Why aren't we impeaching Cheney?

[cannon_fodder]

I honestly can't believe I am debating this again... feels like 2003.

Anyway, what was the blatant lie that the Administration told that serves as an impeachable offense?  They made a decision based on the best evidence available and acted on it.  This intelligence was accepted by the United Nations, Britain, Russia, and other nations.  The dispute at the time was not if Saddam was in violation of the UN accords, but if anything should be done about it.  Iraq violated nearly every aspect of the agreement reached after Gulf I.  I refuse to re-debate the merits of the war from a current perspective, as at this point we can easily look back and say the course we chose or the way we chose to execute it was in error.

In any event, a lie entails an intent to deceive, the actual evidence only indicates incompetence.   If incompetence were a reason to remove a person from office the hallowed halls of D.C. would be blissfully silent.

While there has indeed been some profits made from this war, they are of no concern to me.  The only concern would be if I believed the war was started with a desire to profit these companies.  I have no concern for the profits made by Ford or Lockheed in World World II.  Nor for the money Colt makes from selling rifles to the US Army.  There are jobs that need to be done and if someone can make money doing those jobs, so be it.

Now, it is important to distinguish profits in the sense above and FRAUD and MISMANAGEMENT.  If the allegations of mismanagement and fraud are true, all profits should be disgorged from offending contractors.  However, as it stands, Hulliburton is the only company in the world capable of performing many needed functions.  The base closures and downsizing of the 1990's increased competition between the 3 primary providers, and the winner of that competition now holds all the contracts. That does not give them an excuse for fraud, but does explain why they are still on the job.

Per your incompetence comment, it is well known that Dick Chaney is a very competent man.  You may not like the ends to wit this is used, but one does not excel in business and rise to the office of vice president by being a morons.  Likewise, the call of 'idiot' has plagued G.W., largely on account of his lackluster speaking ability.  But a brief inquiry into his actually academic prowess reveals his GPA bested his much renowned competitor Kerry at their mutual alma mater.  They may be incompetent in running a hegemonal power, but it is not for lack of intelligence.

And on to the sarcasm.  It was meant to highlight the error of blaming inanimate objects  for the worlds problems.  The entire notion of a military industrial complex is so archaic in the post-industrial world it is nearly laughable.  The VAST majority of businesses in the United States have suffered as a result of this war, not profited.  The loss of employees to wartime duties, the loss of worldwide goodwill, the increase in governmental consumption or needed materials, have all hurt most industries. Especially in a service oriented economy; war provides no benefit.

The so-called Military Industrial Complex could account for no more than 3.5% of our national GDP. That's how much we spend on military in a year. In an era controlled by neither the military, nor heavy industry, it is unlikely it wields this kind of influence.  The century old theory of the military industrial complex is as much a part of history as the Industrial Revolution that spawned it.  I have read NOTHING in economics that gives credence to this alleged beast.

Also, I said nothing of me personally not knowing peace nor understanding.  I referred to "all," which would incorporation the vocal class of people that seem to think corporations meet in a secret place, known as "the meadows," to plot hot best to corrupt the world, keep the man down, and generally be evil.  Lest we forget, it was the invention of the corporation that fostered most of the security, wealth, and amenities you enjoy today and the treasured institutions they fund.  For some reason, success makes you evil in the eyes of some (Microsoft - an integral part in ushering the the computer age.  Wal-mart - saving American consumers Billions of dollars a year.  Exxon - providing cheap oil for your SUV.  Halliburton - feeding US soldiers world wide.)
--------------------------------------

Now a quick lesson in loaded language:

quote: Something is troubling Elizabeth Cheney, the other daughter of the Lockheed-Halliburton syndicate.

First, the entire sentenced is premised on the incorrect notion that the author knows the thoughts of the subject. Second, a person cannot be the child of an inanimate object.  Third, this sentence contains an inferred allegation in the Lockheed and Halliburton are not associated.  Finally, the word syndicate holds a negative connotation.  

quote:Although the problem troubling our dear Lizzie is not her conscience, because that would require first that she have a conscience.

"Dear Lizzie" is condescending in that the author neither holds the subject to be dear nor is on a first name basis with her.  In addition, inferring she has no conscience is a direct insult.  

quote:No, what is troubling Lizzie is the lack of courage and an interest in losing she ascribes to those who are opposed to her daddy's war.

This sentence inserts thoughts into her head.  Assigns her an interest to the war. Uses the word "daddy" in an attempt to belittle her for having a powerful father.  And accuses her father of having, in essence, a pet war - an accusation insulting to the subject directed at a third party.

This paragraph is about as objective as if I were to write:
"Something is troubling Hillary Clinton, the other spouse of the Little Rock WhiteWater embezzlement. And no, it isnt Slick Willie having sex with another intern and perjuring himself before the grand jury.  That would require the lesbians to care who her farce husband had sex with.  No, what is troubling Hillary is the difficulty she is having usurping the presidency as swiftly as she was able to force her incompetent daughter into a New York brokerage house."

Gee, that wasnt loaded at all.
-------------------------------

I dont even like the sitting president.  I think he is a well intentioned man that is acting on what he believes is right and I do not subscribe to the notion that he either set out to deceive nor that he is part of some grand conspiracy.  I just think his beliefs are misplaced, his policies unwise, and his execution poor.

But an article such as this is not likely to spark honest debate.  It was written with the intention of inflaming readers and preaching to the choir while alienating dissent.  Would a link to a Rush Limbaugh article be fruitful?  Not likely.

[aoxamaxoa]

You and the artist need to hook up based on your common fodder for verbosity.

BTW, "In any event, a lie entails an intent to deceive, the actual evidence only indicates incompetence " is bs. A lie can also be purposeful omission of a fact or detail to sway the truth. You can be competent and play with the evidence.

" Dick Chaney is a very competent man" is absurd.

"The VAST majority of businesses in the United States have suffered as a result of this war, not profited. " Prove that!

"The so-called Military Industrial Complex could account for no more than 3.5% of our national GDP." No way. It's what % of our national spending?

I could go on but a discussion with you would be wasteful. Words and framing do count.

[cannon_fodder]

Please, work on your critical reading skills:

"[A] purposeful omission of a fact or detail to sway the truth" would fall within my stated definition of a lie.  That would include AN INTENT to deceive.  Competently playing with evidence with the intent to deceive would be a lie per the stated.  

Per Marriam-Webster

quote:Main Entry: 3lie
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): lied; ly·ing /'lI-i[ng]/
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English lEogan; akin to Old High German liogan to lie, Old Church Slavic lugati
intransitive verb
1 : to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
2 : to create a false or misleading impression
transitive verb : to bring about by telling lies <lied his way out of trouble>

Hate to break it to you, but I dont just make crap up and spit it out.

Dick Chaney is highly competent.  The man has served in many offices public and private.  He has amassed great wealth for himself and garnered the respect of international business.  One does not accomplish such things being 'as stupid as a stupid does' outside of movies.  Period.

Per the military industrial complex: common sense should tell you that in a service based industry depending on international relations; a war, particularly an unpopular war, is a hindrance to business. Furthermore, in a logical  or scientific argument the burden of proof lies with the person attempting to prove the existence of something not he who wishes questions it.  To prove the non-existence of something is nearly impossible since the stated object is assumed to... not exist.  Otherwise, you must believe that there is indeed unicorns deep in the woods - because it is impossible to definitively prove there is not.

Military spending is 3.5% of GDP.  Again, I chose that number for a reason, Im not just making **** up.   3.5% would indicate an approximate average of our GDP spent on military in recent history. That is historically very low for these war-like United States (peak of 39% and a low of 3% since the outbreak of WWII):
http://www.truthandpolitics.org/military-relative-size.php

Thus, my definition of a lie was spot on - no bs as you so boldly indicated.  Though I attempted to give you some indication of the fallacy of the military industrial complex the burden of its existence is actual on you.  And the maximum impact of the alleged secret society is around 3.5% as indicated by the federal budget.  So unless you have an alternate theory for how Chaney rose to the highest ranks of commerce and government in the world, I think I've pretty well covered all of your concerns.

I would like to point out I have done so without resorting to calling any of your assertions bs, using your name for world play, nor operating under the pretense that the discussion which you willingly participate has somehow become wasteful. At the same time I have been able to use logical arguments and actual sources to make my point.  

Now move along, there is nothing else to see here.

[iplaw]

Don't feed the troll cannon...he's immune to logical discourse and coherent thought.

[cannon_fodder]

Perhaps, but I still operate under the (probably mistaken) assumption that people can be spoken to logically.  I am often persuaded this is not the case with individuals, but since its a slow day at work I suppose its worth a try.

If nothing else, it feels good to draft a logical, sourced, and well presented argument every now and then.  Hell, I dont even really like this administration... but disparage them with merit, there's plenty there.

[iplaw]

Hee hee...spoken like a true attorney.  Aox is drive-by bomb thrower, just like his buddy Tim Huntzinger.  I may disagree with Waterboy, Rico, and Rwarn, but at least their posts are more than 15 words followed by a link to ___________.... (Insert favorite loony blog)

I wish you well on your future posts with him, but I think frustration is the inevitable outcome...

[aoxamaxoa]

"Hate to break it to you, but I don't just make crap up and spit it out." Spit and crap it is....

Guess my priorities are way different than yours.  Again, what % of our budget is being squandered by this war? Who cares if it's ONLY %3 of our GDP.

Cheney is the drive by bomb thrower. He got where he got through power grabbing and deceptive manipulation. He's a perfect broker for government contracts.

Good. My approach does work. it frustrates all you Bush extremists.

Not a drive by bomb thrower.

More like an efficient throat cutter....

"Now move along, there is nothing else to see here." Proof of you being a repeating bore.

[iplaw]

Did someone fart in here?  I smell something, but I can't see anything...

[aoxamaxoa]

^call mommy into your room to check your underwear......

[cannon_fodder]

Actually all my arguments are logical and sourced.  So crap they are not.

As military spending  is only 3.5% of our GDP, that would be the extend of the military industrial complex.  The amount of money spent in dollar terms is not reflective of any activities impact on our society, % of total is a much better picture.  If, as it now appears, you wish to change the argument to 'we are spending too much money in Iraq' you may do so now.

More ad hominem attacks on Cheney, you dont like him and feel the need to disparage him because a man you dislike is highly successful.  Got it.

As mentioned previously, Im not even a fan of this administration let alone a "Bush extremist,"  nor am I particularly frustrated.  What, might I ask, do you really hope to accomplish with your 'approach?'  Certainly you dont think you are going to either gain a better understanding nor sway another's opinion, shall I assume your approach is intended to be malicious and ignore you as wiser men do?

My closing line has become a theme in this thread, meant to indicate the repetitive nature and ineffectiveness of your argument.  Basically, its an insult to your inability to raise a valid point. Im sorry if you were properly insulted by it.

[Conan71]

I'm telling you Cannon, the view is so much better when you put trolls on ignore.  Aox is obsessed with liberalism so much that it appears he/she/it has little else to do than Google as many liberal web sites and articles as possible.

Aox must be a trust fund baby or government clerk with that much spare time.

[aoxamaxoa]

CF. Come now. ^"your inability to raise a valid point..." is a lie.

Go back to the "picture on the bill" thread and be your irrifutable self.

[aoxamaxoa]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

I'm telling you Cannon, the view is so much better when you put trolls on ignore.  Aox is obsessed with liberalism so much that it appears he/she/it has little else to do than Google as many liberal web sites and articles as possible.

Aox must be a trust fund baby or government clerk with that much spare time.

Some days it's that way mister "I put Aox on ignore"....

Then again, some of us have the intelligence to multi task.

btw, googling liberal web sites is not the way to find information quick. Any slow lawyer knows that....

[aoxamaxoa]

Back on topic. First Cheney should be forced out.

Libtard links....
Keep your eye on the ball- impeachment now!

by Carol Wolman

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_carol_wo_070213_keep_your_eye_on_the.htm

"There are lots of issues that need attention- global warming, torture, the media buildup for attacking Iran. Impeachment trumps them all. Get rid of the bad guys, and we can tackle the rest of it. Since Congress won't impeach, they're bad guys too. We the People are on our own."

and

The Libby trial makes impeachment easy, and obligatory

by Carol Wolman

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_carol_wo_070214_the_libby_trial_make.htm

"Bush and Cheney had just used manufactured evidence to persuade the American public that there was reason to launch a pre-emptive war against Iraq. They were "fixing the facts around the policy" as the famous Downing Street memo put it. (A recent Pentagon study confirms this.) "

This trial and verdict will just disappear from public view. Except for people who go out of their way to follow it, almost nothing is being said on the airwaves, except a passing mention that the trial is moving to the deliberation stage. Without outrage and examination, who's going to care? A handful of people on the net like me?

Tomorrow "Breach" opens in theaters. What happened to that spy who betrayed US secrets to enemies? No doubt he's in a Club Fed white collar prison. His wife still draws on his retirement! We're paying her for his "work" ---after she and hers profited off of his treason! No spotlight on her...no outrage.

[cannon_fodder]

More of the same... no longer worth a reply.

Please post when you have thoughts of your own or you wish to actually debate an issue.

XoXo,

cannon_fodder