The people can’t ammend their own constitution, because some parts are too important to be trusted to anyone but judges

Wow! He really said that? Amazing.

Its no wonder liberals believe we are “imposing democracy” on Iraq. They are living proof that not all people do want to be free. A small, frightening segment of society wants to be controlled and told what to do.

I’ve seen the facts you cite, I just ignore them

The people can’t ammend their own constitution, because some parts are too important to be trusted to anyone but judges

Levi calling anyone one sided is funny, he’s so one sided, we ought to call him Mobius Strip

Instead the incumbent Vice President chose to attack back, faulting Cheney for weakening America. He should have just ignored the criticism and not responded in kind.

I watched Biden answer those questions about Cheney, and the very first thing he said was something along the lines of ‘he’s free to criticize us.’ And as for your advice that a Democrat should stand around ‘ignoring the criticism’ of a Republican — I mean come on. It’s the same with conservatives encouraging Democrats to leave Rush alone and stop responding to him, you just want politics to be one-sided.

I’d want it to be one-sided too if I got things as wrong as you guys have.

Bruce and several threaderators here have it right… Cheney isn’t out of bounds or uncivil (not your word) or tacky (again, not your word) by speaking out about the wholesale effort of the Obama WH to rework history on “torture”, the “War on Terror”, Camp Delta, the correct emphasis on natl security, the proper balance of American policy interests when it comes to kow-towing to foreign leaders and the internl press… or even whether or not there is a real threat to the West in the rise of radical muslims in the world.

There is zero need to have puppets or alter-ego talking heads doing the bidding of some Cheney-in-hiding. Thank God someone is speaking out from the last Administration –nearly everyone else is running for the big contract, the big job or has fallen off the radar screen like disaffected former colleagues.

By the way, I’d also recommend you take some time to rethink your assessment of Rachel Maddow of MSNBC, too. Listen to her politico-entertainment show with the volume modulated, not off… she was off the charts scorching hot on Cheney last night… without the humor but smiling her best bar smile while pilloring a great American and public servant in Dick Cheney.

There’s just something about criticism when the new team hasn’t yet got their sea legs, so to speak

The problem with that is that the new team is trying to fundamentally, permanently change the nation both domestically and from a foreign policy standpoint, at the same time you suggest Cheney should be withholding criticism. Sure, he could wait, but Obama sure as hell wont, and neither will our enemies.

But they have been trashed.

I have zero doubt that Obama will continue the practice when he is an ex.

All that comes from Republicans adhering to traditions to which Democrats don’t is that we handicap ourselves. The result is that Democrats define the issues to more Americans and more people around the world and those people never hear the Republican message.

One need only look to the 2006 and 2008 cycles, to see how well that strategy works.

Also, it would be truly lovely if there were Republicans who were taking Cheney’s message to the people, but unfortunately they aren’t. For two years Republicans have been cowering in fear, afraid to defend themselves and most certainly unwilling to defend Bush and Cheney.

And as far as the media is concerned, the Republican message is, “republicans are to blame for everything, we are angry, hateful, mean and you have every reason to hate us”. If you are a Republican politician, and you can’t be used to make Republicans look bad, the media has no interest in you. We actually do have some conservative politicians who can make our case, and compellingly so, but wouldn’t you just know it! the media coincidentally has to wash its collective hair that day, if you know what I mean.

Cheney at least has the stature that they can’t ignore him. Which is well more than half the battle right now.

If you saw a poisonous snake slither into your neighbor’s back yard I think it would be morally reprehensible not to say and do something about it. The former VP is merely voicing his opinion that the current administration is allowing this country to be open to danger, either from stupidity, ineptness or on purpose. I am glad Cheney has the courage to speak up and I see nothing wrong with his timing.

I just think he should wait a certain period of time before speaking out. Gore showed a lot of class in 2001 by all but hiding in an undisclosed location after Bush took office. I don’t think he made a public appearance, at least one where he offered any political commentary until the summer.

There’s just something about criticism when the new team hasn’t yet got their sea legs, so to speak. If it weren’t so late, I might be better and more clearly able to articulate this point.

You seem to have the rule wrong. It is not that former presidents dont criticize sitting presidents, it is that former Republican administrations are not to criticize Democrats. Former Democrats get to criticize whoever they want, where ever they want, when ever they want.

Clinton criticized Bush, Gore criticized Bush, Albreit criticized Bush. Carter criticized Bush, Mondale criticized Bush, Brzezinski criticized Bush.

All while at war. Sometimes overseas.

There also used to be a rule that you were to unite behind the president in times of war, and there was a rule that politics stopped at the waters edge.

ALL of which have been trashed by Democrats to garner public support behind their policies — despite their policies being morally wrong.

Since bad policy is being furthered by Democrats breaking these rules and Republicans adhering to them, I’d say its time for the rules to change.

With all the trashing of people on the right from every direction, there is nothing they can say worse about Cheney then they already have said.

Let him have his say, MSM will never sing his praises and we won’t be around to see what history has to say in any event.

We’re in the 21st C -there is no longer a need for former officials to sit on the porch, rock quietly while in private thought and first write those memoirs before venturing into the public arena. That worked in the mid-20th C because America had slower, more prolonged news cycles. The then-appropos spirit was: give the guy a chance… even though Eisenhower might take issue with Kennedy’s honorable conduct on that score… or the ungentlemanly brutes in the Georgia Mafia in Carter’s smokehouse with the Ford folks.

I think Cheney is right to level the weapon, take aim, fire off a few shots -especially given all the backward shots this current crop of WH hacks are taking. In this time & age, being silent more than 3-4 news cycles is an eternity… just ask Newt or Carville or Gergen or Noonan.

Nope, I wish Bush or Cheney would do a longer, in-depth series of “candid” conversations with someone at Fox or an Indie. Lay it out. Be fair and honest. Straighten up a record that has gotten horribly out of whack lately. Name names.

And do it with the knowledge that they can NOT count on the current actors to act as gentleman or good stewards of the public square –level the weapon, take aim, fire damn it.