Cheney: Let them Eat Death

When confronted with the deep poverty and starvation of the French people due to a lack of bread, legend has it that Queen Regent Maria Antonia Josepha Johanna von Habsburg-Lothringen - allegedly stated "Let them eat Cake."

This week we may have discovered another neo-Regent whose callousness and insouciance makes that infamous utterance appear practically heartfelt.

When asked about the fact the nearly 70% of Americans Oppose the Iraq War - Vice Present Richard Cheney stated:

CHENEY: So?

RADDATZ: So? You don’t care what the American people think?

CHENEY: No. I think you cannot be blown off course by the fluctuations in the public opinion polls.

Fluctuations? Fluctuations? Not according to Gallup.

Does this look like a "fluctuation" or a slow inexorable slide into hell?

Cheney statement prompted the following exchange in the White House Press Room.

HELEN THOMAS: The American people are being asked to die and pay for this. And you’re saying they have no say in this war?

PERINO: No, I didn’t say that Helen. But Helen, this president was elected...

THOMAS: But it amounts to it. You’re saying we have no input at all.

PERINO: You had input. The American people have input every four years, and that’s the way our system is set up.

No, Dana, actually the people also had input during the 2006 midterm elections, where Republicans - who overwhelmingly support th was - received a massive "thumping".

But I digress, back to Darth and his heartfelt response to the information that we have now lost 4000 soldiers in Iraq and how that has affected their families.

Cheney: The president carries the biggest burden, obviously. He’s the one who has to make the decision to commit young Americans, but we are fortunate to have a group of men and women, the all-volunteer force, who voluntarily put on the uniform and go in harm’s way for the rest of us.

RADDITZ: "When you talk about an all-volunteer force, some of these soldiers, airmen, Marines have been on two, three, four, some of them more than that, deployments," Raddatz said. "Do you think when they volunteered they had any idea that there would be so many deployments or stop-loss? Some of those who want to get out can't because of stop-loss?"

CHENEY: "A lot of men and women sign up because sometimes they will see developments," Cheney said. "For example, 9/11 stimulated a lot of folks to volunteer for the military because they wanted to be involved in defending the country."

Nice way to completely duck the question about STOP-LOSS, Dicky.

But sure, lots of people did sign up after 9/11 in order to go after Bin Laden! Unfortunately Bin Laden isn't in Iraq, he never in Iraq and our country didn't need defending against Saddam Hussein.

Last week the Pentagon released a report on Hussein and Al Qaeda.

On Monday, McClatchy reported that a "review of more than 600,000 Iraqi documents" captured after the U.S. invasion "has found no evidence" that Saddam Hussein "had any operational links" with al Qaeda

We also found no nuclear materials or programs, no chemical weapons or programs and no plans to begin any weapons programs. Nothing. Nada. ZIP!

And as far as the President "carrying the heaviest burden" - he himself doesn't seem to think so.

I can only tell you what people on the ground, whose judgment — it’s hard for me, living in this beautiful White House, to give you an assessment, firsthand assessment. I haven’t been there; you have, I haven’t.

And then there's of course the fact - and it is a fact - that resources we have dedicated to Iraq have hurt our campaign against Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan- not that John McCain knows it.

"I know of no one who believes attention to Iraq at that point diverted our attention from Tora Bora," McCain said. ...

"We should have put more boots on the ground there to apprehend [Bin Laden]. Everyone agrees. But I have no reason to believe that because we urged attention to Iraq, it had any tactical effect on the battleground."

Which I guess means that Bob Woodward is "No One" since he reported that Bush and Rumsfeld began planning to attack Iraq - even before Tora Bora.

On Nov. 21, 2001, 72 days after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Bush directed Rumsfeld to begin planning for war with Iraq. "Let’s get started on this," Bush recalled saying. "And get Tommy Franks looking at what it would take to protect America by removing Saddam Hussein if we have to." ...

Bush’s order to Rumsfeld began an intensive process in which Franks worked in secret with a small staff, talked almost daily with the defense secretary and met about once a month with Bush.

And how about Gen Franks what did he think?

"They were in the midst of one war in Afghanistan, and now they wanted detailed planning for another? Goddamn," Franks said, "What the f*** are they talking about?"

What the f*** indeed.

But here we are, five years later, and Cheney is still talk through his A**. Especially about Iraq.

In an interview with ABC News yesterday, Vice President Dick Cheney asserted that President Bush "carries the biggest burden" of the Iraq war and even compared staying the course in Iraq to the pardoning of President Nixon.

CHENEY: Thirty years later, nearly everybody would say it is exactly the right thing to do, that if he’d paid attention at the time to the polls he never would have done that. But he demonstrated, I think, great courage and great foresight, and the country was better off for what Jerry Ford did that day. And 30 years later, everybody recognized it.

And I have the same strong conviction the issues we’re dealing with today — the global war on terror, the war in Afghanistan and Iraq – that all of the tough calls the president has had to make, that 30 years from now it will be clear that he made the right decisions, and that the effort we mounted was the right one, and that if we had listened to the polls, we would have gotten it wrong.

But Cheney also took time out to insult Sens. Barack Obama (D-IL) and Hillary Clinton (D-NY) for "announc[ing] that the solution in Iraq is to withdraw," calling them "wannabes."

Wannabes? For wanting to turn away from a purely military plan - which has gone on longer than the Civil War and World War II and has failed - to one of diplomacy. To a plan that recognizes the simple fact that invading and occupying Iraq was a tragic mistake. That buying peace with cash payoffs is a bad idea, especially when the check start to bounce. That our troops are nearing and passing the breaking point, which makes us far more vulnerable and weakened on the other fronts we have - particularly Afghanistan. A plan that recognizes that a strategic retreat is often the best course of action to ultimately win.

It's well past time we got past the mudslinging over former pastors and former visit to Bosnia with or without sniper fire and got back on the real subject, redirecting this country away from the failed ideology, failed poilcies and failed strategies of the Neo-Cons and move forward to true peace, and true victory.

Like Marie Antoinette's eventual grisly end, we need to cut off the Bush/Cheney/McCain Administrations head, and end these insane policies permanently.

Vyan