You know it is bad for Obama and the Democrats when the talk of the weekend is the dueling Vice Presidents. Dick Cheney and Joe Biden traded shots at each other over the weekend over a number of things. Joe Biden said that he did not believe another 9/11 size terrorist attack on us (here at home) was likely.

“Look, let me put it this way. The idea of there being a massive attack in the United States like 9/11 is unlikely, in my view,” the vice president said. Info Wars

Biden accused Cheney of rewriting history or not being aware of what happened and then rewrote history himself when describing how wonderful the Obama administration has been. Listening to Biden one would think that a successful war was not waged during the Bush years and that the victory was entirely the result of Obama. Of course, one has to expect this as Biden and Obama have a game plan and that is to whine and blame Bush for everything.

Rudy Giuliani has been described as 9/11 plus a verb. Obama and Biden are best described as whine plus blame Bush. Thirty seconds into his speech today Obama blamed Bush. Obama blamed Bush and then lied about his own record (the stimulus created or saved 2 million jobs, it worked, blah, blah). It is the pattern. They figure if they keep blaming the last guy and lying about it on top, they will keep the attention off their failed policies (like the stimulus).

I happen to believe that blaming the last guy for every bad thing is a sign of poor leadership. Obama blames Bush and will not give him credit for any of the good that has been passed on (he certainly is quick to take credit for it). It is a shame because they sound like whining babies. George Bush did not blame Clinton for any problems that were passed on. Bill Clinton did not blame H W Bush for his problems and Reagan did not blame Carter for his problems. And to be fair, Carter did not blame Ford. They did all the blaming on the campaign trail, pointed out the problems in the beginning, maybe took a few veiled shots while explaining their plans and then moved on. None of the previous presidents have whined like Obama. He is a huge crybaby and not fit to lead.

As bad as it is to have all the headlines discussing a war of words between the old and new VPs, you know things are really going bad when the media points out things like the rising number of homeless on Obama’s watch. Usually, homelessness ceases to exist when a Democrat is in office. When Republicans are in office the newspapers print the stories about the number of homeless and how terrible it is. When a Democrat gets elected the MSM stops reporting on the homeless as if they magically got places to live. The tide is turning if the AP is reporting this:

Homelessness in rural and suburban America is straining shelters this winter as the economy founders and joblessness hovers near double digits—a “perfect storm of foreclosures, unemployment and a shortage of affordable housing,” in one official’s eyes.

The AP must not have gotten the “don’t mess with the messiah” memo because it reported this. The MSM got Obama elected. They were behind him, ignored his radical past, refused to vet him, and painted a better than reality picture of him. They have skin in the game and cannot lose their man. This is why you rarely see them reporting the number of war dead. When Bush was in office twits like Olberman and Matthews would have segments about the number of US service members killed. The names of the war dead would be scrolled on the TV screen. People had to be reminded of this day in and day out.

The military members who die on Obama’s watch are quietly reported. No names scrolled, no body count, no nothing. They must protect the messiah.

So it is very strange indeed that the AP would report on the homeless.

Then again, maybe they are Bush’s fault as well.

Sources:
CBS 1
CBS 2

The United States was attacked on Christmas Day in what turned out to be a failed attempt at blowing up an aircraft. The response from the Obama people was disjointed and insincere. Obama was informed of the attack a few hours after it happened and he responded three days later. Some folks have made a big deal about the time it took to respond but that is not as important as what was said when the response actually arrived. Obama contradicted his Homeland Defense Secretary and became increasingly irate at the accusations that he was weak. Regardless of how long Obama waited to respond the real problem was that his response looked more like damage control than national security.

George Bush did not respond until six days after the shoe bomber made his fatal attempt. I do not know if there were legal reasons (the shoe bomber is an American citizen and perhaps they could not make statements that would jeopardize the investigation) or if the White House Press Secretary said anything prior to Bush. When Bush finally addressed it I don’t recall it being about damage control. I just remember that I had to start taking my shoes off every time I went through airport security.

News for TSP, I am not taking my underwear off because of this incident…

Regardless of the time involved, Obama should have been more concerned with the incident and not worried about damage control and he should not have had to clean up the gaffes of his DHS Secretary. Obama and his people (including his media wing at the MSM) should have spent less time defending how long it took Obama to say something with childish comparisons to how long it took Bush and spent more time telling people how they would be kept safe and at the same time inconvenienced as little as possible during the heavy holiday travel period.

One thing that Obama and his people were quick about responding to were the attacks on Obama. Team Obama responded nearly instantaneously when Dick Cheney came out with his criticisms of Obama. Dick Cheney is not a threat to airline safety, terrorists with underpants bombs are. If it took three days to address the real threat it should have taken longer to address Cheney. It should have taken longer to address the other criticisms leveled at the Obama administration. I think Cheney was spot on but that does not mean he could not be ignored by the administration until after they addressed the threat.

By taking its time with addressing the threat but responding in near real time to criticisms the Obama team comes off as being in campaign mode and not in leadership mode. Being president is a tough job no matter who is in there and if it takes them a while to address a situation then when they do address it they should look like they know what is going on. Obama was hurt by the ineptitude of Napolitano. That made them look more inept and added fuel to the fire.

We have already figured out that Obama does not do anything regarding leading the country quickly. It has taken him days or months to come to decisions (except for the crisis spending bills) and while his supporters like to claim he is a deliberative person he does not appear as such when he is able to immediately respond to criticism.

It also did not help the cause for Obama to say; “We will not rest until we find all who were involved and hold them accountable” and then leave his press conference to play golf. I realize he is on vacation so it might have been prudent to maybe leave that “we will not rest” part out of the speech and save it for a time when he is not, you know, resting…

The left was quick to point out George Bush discussing the seriousness of the terrorism threat while playing golf but remain silent about Obama’s very similar situation.

Sources:
Washington Examiner
Swamp Politics

UPDATE: Excellent article by Charles Krauthammer.

The Democrats are quick to point out that 9/11 happened on Bush’s watch and therefore he is responsible for it. Fair enough though it is just as true that the policies of the Clinton Administration led to the attacks of that day. Bush was tagged with it but Clinton made it happen.

The failed terrorist attack of Christmas Day took place on Obama’s watch and he is responsible for it. Democrats believe that it is our belligerence that causes us to be attacked and that their methods of diplomacy are the correct ones. I think it is safe to put that myth to rest. Despite the Obama view that he will usher in a new world and that people will like us if we extend an open hand the attacks continue. The people who want to do us harm do not care much about the nice talk. They have a goal and that goal is to destroy us.

No external force can defeat us. Our defeat, if we suffer one, will come from forces within and those forces are manifested in the Obama Administration and the Democrat Congress. Their policies and their positions make us weaker and will get Americans killed.

David Horowitz has a piece out at FrontPageMag.com which is entitled; “Who Will Be Responsible for the American Dead?” He answers the title’s question as follows:

The answer to the question posed above is that liberals will be responsible when the next bomber actually succeeds in killing Americans. Liberals have fought the very idea that we are at war (and should use security measures appropriate in wartime) although our enemies have declared war on us. Liberals have fought to close the Guantanamo Bay holding center and to release its terrorists back onto the battlefield.

Liberals have fought the idea that we are at war. This is a true statement and is reflected by the replacement of the phrase “War on Terror” with the phrase “Overseas Contingency Operations” and “Terrorism” with “Man Made Disaster.” This is a mindset that will get people killed and is a mindset that demonstrates weakness. The Christmas Day bomber felt no love for America or Obama and his open hand. This person felt a hatred for us and everything we believe in and felt so strongly that he was willing to take his own life in order to murder a bunch of innocent people.

Dick Cheney says that Obama is pretending that this does not exist but that pretending will not make it go away. Politico reports these words from the former Vice President:

“As I’ve watched the events of the last few days it is clear once again that President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war. He seems to think if he has a low key response to an attempt to blow up an airliner and kill hundreds of people, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if we bring the mastermind of 9/11 to New York, give him a lawyer and trial in civilian court, we won’t be at war.

“He seems to think if he closes Guantanamo and releases the hard-core al Qaeda trained terrorists still there, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gets rid of the words, ‘war on terror,’ we won’t be at war. But we are at war and when President Obama pretends we aren’t, it makes us less safe. Why doesn’t he want to admit we’re at war? It doesn’t fit with the view of the world he brought with him to the Oval Office. It doesn’t fit with what seems to be the goal of his presidency – social transformation—the restructuring of American society. President Obama’s first object and his highest responsibility must be to defend us against an enemy that knows we are at war.”

This is a very astute observation by Mr. Cheney. He has Obama completely pegged and his assessment is spot on. Obama pretends that things do not exist because they do not fit into the view he has of the world. Obama is like a child who believes that if something is not seen (or in his case acknowledged) then it does not exist. The saying that what you can’t see can’t harm you is a dangerous one indeed. While Obama pretends that there are no enemies and that we are not at war we are being targeted by those who are at war with us.

Recently, Obama gave himself a B+ grade for his work so far. Toby Harnden of the Telegraph UK has a post up indicating that Obama gets an F for protecting Americans. Mr. Harnden states:

There is no more solemn duty for an American commander-in-chief than the martialling of “all elements of American power” – the phrase Obama himself used on Monday – to protect the people of the United States. In that key respect, Obama failed on Christmas Day, just as President George W. Bush failed on September 11th (though he succeeded in the seven years after that).

Yes, the buck stops in the Oval Office. Obama may have rather smugly given himself a “B+” for his 2008 performance but he gets an F for the events that led to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab boarding a Detroit-bound plane in Amsterdam with a PETN bomb sewn into his underpants. He said today that a “systemic failure has occurred”. Well, he’s in charge of that system.

Yes, Obama is in charge of the system that failed and he is in charge of securing this country. Unfortunately, while he pretends that all is well the wolves are at the door.

The sad truth is that the door leads to a house made of straw.

Related:
History News Network; SYSTEM WORKED; OBAMASPHERICS FAILED

Cassandra was a mythical figure in Greek mythology- a favored priestess of the god Apollo, she resided in the city of Troy, in the temple of Apollo, where she could foretell the future to all who requested an audience. She fell out of favor with the god Apollo, because she would not submit to his amorous advances.

When that happened, Apollo cursed her , that she could foretell the future, but that no one would believe her ever again. As it happened, the Greeks had a little spat with the Trojans, recounted in the Iliad, by the Greek author Homer, and in this fight, which supposedly lasted twenty years, Cassandra made prediction after prediction, but no one believed.

At the end of the war, after twenty years had passed, the Greeks were tired, and resorted to trickery. They built a giant horse, into which went their best warriors, hidden. The rest of the armada pretended to sail away, and the trojans, awakening and seeing the giant horse, and no Greeks, came to the conclusion that they had won, and the horse was an offering to the Gods, or the Trojans (it’s unclear really who was the true intended recipient), and a peaceful offering.

Over Cassandra’s vocal protests that this horse meant doom for all Trojans, the horse was wheeled into the Walled city of Troy, and at night, during the celebrating, the hidden Greeks slipped out and, with the other Greeks who had come back under cover of darkness, killed all within Troy, or so it is written.

Former vice President Dick Cheney is the Cassandra of today’s world- he talks of terrorism (and yes, Virginia, it IS still called terrorism) that came to our shores and of terrorism that still yearns to make us very dead. He speaks from experience, experience that Skinny B and his posse DO NOT HAVE in dealing with terrorists, as evidenced by the rampant backpedaling B has had to do in the Gitmo “closings”.

“Nine-eleven caused everyone to take a serious second look at threats that had been gathering for a while, and enemies whose plans were getting bolder and more sophisticated. Throughout the 90s, America had responded to these attacks, if at all, on an ad hoc basis. The first attack on the World Trade Center was treated as a law enforcement problem, with everything handled after the fact – crime scene, arrests, indictments, convictions, prison sentences, case closed.

That’s how it seemed from a law enforcement perspective, at least – but for the terrorists the case was not closed. For them, it was another offensive strike in their ongoing war against the United States. And it turned their minds to even harder strikes with higher casualties. Nine-eleven made necessary a shift of policy, aimed at a clear strategic threat – what the Congress called “an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.” From that moment forward, instead of merely preparing to round up the suspects and count up the victims after the next attack, we were determined to prevent attacks in the first place.” Weekly Standard

As counterpoint to Skinny B’s watery speech, in which he prevaricated about the terror situation, and preferred his favorite childish tactic, which was pointing to the Bush administration twenty- eight times either by name or by implication, Dick Cheney didn’t truly criticize the present administration, instead, plainly making the case of why our vigilance can not be relaxed.

“Everyone expected a follow-on attack, and our job was to stop it. We didn’t know what was coming next, but everything we did know in that autumn of 2001 looked bad. This was the world in which al-Qaeda was seeking nuclear technology, and A. Q. Khan was selling nuclear technology on the black market. We had the anthrax attack from an unknown source. We had the training camps of Afghanistan, and dictators like Saddam Hussein with known ties to Mideast terrorists.

These are just a few of the problems we had on our hands. And foremost on our minds was the prospect of the very worst coming to pass – a 9/11 with nuclear weapons.” Weekly Standard

It is no accident that Dick Cheney’s popularity is growing as more and more people are becoming uneasy with this know- nothing poseur in the White House, and his crew of blame-the-victim liberals spending all their time trying to minimize  any reference to terror. Calling something a “man caused disaster” will not make the deaths any less horrible, and deleting the term “terrorist”, or “enemy combatant” from our vocabulary will not cause them to either like us more, or kill us less.

“So we’re left to draw one of two conclusions – and here is the great dividing line in our current debate over national security. You can look at the facts and conclude that the comprehensive strategy has worked, and therefore needs to be continued as vigilantly as ever. Or you can look at the same set of facts and conclude that 9/11 was a one-off event – coordinated, devastating, but also unique and not sufficient to justify a sustained wartime effort. Whichever conclusion you arrive at, it will shape your entire view of the last seven years, and of the policies necessary to protect America for years to come.

The key to any strategy is accurate intelligence, and skilled professionals to get that information in time to use it. In seeking to guard this nation against the threat of catastrophic violence, our Administration gave intelligence officers the tools and lawful authority they needed to gain vital information. We didn’t invent that authority. It is drawn from Article Two of the Constitution. And it was given specificity by the Congress after 9/11, in a Joint Resolution authorizing “all necessary and appropriate force” to protect the American people.” Weekly Standard

If you note the first sentence in that second paragraph,  you will begin to see the problem we now have vis-a-vis this current administration, as all the Liberal socialists there seem hell- bent on castrating our intelligence services, beginning with the Speaker of the House, but not limited to her alone.

Perhaps, if everyone listened to Dick Cheney a little more, and Skinny B a little less, then the similarity between Cheney and Cassandra would end at having the same first letter in their names, rather than their shared  voices in the wilderness.

Four people were arrested today for attempting to reign terror in New York. The media described them as a home grown terrorist group but, in reality, the group of men were Muslim converts who wanted to bomb Jewish synagogues and shoot at military aircraft. They might have been here but their terror was not home grown. It was grown from the seeds of hatred sewn in the Middle East.

While this news was fresh, Obama was giving a speech defending his decision to close Gitmo. In that speech he did not rule out bringing some of the terrorists at Gitmo to the United States. The Won stated that he would not bring those who were a danger to us into the country which tells me he means those who would not be in jail. How could the ones in jail be a danger?

Obama said that some of them would be brought here and placed in Super Max prisons while they awaited trial. That might work out well if they are convicted of crimes but what happens if they are found not guilty? Other countries are not willing to take them and we will not be able to put them back in jail so what will we do with them? Just because they are found not guilty does not mean they are not a threat.

If we are forced to let these people loose in America then they should be placed in the neighborhoods of the Democrats who want them released. Obama should be required to take a few of them in at the White House and let them around his daughters with no Secret Service protection. That is what he is proposing happen to the rest of us because if they are released they will certainly be living near our children and we don’t have law enforcement guarding us.

Obama has no plan. He did not think through this process and he figured that all he had to do was smile and say “hope and change” and other countries would take these people. He, as stated by his Press Secretary, made a hasty decision and now he is trying to figure out how to make it happen. He is finding out that it is not very easy to get rid of the people at Gitmo or Bush would have done so.

It was interesting listening to him because he blamed everything on George Bush and then said that Gitmo was used as a recruiting tool for the terrorists and that we are less safe because of the place.

Right, and the fact that we have not been attacked since 9/11 is proof that we are less safe.

The terrorists captured today by the FBI claim they were motivated by our actions in Afghanistan. Obama has increased the number of troops in that country so it is safe to say his actions made them want to wage jihad.

Is it safe to say that Obama is a recruiting tool for the terrorists?

America became less safe when Obama took office. The events in New York show that the threat is still out there and we will be attacked again. It is only a matter of time.

Keep this in mind folks because when it happens Obama will not be able to claim it was Bush’s fault though I have no doubt he will try.

The best news of the day is that Dick Cheney gave a speech at the same time Obama did (Obama evidently changed his to coincide with Cheney’s – probably and effort to take the spotlight from Cheney) and Cheney laid it all on the line and schooled the youngster.

Sources:
WCBSTV
New York Daily News
NBC New York
Daily Mail UK
Al-Reuters

This is cross posted from my friend Ms. Underestimated’s site.

On today’s Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace, Chris had an exclusive interview with V.P. Dick Cheney. This particular portion deals with what Biden has said in the past about Cheney being the most “dangerous” vice president in history. Heh. You know what’s coming next.

Transcript from Fox News:

WALLACE: During the vice presidential debate in October, Joe Biden was asked about your interpretation of the powers of your office as vice president, and here’s what he said.

BIDEN: Vice President Cheney’s been the most dangerous vice president we’ve had probably in American history.

WALLACE: Transition officials say that Biden plans to shrink his office, that he is not going to meet with Senate Democrats the way you did every week with Senate Republicans, that he is not going to have his own, quote, “shadow government” in the White House.

Biden has said that he believes you have dangerously expansive views of executive power.

CHENEY: Well, I just fundamentally disagree with him. He also said that the — all the powers and responsibilities of the executive branch are laid out in Article 1 of the Constitution. Well, they’re not. Article 1 of the Constitution is the one on the legislative branch.

Joe’s been chairman of the Judiciary Committee, a member of the Judiciary Committee in the Senate, for 36 years, teaches constitutional law back in Delaware, and can’t keep straight which article of the Constitution provides for the legislature and which provides for the executive.

So I think — I write that off as campaign rhetoric. I don’t take it seriously. And if he wants to diminish the office of vice president, that’s obviously his call.

I think that President-elect Obama will decide what he wants in a vice president. And apparently, from the way they’re talking about it, he does not expect him to have as consequential a role as I’ve had during my time.

OUCH! That’s GOTTA leave a mark! I honestly think that if Cheney would have run for President, he would have had a really good shot. In fact, a long-held “political fantasy” of mine would have been a “Lynn Cheney for President” ticket! I DEFINITELY would have been behind that one.

Big Dog’s Comment: VP Dick Cheney has been made out to be a villain but he has done a decent job as VP. As an individual he has given millions of dollars to charity, far more than his successor has given in his entire life.

Biden is a moron who will say about anything and often speaks before his brain is engaged. I do believe though that Obama will keep him out of the loop so he does not get in the way of “change.”

Many thanks to Ms. Underestimated for sharing.

Also see Democrat Equals Socialist

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader.

Barack Obama has talked a great game during the last two years. He has spent half of his time in the Senate running for president and during that time he has talked about change and how we needed fresh blood in DC. Then he picked a man who has been a Washington insider for 36 years to be his running mate which essentially negated the idea that he wanted change.

Obama had to select someone with experience because he has little of his own. He has never led anything and his claim to fame is being a community organizer. From all accounts the community is worse off than when he “organized” it but a lot of his friends made money.

Obama went on a world tour to show how loved he was and give the impression that he was ready to be Commander in Chief. Unfortunately for him, the Russians were having none of the Rock Star in Berlin. They attacked Georgia and Obama’s three statements on the issue were weak and showed the glaring gap in foreign experience he has when compared to John McCain. Obama finally released a tough statement that made sense but not before showing that he was a babe in the woods (O-Bambi). Obama showed that traveling with his gypsy parents to different countries when he was a kid did not quite equate to the foreign policy experience he claimed. He needed someone who would beef up the foreign policy credentials of the ticket and thus he selected Biden, a man who I have stated in the past is well informed in foreign policy.

Biden is Obama’s Dick Cheney. Biden is in his 60s so it is unlikely he will run against Obama after a first term in office therefore he is free to say and do what he wants. He is the voice of experience for Obama (a Washington insider voice rather than a voice of change) and he is the attack dog for the ticket. He can go after John McCain and Sarah Palin while Obama gives the image of being as pure as the driven snow the icy precipitation, not the drug cocaine). If elected, Biden will be the voice in the head of a president with little experience in Washington just like Dick Cheney was to George Bush.

The left hates Dick Cheney and every time there is a rumor about his heart they hold candlelight vigils praying that Cheney dies. Anytime Cheney has chest pain the hate sites of the left celebrate that this might be the one. The left also hates Cheney because they say he is a chicken hawk (which is actually a fierce creature) because he received five deferments and did not serve in Vietnam. I have seen more than one story from the left about Cheney’s deferments and none of them were very flattering. This is one more issue with which Joe Biden compares.

Biden received five deferments from the draft and thus never had to serve in Vietnam. After the fifth deferment Biden was not eligible for service because of childhood asthma, an ailment that had never been previously disclosed. In Biden’s stories about his life (in his book Promises to Keep) he discussed having an active childhood and playing football and other sports. There is no mention of asthma and no mention of any limited ability. Since Biden voted FOR the 2002 invasion of Iraq but received five deferments from service, does that make him a chicken hawk?

I realize that the left is full of hypocrisy and that they have trouble applying the same standards to themselves that they apply to others. Look at how they are treating Sarah Palin. They are criticizing her for being a working mother and for working up until she delivered her last child. They are attacking her for doing all the things they have said women could do for years. The slight variation is that liberals love abortion so that a woman does not have to choose between her job and her kid. Sarah Palin demonstrated true pro choice when she chose both of them. It is easier to do both when a mother AND a father are present and work as a team to raise their children. Since many on the left believe that marriage is no big deal and should not be protected and since a large number of their constituents have one parent homes, it is easy to see why they don’t quite understand.

In any event, the left is full of hypocrites so I don’t expect to see Biden called a chicken hawk and I don’t expect to see any stories from the left telling us how he used special connections to get deferments from service and I certainly don’t expect to see stories questioning the asthma issue as a fabrication. If Biden were a Republican there would be a thousand stories about it and the asthma would be deemed a lie, manufactured to avoid service. But since he is a liberal Democrat we will not see much in the way of criticism of this. The MSM will not cover it and Biden will not receive the same level of scrutiny or scorn that Cheney did.

But make no mistake about it, Joe Biden is Barack Obama’s Dick Cheney. He will be his brain and he will be his conscience. Biden and Cheney only differ in political ideology. Their temperaments are the same, their experiences are the same (except Cheney actually worked in the real world where as Biden has lived off the government all his life), and they both received five deferments from the draft.

I never had a problem with deferments but since the left has been obsessed with them I demand the same scrutiny of their candidates who voted for war but never served because of them. Until they can come clean on that issue, they lack any validity.

Biden is a chicken hawk and he is not the change that Barack Obama promised to bring to Washington.

Biden is Obama’s Cheney but I doubt the left will hate him as much…

Just to refresh people’s memories; John McCain attended the Naval Academy and then fought in Vietnam. He did not get a deferment and refused early release from a POW camp where he was tortured because it would not be fair to those who were there longer. Obama could never match that record and neither can Biden (or Cheney for that matter).

As for patriotism, I think Stop the ACLU has a great story about the Democrats and their patriotism. It was not hard to find American Flags at their convention. All you had to do was look in the trash.

**UPDATE: Dr. Bulldog attended a McCain/Palin rally and found NO flags in the trash…

**UPDATE 2: To be clear, I like Dick Cheney. I don’t like Biden’s politics. The point is that it will be interesting to see how the left treats a guy who is nothing more than the man they hate so much.