Cheney

[WillyBWright]

I know **** Cheney and the US Constitution aren't exactly on a first-name basis, but this latest absurdity makes me wonder if senility has set in. He refuses to cooperate with a routine oversight function by claiming the Vice-President is not a member of the Executive Branch. Huh???

Story

The kicker is now Gonzo has been asked to rule on the face-off. Like there's any chance he'll rule in favor of something so trite as the US Constitution. Why Start Now?

Okay Righties, time to reference your daily talking points e-mails.

 

[Haut Medoc]

Re: Cheney

You dare question the Dark Lord & his minions?......
He's got a cast iron set for sure.........​

 

[QC]

Re: Cheney

Reread it. He claims the Vice President is not an office within the executive branch. I think that is accurate. The Vice President is clearly part of the executive branch, but he himself is not an office. I do not see this as slick and I do believe the executive branch is entitled to secrecy. Bark up some other meaningless tree . . . Oh, oh and what the flyin' flip does this have to do with the Constitution?

 

[POINTER94]

Re: Cheney

Hey I heard Cheney was going to kick some puppies tonight too.

If I was a member of the executive branch and was called to congress, I would call the press for a sopeona burning party, complete with Hooters girls. The arrogance of liberals today is just simply funny. Fortunately the MSM doesn't understand, well much of anything with regards to how this country is set up and how it is suppose to be run. Which makes them as irrelavant as those who actually listen to the MSM.

I guess it is time for some of us to brush up on how our country is suppose to work. See separation of powers.

 

[JB]

Re: Cheney

More liberal conspiracy theorist gossip and mudslinging, WBW.

You are too smart to fall for that carp. Since when is an Executive Order not intended to include the Vice President of The United States "the Constitution"??

I wonder who is not on speaking terms with the Constitution. I don't think it is **** Cheney.

 

[RubberFrog]

Re: Cheney

If I was Cheney, I would walk by Pelosi's office and let a fart.

 

[Boomyal]

Re: Cheney

If I was Cheney, I would walk by Pelosi's office and let a fart.

I rarely chuckle uncontrollably, but this one brought up mental images that had me wiping tears from my eyes.

 

[Boomyal]

Re: Cheney

What is good for the goose is ever only good for the gander if you are not a lib. I don't think that WBW is dumb, I just think he see's things thru red colored glasses. And we all know how reds see things, ie whatever suits their agenda. In this case it is Bush is bad and Cheney represents Evil oil.

That perspective, of course, will lead the libs back to exclusive power. Additionally, WBW and his ilk will not be happy until we are all back living in caves and trying to re-think what to do with the wheel, 'cause that is exactly where Hillary, Ted, Nancy, Harry and Willy would like to take us.

 

[agitator]

Re: Cheney

Good one Boom.

 

[treedancer]

Re: Cheney

It seems that Democratic Caucus Chairman Rep. Rahm Emanuel(D-IL) is going to be introducing an amendment to the financial Service and General Government Appropriations bill to cut funding for Cheney?s office.

I think that is only fair; if you claim that your office is not part of the executive branch why saddle the taxpayers with the bill. Hell what is the Vice President job anyway? We could probably give him a large closet somewhere in the White House, a desk, a chair, some pads and pens, a phone, maybe a secretary. Hell might just give him an office by the entrance, and arm him with a shotgun, let him pull double duty as part-time security.

Deferred Halliburton compensation, and his assets in the company as of 2002,whichs is the last compensations I have found so far (still snooping) were valued at between $19.1 million and $86.4 million, I guess he wont be filing for food stamps any time soon.

 

[treedancer]

Re: Cheney

Hey look what I found whole rummaging around the ?internets?. President Bush issued [FONT=&quot]An executive order on[/FONT] March 2003, amending an existing order, here is a quote (? requires all government agencies that are part of the executive branch to submit to oversight.)



Here is the lame part the White house is putting out today another quote (Although it doesn't specifically say so, Bush's order was not meant to apply to the vice president's office or the president's office)



Now President Bush is saying he doesn't have to comply with HIS OWN oversight order. Man where is the ?Mad Hatter ?surly he is around somewhere, probably lurking around 1600 Pennsylvania Washington DC.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw...ney23jun23,0,863839.story?coll=la-home-center

 

[pjc]

Re: Cheney

So what. The MSM elite are so rabid to discredit this administration.

I support "freedom of the press" absolutely. However.
The problem with MSM today is that they have become the "Activist Media". An "Activist Media" is very dangerous, given the ability to influence a good portion of the public. Example is the "Editors Choices" that the Milwaukee Urinal publishes regarding political candidates they wish to support.

What on earth qualifies a group of editorial board hacks to suggest to the readers who to vote for?

"Activist Media", sponsored by the Liberal Left.

 

[Bondo]

Re: Cheney

Ayuh,........ This is just Another Witch Hunt by the Liberals,.......

They change a Word in a Law,+ then expect everybody else Not to See it......
And,..... Obviously TreeHugger,+ Willy has fallen for it............

The President,+ Vise-President are Not "Agencies" in the Executive Branch...............

I find it Amazing that the Liberals just Can't seem to Read English,+ Comprehend What they've just read...............

This New Liberal Congress has, as Usual, Promised the Moon,+ Delivered $h!t...........

 

[rolmops]

Re: Cheney

Hey look what I found whole rummaging around the “internets”. President Bush issued [FONT=&quot]An executive order on[/FONT] March 2003, amending an existing order, here is a quote (— requires all government agencies that are part of the executive branch to submit to oversight.)



Here is the lame part the White house is putting out today another quote (Although it doesn't specifically say so, Bush's order was not meant to apply to the vice president's office or the president's office)



Now President Bush is saying he doesn't have to comply with HIS OWN oversight order. Man where is the “Mad Hatter “surly he is around somewhere, probably lurking around 1600 Pennsylvania Washington DC.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw...ney23jun23,0,863839.story?coll=la-home-center

Tree you might as well save your breath.
The reactions you are getting are all trying to change the subject.
It is the old Limbaugh adage. Move away from subject and lay the blame at these rabid left wingers called the the Main Stream Media.You should know by now that on this board anything that is not McCarthy inspired must be socialist and in some corners even McCarthy is a suspect.
The reactions you draw are reacting to the fact that you question authority like some damn hippie from the seventies and we can't have any of that around here boy,it seems that you need a good bazz whipping.We have some good old boys on this board who would be glad to set you straight.When we are done we will sit on the porch with some moonshine and play the banjo to relax.
I am waiting for the day that somebody on this board will begin to reminisce about George Wallace and what a great president he might have been....

 

[WillyBWright]

Re: Cheney

All I'm seeing is the usual paranoid Vast Left Wing Consiracy comments. To my knowledge, the National Archives is not a political entity controlled or supported by any party. MSM is reporting Cheney's customary stonewalling of a lawful oversight function (endorsed by his own alleged "boss"), not creating it. That's pretty weak, Neocons.

You're going to have to do a whole lot better than trying to rewrite the Constitution and claim that the Vice President is not an agent of the President. The VP is the second highest ranking member of the Executive Branch for crying out loud! He should be the FIRST to fall into lockstep and comply with his boss's own edict. But considering that Dubya isn't really in charge in the first place, I can see where Cheney is so confused. It should be the other way around in his eye, where the President is an agent of the Vice President. Cheney's at the Top of the food chain and the order only applies to the President on down. So of course he's exempt. Gosh, what's all this fuss about anyhow? Silly US!

I have seen no justifiable reasoning set forth by Cheney's camp to explain this. Just childish excuses and convoluted logic as to why he considers himself above compliance. The only logical conclusion is that he has something to hide.

But I'm sure he has nothing to worry about. Lapdog Gonzales will hear and obey as always.

 

[12Footer]

Re: Cheney

I love it!! Cheney is nobody's puppet, is he? Especially not a puppet for the libs. They cannot stand it either. They're like a pack of children trying to trample his lawn, and they aren't getting him to chase them off yet.
In short, they are insignifigant to the office of VP, and even LESS signifigant to him.

 

[POINTER94]

Re: Cheney

Liberals at their finest. Non understanding of the law/sytem, guilt by accusation, manipulation of the system for political gain, and a complete obfuscation of the situation. Don't worry about personal rights. I love the defunding of the office of the VP, awesome suggestion. Ends justify the means. This thread exposes the left for exactly what they are and what they stand for. I thought the liberals were suppose to stand up for the individual and not "BIG" (fill in the blank, whatever suits the needs of the day.) Don't like the law, find some liberal whack job judge to dictate it by judicial fiat.

Who thinks that Lil' Nancy or Dingy Harry could hold a candle to Cheney in a battle of wits? Note: Congress can impeach a VP. Start the process!!! BTW, thems the rules. And congress can do all the oversight they want. The VP never "must" testify. It is at his discression. Considering the fools running this investigation, I wouldn't attend even if they promised me a Lewinski! Perhaps the president could address this in his mandatory, once a year, state of the union address. (Yes, that is mandatory)

Someone help me understand the separation of powers. I am sitting on pins and needles to have this explained by todays "modern" interpretation.

 

[12Footer]

Re: Cheney

Liberals at their finest. Non understanding of the law/sytem, guilt by accusation, manipulation of the system for political gain, and a complete obfuscation of the situation. Don't worry about personal rights. I love the defunding of the office of the VP, awesome suggestion. Ends justify the means. This thread exposes the left for exactly what they are and what they stand for. I thought the liberals were suppose to stand up for the individual and not "BIG" (fill in the blank, whatever suits the needs of the day.) Don't like the law, find some liberal whack job judge to dictate it by judicial fiat.

Who thinks that Lil' Nancy or Dingy Harry could hold a candle to Cheney in a battle of wits? Note: Congress can impeach a VP. Start the process!!! BTW, thems the rules. And congress can do all the oversight they want. The VP never "must" testify. It is at his discression. Considering the fools running this investigation, I wouldn't attend even if they promised me a Lewinski! Perhaps the president could address this in his mandatory, once a year, state of the union address. (Yes, that is mandatory)

Someone help me understand the separation of powers. I am sitting on pins and needles to have this explained by todays "modern" interpretation.

Nothing to add, just thought it needed to be repeated. "This thread {TRUELY DOES} expose the left for exactly what they are and what they stand for."

 

[rolmops]

Re: Cheney

I love it!! Cheney is nobody's puppet, is he? Especially not a puppet for the libs. They cannot stand it either. They're like a pack of children trying to trample his lawn, and they aren't getting him to chase them off yet.
In short, they are insignifigant to the office of VP, and even LESS signifigant to him.

What you do not seem to understand is that in this great country nobody is above the law and everybody has to obey it.
If you support Cheney's behavior you support being above the law. If he can, so can anybody else and his behavior can be used as a defense argument in any court of law.Is that what you support?
In your arguments you tend to defend the letter and spirit of the constitution as you perceive it,yet when your chosen leaders wipe their behind with it,you defend them.

 

[12Footer]

Re: Cheney

What you do not seem to understand is that in this great country nobody is above the law and everybody has to obey it.

I understand a witch-hunt when i see one. I understand total DISREGARD for proper legal procedure, when your liberal sharks smell blood. Do a bit of research on the chain of events followed by the sharks to attack their prey. It differs very little from Scooter Libby and Rove lynchings, yet they bit off more than they could chew with Cheney. Such blatent dissregard for the rule of law here is striking -- and not only given a pass, but CHEER-LEADING YOUR "LEGAL" TEAM to boot!!
If the constitution protects liberals, they are all for it... If it stands in the way of their petty inquisitions (a matter of historic record no less), you wipe your feet on it as you trample-past!!
What you fail to understand is that "in this great country nobody is above the law and everybody has to obey it" means EVERYBODY.. Even liberal hacks. So spare me from this condescension!!

If you support Cheney's behavior you support being above the law. If he can, so can anybody else and his behavior can be used as a defense argument in any court of law.Is that what you support?

Thank you.. You just nailed it for me -- By the liberals' charges alone, he is guilty!! "It's not the nature of the evidence, but the seriousness of the charge"... Right, Pelosi?

In your arguments you tend to defend the letter and spirit of the constitution as you perceive it,yet when your chosen leaders wipe their behind with it,you defend them.

If you read any post I've posted, you'll find that I rail against such acts. I am a stout reaganite and constitutionalist... A "neocon". I thought you knew all that, but oh well. For record, I am totally against partial-birth abortion, illegal immigration, the "fairness doctrine" and welfare for illegal immigrants (what you call "undocumented werkers") -- those and all other miscarraiges of justice liberals steamrollered-past the constitution citing such obcenities as "intent of the law", and "the example of foreign law" in superiority to the prescious document!! and yet, you stand to accuse ME of circumventing the constitution in order to root for Cheney's virtual "flipping-off" of your of that liberal torqumada... Or that somehow, CHENEY HIMSELF HAS TRAMPLED IT?!?! Pa Leeez!!

I've had it with the liberals' "living,breathing ,changing-with-the-times" approach to the constitution! It should be for Cheney as it is for you, as well as it is for me.Samey-same... Leave it alone! It is YOUR lynch-mob that must now follow proper procedure, regardless of how hard it makes their self-righteous task at hand!


You go, Cheney, sir!! IMHO, you should take it a step further... sue for defamation and harrasment!!!
Do it today, Mr. Cheney!