who are undefeated in occupation vs. insurgency style warfare.

  82. BJTexs says:

    Hey, alphie! How about the mighty Chinese stock market today? Do you think that will postpone the shipping container invasion?

    A 9 percent slide in Chinese stocks, which came a day after investors sent Shanghai’s benchmark index to a record high close, set the tone for U.S. trading.

    Yessir, they’ll be owning the USA just about the same time the designated champions are fighting with sabers for the future of Afghanistan.

    BWAAAAA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  83. SweepTheLegJohnny says:

    The Taliban might agree to meet us in a fair fight for control of Afghanistan.

    We can meet them in the parking lot after school.  3:00 sharp!

  84. A. Pendragon says:

    …..the guys who are undefeated in occupation vs. insurgency style warfare.

    Huh?

  85. Hoodlumman says:

    Alphie, the Taliban isn’t in control any more.  They aren’t undefeated anymore. HTH

  86. eLarson says:

    It’s not as crazy at it sounds.

    No.  It isn’t that crazy sounding.  Indeed they challenged us to just such a thing in 2001:

    “The Americans have launched propaganda that Amir-ul-Momineen, (the title of Omar) had gone in hiding. I propose that (British prime minister) Blair and (US president George) Bush take Kalashnikovs and come to a specified place where Mullah Omar will also appear with a Kalashnikov. Then we will determine who runs,” he challenged (via Google)

    I had recommended Time Square as the site.  If Mullah Omar could make it past the pissed off firefighters and police officers.

    The crazy-sounding thing would be to take the Talibunnies at their word.

  87. alphie says:

    The Taliban may not control Afghanistan today, but I think there’s little doubt they will take over again shortly after NATO pulls its troops out.

  88. Ragnell says:

    Just some questions and speculations:

    Was this trip planned without the usual extensive in advance security planning, and

    Was the unannounced trip in response to a perceived urgent need to read the riot act?

    Why did Cheney make the trip instead of Bush?

    Did he make the trip because it was judged even more dangerous than the usual level, and

    Did they perhaps decide the risk was better taken by the vice president,rather than the president?

    People don’t appear to consider that Bush, Rice Cheney do take a risk everytime they visit these sorts of locations

  89. Squid says:

    …yet Iraq will magically return to its kite-flying golden age the day after the last Americans leave.

    Consistency ain’t exactly your forte, is it?

  90. A. Pendragon says:

    The Taliban may not control Afghanistan today, but I think there’s little doubt they will take over again shortly after NATO pulls its troops out.

    Again, huh?

  91. Slartibartfast says:

    The Afghanis are an ancient civilization.

    What star system do they hail from?

    Here on Earth there’s a country called Afghanistan, containing Afghans.  Maybe they’re descendants of this mighty Afghani race of which you speak.

  92. Ted says:

    The second thing that comes to mind is that it reminds me why I do not like assassination as a policy.

    Like the assassination policies that lead Al Qaeda to attempt to assassinate Clinton and the Pope during the 90s?

  93. SteveG says:

    Bagram has a crowded tent city/bazaar outside it.

    Remember when the LA Times was buying disk drives there? You could kill four people from 100 yds out with a golf club and a bucket of balls.

    How genius at intel do you have to be to figure Cheney might visit Bagram after Pakistan?

    How hard is it to make a bomb? Not very. How much intel does it take to find a bomber before they detonate?

    Well, the US has a pretty good law and order system, but people are always on TV totally mystified that the house next door to them was a meth lab… Afghans have a sort of unregulated cash only no records free market smugglers paradise economy. Bomb making can’t be that hard there, and it only takes 3 people or less to pull off a bombing.

  94. Spiny Norman says:

    Hoodlumman

    Is it technically even cherry picking when it’s so widespread at the HuffPo?

    Hardly. One need only shake the tree and reap a bountiful harvest. Same as any other variety of nuts…

  95. N. O'Brain says:

    alpo revealed:

    RIFF: (Spoken) Against the Sharks we need every man we got.

    ACTION: (Spoken) Tony don’t belong any more.

    RIFF: Cut it, Action boy. I and Tony started the Jets.

    ACTION: Well, he acts like he don’t wanna

    belong.

    BABY JOHN: Who wouldn’t wanna belong to

    the Jets!

    ACTION: Tony ain’t been with us for

    over a month.

    SNOWBOY: What about the day we

    clobbered the Emeralds?

    A-RAB: Which we couldn’t have done without Tony.

    BABY JOHN: He saved my ever-lovin’ neck!

    RIFF: Right!

    Ok, by IMPERIAL UKASE, alpo is to be refered to as……ACTION BOY!!!!!

    TW: west62……nawwwwww, it ain’t possible.

  96. JohnWilkesBooth says:

    The motto of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is “Sic Semper Tyrannis.”

  97. Grumblebum says:

    My nuts are shaved but I can’t find any Greeks to handle them.

    HELP ME O WISE ONE

  98. N. O'Brain says:

    The motto of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is “Sic Semper Tyrannis.”

    Posted by JohnWilkesBooth | permalink

    on 02/27 at 04:29 PM

    Hmmmm….

    I awlways thought is was,

    Welcome To Pennsylvania.

    What the fuck are YOU lookin’ at?

  99. lee says:

    eLarson,

    Since the Taliban issued the challenge, Bush gets to choose weapons, right?

    I suggest fighter jets, no floor/ceiling limits, machine guns only.

  100. eLarson says:

    I thought the motto was:

    Welcome To Pennsylvania.

    Just leave yer headlights on: the Turnpike’s under construction from here to Pittsburgh, anyways.

  101. tip says:

    Congratulation, it was very interesting surfing around here, It was a great pleasure for me to visit and enjoy you site. Keep it running!

Comments are closed.