Advocate wrote:mysteryman wrote:Advocate wrote:MM, it is silly to quibble over the tangent on whether Bush was in a mountain. Does anyone know for sure? The key is that, rather than take charge of the country, he hid and allowed Cheney to take control. Some courage!
Cheney was not in charge, nor was Bush ever out of communication.
If you were half as smart as you like to think, you would know that AF1 has the ability to communicate with every part of the military and civilian govt, no matter where in the world AF1 is.
After 9/11, there was considerable criticism and wonderment that Bush allowed Cheney to take charge. Thus, when Bush returned to DC, Cheney was exiled somewhere for months to somehow bolster Bush's claim that he was in charge.
Cheney was in charge?
OK, please provide a list of presidential actions he took, what presidential directives did he issue, what troops did he mobilize, what USAF units did he put on alert, what executive orders did he give and to who?
If he was in charge, there should be an easily traceable list of all of his presidential actions.
Please provide such a list for all of us to examine, if you can.
Include Advocate in that list of folks that likely read too much fiction on left wing websites.
How could you have forgotten this?
Cheney recalls taking charge from bunker
September 11, 2002 Posted: 9:51 PM EDT (0151 GMT)
Cheney in the White House underground bunker
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- As horrified Americans watched the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, unfold on their television sets, Vice President Dick Cheney directed the U.S. government's response from an emergency bunker.
The actions included moving key members of Congress to a secure location and having the Secret Service bring his wife, Lynn, to the bunker.
Cheney was in his West Wing office when he received word that a plane had struck the World Trade Center. He watched TV and hoped that his instincts were wrong.
"It was a clear day, there were no weather problems, and then we saw the second airplane hit in real time," Cheney told CNN's John King in an interview in the vice president's office.
"At that moment, you knew this was a deliberate act. This was a terrorist act."
He called President Bush in Florida and spoke with top aides. Then his door burst open.
"My [Secret Service] agent all of a sudden materialized right beside me and said, 'Sir, we have to leave now.' He grabbed me and propelled me out of my office, down the hall, and into the underground shelter in the White House," Cheney said.
In White House terminology, it is the PEOC, short for the Presidential Emergency Operations Center.
"I didn't know that it existed until I was actually down there, and I'm sure I could find my way back there to this day," said Mary Matalin, a counselor to the vice president.
A relic of the Cold War, the deep underground bunker became the vice president's base of operations on the first day of a new war.
After the planes struck the twin towers, a third took a chunk out of the Pentagon. Cheney then heard a report that a plane over Pennsylvania was heading for Washington. A military assistant asked Cheney twice for authority to shoot it down.
"The vice president said yes again," remembered Josh Bolton, deputy White House chief of staff. "And the aide then asked a third time. He said, 'Just confirming, sir, authority to engage?' And the vice president -- his voice got a little annoyed then -- said, 'I said yes.'"
It was a rare flash of anger from a man who knew he was setting the tone at a White House in crisis.
"I think there was an undertone of anger there. But it's more a matter of determination. You don't want to let your anger overwhelm your judgment in a moment like this," Cheney said.
Word came that Flight 93 crashed in Pennsylvania. Aides frantically called the White House to find out whether a military jet had shot it down.
"The vice president was a little bit ahead of us," said Eric Edelman, Cheney's national security advisor. "He said sort of softly and to nobody in particular, 'I think an act of heroism just took place on that plane.'"
Cheney and staffers watched in horror as the first tower of the World Trade Center collapsed. Matalin remembered the moment.
"Oddly everything just stopped. Not for long, but it did stop totally at that moment," she said. "[Cheney] emoted in a way that he emotes, which was to stop."
After the brief lull, Cheney and the White House staffers got back to business, which included checking the tail numbers of the last airplanes unaccounted for when national air traffic was ordered to halt.
"It was about 12:15 or 12:20 [p.m. ET] when I said to the vice president, 'Mr. Vice President, all the planes are down, and he said, 'Great, thank you very much,'" Edelman said.
Some aides suggested that Cheney was a possible target and should not stay at the White House. He said no.
"I had communications with the president, communications with the Pentagon, Secret Service and so forth. And we could continue to operate there, and if I left, I'd lose all that," Cheney said.
Lynn Cheney was a constant presence. She leaned in at one point to tell the vice president that their daughters were fine.
"It's something you think about, but again, it's not so much a personal consideration at that point. It may have been for people who didn't have anything to do," Cheney said.
It was the bunker's first test in an actual emergency, a day of crisis with some hitches.
Cheney wanted to track TV reports of the devastation and listen in on communications with the Pentagon.
"You can have sound on one or the other and he found that technically imperfect," Matalin recalled.
Cheney returns to the White House by helicopter from a secure undisclosed location on September 12, 2001.
The vice president had a few words with the president just before the latter's address to the nation. CIA Director George Tenet watched from the bunker, waiting for Bush to convene a late-night meeting of the National Security Council.
"I guess the thing I was struck by was the extent to which he had begun to grapple with these problems and to make decisions, that we were in a war on terror," Cheney said.
Cheney spoke once more to the president, and then took a nighttime ride past the Pentagon, heavily damaged in the attacks.
"I recall watching the vice president, who was staring out the window at the Pentagon, and wondering what he may be thinking about, the responsibilities he would have in the future. A pretty sobering moment," said Lewis Libby, Cheney's chief of staff.
It is a memory that Cheney said has shaped every day since then.
"As we lifted off and headed up the Potomac [River], you could look out and see the Pentagon, see that black hole where it'd been hit. A lot of lights on the building, smoke rising from the Pentagon," he said.
"And you know, it really helped to bring home the impact of hat had happened, that we had in fact been attacked."
You seemed to ignore this part...
Quote:"I had communications with the president, communications with the Pentagon, Secret Service and so forth. And we could continue to operate there, and if I left, I'd lose all that," Cheney said
So, since he was talking to the President, the most likely scenario is that Cheney was doing exactly what Bush told him to do.
But you still havent provided the list of all the executive orders Cheney gave during that time, showing that he was in charge.
I imagine it was more like when REagan was shot, when Al Haig said "I'm in charge", even though he wasnt.
He made decisions until Bush got to the WH, but that didnt make him in charge, it just gave the press someone to talk to
Some people are so desperate to find some issue about Bush, this is getting tiresome to say the least. The concocted issues are becoming laughable, and pretty revealing in terms of the how much the Bush haters are scraping the bottom of the barrel for anything they can dream up.
Whenever you deal with this current WH crew in any fashion, talk about this crew, think about this crew, you're scraping the bottom of the barrel. I truly doubt that there has ever been such a bottom of the barrel administration in so many ways.
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blbushdumbpeople.htm
How can 59 million people be so DUMB?
Look what they voted into the white house twice; a governor who made such a mess of his state, that the subsequent law-makers reversed most of Bush's initiatives.
A president who has taken more "vacation" during a time of war than any president before him.
A president who attempted to get the supreme court to intervene in a private affair because he claimed "every life is precious," but has no remourse for the hundreds of thousand of innocent Iraqis killed by his illegal invastion.
A president who loves to use "support our troops," but is responsible for cutting veteran's benefits and services.
A president who authorizes torture of prisoners, and breaks US laws by his illegal wiretaps. Reveals a CIA agent for revenge,
DUMB is too mild an adjective to describe the people responsible for putting a psycho into the white house for two terms.
How many lies can a president tell the citizens before they wake up from their stupor?
Quote:How many lies can a president tell the citizens before they wake up from their stupor?
Good question.
After all,Bill Clinton was elected twice also.
Advocate wrote:Ticomaya wrote:Advocate wrote:MM, it is silly to quibble over the tangent on whether Bush was in a mountain. Does anyone know for sure? The key is that, rather than take charge of the country, he hid and allowed Cheney to take control. Some courage!
Whether it's silly to quibble over it or not is really determinant on whether you are going to continue to insist he did. Are you, or are you willing to admit he only made it as far as Nebraska? I'd be interested to know what source you have that says anything about him holing up in a mountain.
Is it a minor detail? Yes, but it's another point to show you don't have your facts straight, and are primarily focused on vomiting out anything that you think will cast the President in a negative light.
As I suspected, you are as small-minded as MM.
As I suspected, you didn't have your facts straight.
mysteryman wrote:Quote:How many lies can a president tell the citizens before they wake up from their stupor?
Good question.
After all,Bill Clinton was elected twice also.
Besides his lie about a bj, what lies did Bill tell?
mysteryman wrote:You seemed to ignore this part...
Quote:"I had communications with the president, communications with the Pentagon, Secret Service and so forth. And we could continue to operate there, and if I left, I'd lose all that," Cheney said
So, since he was talking to the President, the most likely scenario is that Cheney was doing exactly what Bush told him to do.
But you still havent provided the list of all the executive orders Cheney gave during that time, showing that he was in charge.
I imagine it was more like when REagan was shot, when Al Haig said "I'm in charge", even though he wasnt.
He made decisions until Bush got to the WH, but that didnt make him in charge, it just gave the press someone to talk to
The media talked about Cheney taking charge. Have you asked any of the media for a list of his executive orders, etc.? Unlike Reagan, Bush was not shot. Poor analogy!
Advocate wrote:mysteryman wrote:Quote:How many lies can a president tell the citizens before they wake up from their stupor?
Good question.
After all,Bill Clinton was elected twice also.
Besides his lie about a bj, what lies did Bill tell?
Whenever his lips moved, from the time he first ran for president claiming Bush senior's economy was the worst since the Great Depression to recently when he claimed he was always against the war in Iraq.
It would take a few books to document all of them, Advocate, but the claims about the economy when he ran against Bush I are well known, and his recent claims about him always being against the war are well known, as well as the documentation to the contrary. Just do a search and you will come up with lots of information. You should know the economy claim and the war claim if you follow the news at all, and if you were following the first Clinton presidential campaign.
okie wrote:It would take a few books to document all of them, Advocate, but the claims about the economy when he ran against Bush I are well known, and his recent claims about him always being against the war are well known, as well as the documentation to the contrary. Just do a search and you will come up with lots of information. You should know the economy claim and the war claim if you follow the news at all, and if you were following the first Clinton presidential campaign.
Is it impossible, for you to hold your currently elected party leaders to the same standard?
I've never once seen you take Bush to task for lying, and there's not only ample proof that he has lied many times, the nature of those lies is quite damning and harmful to the country. If you are against Presidents lying, why so selective in your damnation?
Cycloptichorn
okie wrote:It would take a few books to document all of them, Advocate, but the claims about the economy when he ran against Bush I are well known, and his recent claims about him always being against the war are well known, as well as the documentation to the contrary. Just do a search and you will come up with lots of information. You should know the economy claim and the war claim if you follow the news at all, and if you were following the first Clinton presidential campaign.
I would love to see Bill's actual statement about Bush I's economics. Could we see it?
Cycloptichorn wrote:okie wrote:It would take a few books to document all of them, Advocate, but the claims about the economy when he ran against Bush I are well known, and his recent claims about him always being against the war are well known, as well as the documentation to the contrary. Just do a search and you will come up with lots of information. You should know the economy claim and the war claim if you follow the news at all, and if you were following the first Clinton presidential campaign.
Is it impossible, for you to hold your currently elected party leaders to the same standard?
I've never once seen you take Bush to task for lying, and there's not only ample proof that he has lied many times, the nature of those lies is quite damning and harmful to the country. If you are against Presidents lying, why so selective in your damnation?
Cycloptichorn
Only in your fertile imagination is there "ample proof" that Bush has lied many times, Cyclops.
Ticomaya wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:okie wrote:It would take a few books to document all of them, Advocate, but the claims about the economy when he ran against Bush I are well known, and his recent claims about him always being against the war are well known, as well as the documentation to the contrary. Just do a search and you will come up with lots of information. You should know the economy claim and the war claim if you follow the news at all, and if you were following the first Clinton presidential campaign.
Is it impossible, for you to hold your currently elected party leaders to the same standard?
I've never once seen you take Bush to task for lying, and there's not only ample proof that he has lied many times, the nature of those lies is quite damning and harmful to the country. If you are against Presidents lying, why so selective in your damnation?
Cycloptichorn
Only in your fertile imagination is there "ample proof" that Bush has lied many times, Cyclops.
There is ample proof on a variety of topics; the most recent being his knowledge of the NIE on Iran (lied about when he knew about it), his claims that a wiretap requires a judge (lied, knew that we were doing it without a judge's approval) and his oft-repeated claim that 'we don't torture' (there's evidence that he's known for years that we do - see todays' NYT).
I could go in to Iraq war lies, but you'll just deny the truth over and over again on that one, so why bother?
Cycloptichorn
Cyclo, The crux of the matter of Bush is that those who continue to support Bush believe his lies; therefore Bush doesn't lie. Facts don't matter, because Bush doesn't lie. Simple conclusion.
Advocate wrote:okie wrote:It would take a few books to document all of them, Advocate, but the claims about the economy when he ran against Bush I are well known, and his recent claims about him always being against the war are well known, as well as the documentation to the contrary. Just do a search and you will come up with lots of information. You should know the economy claim and the war claim if you follow the news at all, and if you were following the first Clinton presidential campaign.
I would love to see Bill's actual statement about Bush I's economics. Could we see it?
There were many, Advocate, as the "worst economy since the Great Depression" was the mantra and one of the central themes of his campaign, and although it was garbage, it worked. I pulled just one speech:
http://www.ibiblio.org/nii/econ-posit.html
"This policy hasn't worked. The current administration has compiled the worst economic record in 50 years. George Bush's Presidency has produced slower economic growth, slower job growth, and slower income growth than any administration since the Great Depression -- and the biggest deficits and highest middle-class tax burden of any administration in history."
That mantra, Advocate, was one of the reasons I concluded then that Bill was not committed very much to honesty.
