Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, March 16, 2007
Charles Krauthammer :: Townhall.com Columnist
Dick Cheney Syndrome?
by Charles Krauthammer
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


WASHINGTON -- "What is wrong with Dick Cheney?" asks Michelle Cottle in the inaugural issue of the newly relaunched New Republic. She then spends the next 2,000 words marshaling evidence suggesting that his cardiac disease has left him demented and mentally disordered.

The charming part of this not-to-be-missed article (titled "Heart of Darkness," no less) is that it is framed as an exercise in compassion. Since she knows that the only way for her New Republic readers to understand Cheney is that he is evil -- "next time you see Cheney behaving oddly, don't automatically assume that he's a bad man," she advises -- surely the generous thing for a liberal to do is write him off as simply nuts. In the wonderland of liberalism, Cottle is trying to make the case for Cheney by offering him the insanity defense.

She doesn't seem to understand that showing how circulatory problems can affect the brain proves nothing unless you first show the existence of a psychiatric disorder. Yet Cottle offers nothing in Cheney's presenting symptoms or behavior to justify a psychiatric diagnosis of any kind, let alone dementia.

What behavior does she cite as evidence of Cheney's looniness?

(a) Using a four-letter word in an exchange with Sen. Patrick Leahy. Good God, by that standard, I should have been committed long ago and the entire borough of Brooklyn quarantined.

(b)"Shoot a man in the face and not bother to call your boss 'til the next day?" Another way of putting that is this: After a hunting accident, Cheney tried to get things in order before going public. Not the best decision, as I wrote at the time, but perfectly understandable. And if that is deranged, what do you say about a young Teddy Kennedy being far less forthcoming about something far more serious -- how he came to leave a dead woman at the bottom of a pond? I am passing no judgment. I am simply pointing out how surpassingly stupid it is to attribute such behavior to mental illness.

(c) Longtime associate Brent Scowcroft quoted as saying, "Dick Cheney I don't know anymore." Well. After 9/11, Cheney adopted a view about fighting jihadism, America's new existential enemy, that differed radically from the "realist" foreign policy approach that he had shared a decade earlier with Scowcroft. That's a psychiatric symptom? By that standard, Saul of Tarsus, Arthur Vandenberg, Irving Kristol, Ronald Reagan -- to pick at random from a thousand such cases of men undergoing profound change of worldview -- are psychiatric cases. Indeed, by that standard, Andrew Sullivan is stark raving mad. (OK, perhaps not the best of counterexamples.)

I too know Dick Cheney. And I know something about the effects of physical illness on mental functioning. In my younger days, writing in the Archives of General Psychiatry, I identified a psychiatric syndrome ("Secondary Mania," the title of the paper) that was associated entirely with organic (i.e. underlying physical) disorders. The British medical journal Lancet found this discovery notable enough to devote an editorial to it shortly afterward and to alert clinicians to look for its presenting symptoms.

And as a former chief resident of the psychiatric consultation service of the Massachusetts General Hospital -- my house staff was called in to diagnose and treat medical in-patients (many of them post-op, many with cardiac disease) who had developed psychiatric symptoms -- I know something about organically caused dementias. And I know pseudoscientific rubbish when I see it.

I was at first inclined to pass off Cottle's piece as a weird put-on -- when people become particularly deranged about this administration, it's hard to tell -- but her earnest and lengthy piling on of medical research about dementia and cardiovascular disease suggests that she is quite serious.

And supremely silly. Such silliness has a pedigree, mind you. It is in the great tradition of the 1964 poll of psychiatrists that found Barry Goldwater clinically paranoid. Goldwater having become over the years the liberals' favorite conservative (because of his libertarianism), nary a word is heard today about him being mentally ill or about that shameful election-year misuse of medical authority by the psychiatrists who answered the poll. The disease they saw in Goldwater was, in fact, deviation from liberalism, which remains today so incomprehensible to some that it must be explained by resort to arterial plaques and cardiac ejection fractions.

If there's a diagnosis to be made here, it is this: yet another case of the one other syndrome I have been credited with identifying, a condition that addles the brain of otherwise normal journalists and can strike without warning -- Bush Derangement Syndrome, Cheney Variant.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Charles Krauthammer is a 1987 Pulitzer Prize winner, 1984 National Magazine Award winner, and a columnist for The Washington Post since 1985.

Be the first to read Charles Krauthammer's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

LOL
Or as I call it, Typical Liberal Looniness Syndrome, TLLS.

Very funny article
and so true. I have never seen anything from Cheney other than steadfastness and a calm demeanor. He has never appeared to be demented in any way.

The left sees him as demented because they use projection constantly being the mentally challenged that they are.

Democrats know everything
Whether you read it in the newspapers or see it on some network. The Democrats are always telling Republicans whats wrong with them. They even write books telling Republicans and Conservatives how to act. If a Republican doesn't show dissent for the war in Iraq, President Bush, or our troops, then they're a crony of President Bush. Ever noticed how Democrats are so totally amazed, that we still have Americans who love this country and wants to see victory in Iraq. Some have even discussed sending Republicans to clinics, for re-education because they are so sick in the head with wrapping themselves around the flag. Imagine that, patriot Americans. Whats wrong with us. We now have reporters telling the Conservatives how to bring Conservatism back to life. I didn't know it was dead. Poor Republicans, they lost the elections in November. For the longest since the war in Iraq began, the Democrats were always saying, with their daily propaganda which the media can't wait to print, that there has to be something wrong with President Bush. Maybe President Bush doesn't know, he's lying to the American people about the threat of terrorism. Bush is a good liar. He's totally fooled everyone in the military to go and give up their lives for his war. Good thing we have the Democrats. They saw right through President Bush for the liar he is. Some have said it's because he's a dry drunk, and it's effected his judgement, and he really thinks he's making rational decisions. Give praise we have the Democrats to see through all this. The good thing about it, is that the Democrats pull it right out of nowhere. Their information about Republicans is so handy to them. For our troops to still be in Iraq, something must be wrong with President Bush or Cheney. They had a field day with President Bush, now it's Cheney's turn. Cheney doesn't know himself as well as those who interviews him does. The reporters who has been on the job longer then Cheney has been Vice President, are just about experts in all fields of life. Just ask them. They were very upset because President Bush didn't take their advice on how to fight the war in Iraq. Look how many times, they wrote Cheney off every time he went into the hospital. They not only had their fingers crossed, but their toes as well. If you ask them, it wasn't wishful thinking should something happen to Cheney, it was something that had to be open up for discussion, just in case something did go wrong with Cheney. Aren't we fortunate to have Democrats so concerned with Cheney's health. Hasn't it been the Democrats who has brought to the attention of the American people President Bush lies, failed policies, wrong course in Iraq, a war we can't win, our troops who were abusing enemy combatants at Gitmo, our secret prisons, eveasdropping on phone calls, our troops who were killing innocent civilians at will, and just about everything a Republican does now, is considered a scandal. It's good to see the Democrats there, when the American people needs them the most. Those scoundrel Republicans should be grateful, the Democrats have been elected to put this country back together, after President Bush took this country to war based on eight years of intelligence provided to him by Bill Clinton. The Democrats are so good in recognizing a liar like President Bush. I bet they knew President Bush was lying, because the best liar in history, Bill Clinton gave President Bush the intelligence in which he made his decision to go to war, and could it be they knew the intelligence was a lie. We are so lucky to have a party who knows everything about Republicans, and never does anything wrong in the eyes of the media. Good health Cheney.

maverick
I sure liked your post.

WHy should anyone
be surprised when an author in a liberal rag like the New Republic writes an article that is FOS? All this article does is illustrate that this print magazine has little difference from the posting on the DailyKos or the spew from the liberal trolls who drop by here.

It always amuses me...
When Lefties trot out that personal exchange between VP Cheney and the baiting Leahey on the Senate floor to support their outrage. This pseudo-alarm coming from the champions of the F-bomb saturating their blogs and print mouthpieces like Rolling Stone and Vanity Fair is just another demonstration of their hypocrisy.

The fact of the matter is that the perpetual pre-pubescents of the Left greatly fear the forthrightness of Cheney (and Rumsfeld for that matter). Neither man brooks any nonsense. Both are responsible adults. The Lefties, in constant childish rebellion against authority figures, spend way too much energy railing against their surrogate parents in their temper tantrums. They attribute nefarious motives to these strong leaders, fearing that the adults in charge are correct.

Um, tanabear, you may want to revisit the "imperial" aims voiced by Islamo-jihadists before you make that charge against our own leadership. You will find those items recorded in print and on videotape should you energize yourself out of your mom's den. The Islamic terror masters and their henchmen are determined to use those ME energy resources to fund their expansionist aims through deadly weapons, ruthless foot soldiers, and destruction of the world economy. Our foothold in Iraq and Afghanistan is a deterrent against this spreading destructive disease.

If this is too hard to understand, then maybe you should continue your reading of Cliff Notes and Classic Comics versions of history until those publications catch up to reality.

Thanks to Tanabear
For several years now I have been posting the suggestion (on various boards) that interested persons may want to look at "Rebuilding America's Defenses", the policy paper commissioned by Dick Cheney via the PNAC in 2000. It is a long hard slog of a read and I doubt that many of the war-is-fun crowd have disciplined themselves to read it. This paper is a blueprint for giving the United States full military dominance over the entire earth and also space. Add to this Cheney's announcement in January 2001 (nine months before 9-11) that his intention was to increase the unilateral power of the Executive Branch of our government and, if you possess the capacity for logical thought, you cannot miss what Cheney is: the architect of democracy's downfall in the United States. Those who have additional questions might wish to google "Neoconservatism". A concise online summary is "Leo Strauss' Philosophy of Deception". Strauss was the University of Chicago professor who formulated the Neoconservative political philosophy that informs our present government. The tenets held by Strauss provide a doctrine antithetical to democracy.

Many who support the Bush administration don't understand that "Neoconservative" isn't just another word for "conservative". Cheney has a very clear agenda, and it has nothing to do with gay marriage and abortion: it has to do with the control of money and power, which Cheney would prefer to see in the hands of Corporate America rather than of the American people. Is he crazy? Is he evil? Who knows. But he's not Thomas Jefferson.

Krauthammer has a bit of a point.
Cotter really can't deliver an accurate diagnosis about Cheney's mental state of health at a distance. It's just theories. Fine. Just like Bill Frist wasn't qualified to deliver a diagnosis about Terri Schiavo based on a selectively-edited assortment of video clips.

But you know, psycho- I mean psychiatrist-columnist Krauthammer himself likes to conduct remote diagnoses. Back in May 2004, Al Gore called on Rumsfeld and Tenet to resign, and criticized the conduct of the war in Iraq.

And our buddy Krauthammer, on Fox News with Brit Hume, said that Al Gore was "off his lithium." Lithium, of course, is used to treat heavy mental conditions like bipolar disorder.

And that wasn't even the FIRST time Krauthammer did remote diagnosis.
In 2003, he suggested former Vermont governor Howard Dean was mentally ill based on a quotation the columnist had heavily altered using ellipses. And the year before, Krauthammer also attacked Gore for his criticism of the conservative media, saying, "I'm a psychiatrist. I don't usually practice on camera. But this is the edge of looniness, this idea that there's a vast conspiracy, it sits in a building, it emanates, it has these tentacles, is really at the edge. He could use a little help."

So, allow ME to offer a diagnosis of our friend Charles Krauthammer. He is afflicted with a severe case of hypocrisy, which is only manifested towards Democrats, complicated by dishonesty and malice.

Prognosis: It will likely continue until his death, except in the unlikely instance that he decides he could make more money attacking Republicans.

http://vaguelylogical.blogspot.com/


Projection?
Though I can't long-distance diagnose, it may very well be that many Democrats are projecting, that is, seeing their own flaws in the faces of their enemies.

Ayn Rand described this phenomenon, though she didn't call it that - Marxists, unable to cope with their own inadequacies, ascribe those flaws to their political opponents as a mental form of scape-goating.

Charles wrote a classic here.
This is great. He discusses all the reasons why Cheney is a nutcase and then says Cheney is not crazy at all--its just the journalists.

What is Good for Halliburton
The long held conservative principle what is good for General Motors is good for America has now morphed into what is good for Halliburton is good for America in the person of our Vice President, Dick Cheney. Only now, we live in global economy, in which companies like Halliburton service everything from making oil rigs to sandwiches for our soldiers in Iraq.

After six years, there is no question that the Bush Administration has been good for Halliburton and companies like Exxon/Mobile. High oil prices mean good profits.

But one must ask himself if, in today's world, in which we see Halliburton moving its HQ to the Middle East, if the old adage still holds true. I don't think it does, and a sound economic analysis should always consider the "externalities" of business production. In this case, it is the lives of our soldiers and the debt that our children and our children's children will some day have to pay back to China.

No Mr. Cheney, what is good for Halliburton is no longer what is good for America.

sashal
You don't have to be a shrink to see Howard Dean is mentally deranged. Every time one of these leftist talks about the vast right wing conspiracy they are projecting their own actions, the vast left wing conspiracy onto the right.
You guys on the left are all deranged. You've got the media, the dims, and the radical Islamists all on your side trying to convince the American public that anyone on the right has a problem because we don't want your socialist nonsense.

sashal
Where did he say that Cheney is a nutcase? I wonder if that means that all the individuals with a history of heart attacks and bypass are damaged mentally and emotionally?

Lilly...
you might add the new twist to neo-conservatism - moving your business to Dubai to take advantage of LIBERAL tax laws.

I want America to stay on top as much as anybody folks, but at the rate we are going, we are headed the way of the Romans.

I think we need an administration who will use some finesse - whoever that might be.

J

That Bad Man
How is it that in Scio-Marxist parlance metaphor is elevated to fact? The inability to face reality leaves one emotionally crippled at best, but more likely a delusional character without perception beyond simple constructs.

Lilly:
“…Cheney would prefer to see in the hands of Corporate America rather than of the American people..”

Rosey:
“After six years, there is no question that the Bush Administration has been good for Halliburton and companies like Exxon/Mobile. High oil prices mean good profits.”

Hello socialist misfits, it’s an investor society! The American people own shares in “Corporate America”! That’s what defines Corporate America. If they don’t own them directly, they have a 401k, IRA or even public service retirement plan vested in Corporate America.

Replacing General Motors with Halliburton simply exchanges the straw dog for a straw man. In either case, Roger Smith or Dick Cheney is mere metaphor to point at when flailing about in public. You may draw attention to yourself, but when called upon for substantive reality, you offer up the boogeyman.

Dumb
The Cottle article is more than just "silly"; it's pretentious, empty-headed, and sophomoric: it would probably earn an "A" in any college course across the country, which is what it might've been written for in the first place. (That's no compliment, by the way.) The only thing more sophomoric might be what passes for journalism in Europe.

Moby
Tanabear is the classic "Moby", i.e. a leftie who pretends to be a disaffected Republican or conservative who has now had a change of heart. The purpose of the moby is to spread FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) among conservatives with the intent to demoralize.

The usual tactic is to claim something like "I've been a Republican for umpty-ump years, and have always voted for the GOP candidate, but now..." And then the moby recites whatever Democratic talking points are in vogue that week. Same thing here. Tanabear claims to have once been a Cheney supporter, but now he refers to the vice president as a "bloodthirsty imperialist." Uh-huh.


Rosie!
Halliburton?

Wow, you need to catch up with the rest of the lib blogosphere.

Halliburton is sooooooo last year.

Bottom Line
The vast majority of contribution to any media is futility in dealing with symptoms of people who are at the core selfish and fearful because they have no relationship with God and His son Jesus. They don't, of course have a clue about the bible. Those of you who think this statement irrelevant or naive should try to understand, that in the face of truth, your life and world view is "irrelevant and naive". The truth will endure forever and those who pursue it and promote it will fight, win, and also endure with the Author of truth forever.

The choices at the moment are to acknowledge the One who actually has all power and authority willingly with a contrite heart, or continue to war against the truth; continue to foment and propagate lies, fear, and hatred of absolute truth and generate even more diabolical conditions for ourselves.

Oh,yeah, we are our own worst enemy. If you understand this then do something about it. Call out to Jesus for help. He has the power. You won't find it anywhere else.

Nothing New
Nothing new hee. the LaRouchers used to publish "reports" on how thyroid disorders drove the first President Bush insane. They even called the first Gulf War "Operation Thyroid Storm" in their publications.

What is new is that a mainstream article would follow in the mudslinging, demented path of LarOuche. That is a sad commentary on the state of the mainstream of left wing politics.

just Realized
That is exactly what has been frightening me about the democrats of today. Caught up in a rabid hatred for Bush and a self-induced paranoia about a totalitarian dictatorship in the US, which does not exist, they have started to sound like Lyndon LaRouche and his followers. Strange how beliefs that once proved to everyone you were a conspiracy theory nut are now considered mainstream on the left. No longer do they denounce 9/11 conspiracists, or those who wish death on the president or vice president, get shunned by polite society, they are now the leading lights of the left.

Frightening.

PNAC
Also sick of hearing how a theoretical piece on American defense was some sort of secret uber-plan to take over thw world.

Hint to the Left. If it is a secret conspiracy, you would not know about it, and could not search for it in Google.

Also, why is it so shocking that geo-political think thank types engage in hypothetical military planning? Isn't that what they are supposed to be doing?

Strauss
Also, the DailyKos or DU must have mentioned Strauss this week, as he has recently joined the ranks of boogey-men/neocons in every monbat post this week.

andrews
It is fine for think tanks to engage in "hypothetical military planning". However, it is also fine for us to take a look at those plans, notice who wrote them and then notice the positions in government that those writing those plans, now hold. It clearly is not a secret conspiracy, as you mention. It is quite out in the open.

How does it being out in the open, change the fact that those writing these plans, did so long before 9-11, and now are in positions in our government to execute our foreign policy? It doesn't.

Andrews, you're going to have to go back to the drawing board in your attempt to imply that anyone pointing out these facts, are leftists. ;-)

By the way, what *I* find frightening are those that are afraid to look at the truth of what is going on in our government, on both sides of the aisle, and who seem to bear more allegiance to President Bush, than their own country and Constitution.

Oregon
posted, "Tanabear claims to have once been a Cheney supporter, but now he refers to the vice president as a "bloodthirsty imperialist." Uh-huh."

Excellent analysis!

Logic and critical thinking do not enter into Tanabear's (et al) thought processes; it's nothing but pure political agenda-driven propaganda.

The socialists on the left are true believers when it comes to handing over control of private enterprise to the federal government. They want socialism and don't even know what socialism is.



Liberty
I did not say everyone who worries about PNAC is on the left. I am well aware there are those on the right who voice the same fears.

I still think you ascribe far too much to the PNAC documents. Just because someone wrote a document does not mean it is a plan for their entire future.

Eg. Alan Greenspan in the 70's wrote eloquently about returning to gold and eliminating the Fed. He was in office for 14 years and did neither. His earlier writings did not provide a secret roadmap to his future actions.

Just because some people argued that we should take a more active military stance in securing vital national interests overseas does not mean there is some sort of secret PNAC conspiracy.

And don't try to whitewash it. Most of you anti-PNACers are convinced it is a conspiracy. Many even have join membership in the Mossad-blew-up-theWTC or -war-for-Halliburton conspiracy clubs.

But, you will write me off as a brainwashed too of the globalists, so why do I bother?

lilly
"This paper is a blueprint for giving the United States full military dominance over the entire earth and also space."

Can someone explain to me why this would be a bad thing?

Oregon et al
My thoughts exactly. When I saw Tanabear claim to have been pleased with Cheney I fell out of my chair. Sure! And Kimberly had pinups of GWB all over her bedroom until 2001.

Liberals never argue from anything but
wishful thinking and daydreaming. Ted Kennedy didn't just leave a dead woman in a car he'd wrecked because he was drunk. She was probably an unconscious woman who still had hours of air remaining in the car, all of which was used up by Teddy's swimming around for a while, then resting in bed for a while, then consulting with cousins for a while, finally confabbing with lawyers for a while, just to make sure she was REALLY dead after a while. Today, while leaving the instrucitonal building where I teach at a jr. college, I overheard an esteemed colleague informing his students that a poll taken of Congress reports 23% of Reps. don't "believe" in global warming while 74% of Dems. do "believe" in global warming; ergo, how stupid Reps. are. Global warming is now a religion whose tenets are open to polling and supported by Dems. who often hate religion and call it fairytales and much worse. Unless they believe in it. Cheney doesn't grovel and apologize, doesn't suck up to the NYTimes or Washington Post, doesn't appear on Comedy Central to announce major decisions in his life, and goes about his business as if the media and its apostles and accolytes don't really matter. The New Republic will fold again, because libs. have supported every nutty reading program for the last 30-40 years, until the average high school graduate from DC schools read on the 4th grade level. Those grads won't be supporting any reformulated New Republic. In the end, everything comes around.

Cheney
Cheney is hard to figure except that to be so wrong so often causes one to question his judgment. I will emphasize again, it is the outcomes that count not the chatter. The efforts of the administration are a mess.

Liberty
Just because we do not subscribe to the belief that Bush is stealing all our rights does not mean we are putting Bush above the constitution. It means we do not subscribe to your beliefs or find your evidence less than compelling.

However, like the liberals, you only recognize three categories of people. Those who agree with you (the elect), the stupid and the evil.

Sorry, we can be completely intelligent and well meaning and yet find your argument less than compelling.

Rebuilding America's Defenses
What is the problem with this paper?

I've read it and all I see is solutions to potential problems the United States may face in the future, land, sea, air, and space.

Everything I see is based on defensive measures and I see nothing about offensive strategies.

This calls for the United States to have the most dominant military in the world -- not to conquer the world, but to defend the United States. What is wrong with that?

Clyde9

Liberal Lunacy
Since liberals are always right then obviously those who disagree with compassionate liberals must suffer from sort of mental illness or defect. It is in the best interests of society to treat those who suffer from such mental diseases as conservativism.

Re Halliburton
Since Halliburton announced they are moving their headquarters to Dubai you would think the Democrats would be shouting for joy that they had prevailed over such an evil company. After all, for the last six years, everything from hanging chads in Florida, to Iraq and Afghanistan to 9/11 was all a nasty evil plot to raise Halliburton's stock price.

Sanity and the minority of one
..from 1984...
O'Brien's manner grew stern again. He laid his hand on the dial.

"On the contrary," he said, "you have not controlled it. That is what has brought you here. You are here because you have failed in humility, in self-discipline. You would not make the act of submission which is the price of sanity. You preferred to be a lunatic, a minority of one. Only the disciplined mind can see reality, Winston. ... Whatever the Party holds to be truth is truth. It is impossible to see reality except by looking through the eyes of the Party....

They hate Dick, he's the one obsticle to
Impeachment.

"What is wrong with Dick Cheney?" the only thing wrong with Dick Cheney is his boss GW Bush.

plame was covert-cheney is a traitor
plame was under oath and her testimony was vetted by hadyen at the cia. so unless the new cia director is part of the vast left wing conspiracy cheney leaked a covert operatives name.

Sashal
You miss a crucial Point. Both Krauthammer and Frist are M.D.'s and have completed an exhaustive period of training. Given this expertise, they are far more likely to be correct in their assessment of medical issues- mental illness, etc.- than someone without this(Cotter).

Full disclosure:
...I am not a reader of the New Republic. But if this piece by Michelle Cottle is indicative, how could anyone take the magazine seriously? Her anti-Cheney "diagnosis" is so weird she sounds more like a satirist poking fun at the loony left.

Clyde9
I think you stumbled onto the real truth of what scares the loony left about guys like Dick Cheney.

America's having a strong national defense is the very thing they fear most. The sooner a 'greedy capitalistic America' falls ...the sooner they can usher in their new world order of socialism and a one-world government, called the UN!


On Cottle's diagnosis...
Perhaps Ms. Cottle's just trying to draw cover for the vile rantings and 'death wishes' that were expressed by her loony comrades, after the recent failed attempt on the VP's life while in Afganistan.

She merely wants us on the right to know that liberals are all about compassion and love! There's not a mean or hate-filled bone in their body! They care deeply about the health and well-being of all conservatives.

I think I'll go throw up now! :(

New Republic and The Nation
two magazines that rational thinking people should avoid. They are just garbages.

Andrews
How would you know? Have you taken the time to read the plans? It wasn't just PNAC, you know. I also have posted a link to "A Clean Break".

I do not think either absolutely proves the case. However, as my grandfather used to say, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck.

I don't ask you to agree with me, Andrews, on anything I say. All I want you to do is to research it more yourself and then, come to your own conclusion.

Clyde9
That's only part of the picture. Read "A Clean Break", written in 1996. http://www.iasps.org/strat1.htm

It and the neocons who wrote it are discussed in a Haaertz article here: http://www.newamerica.net/publications/articles/2006/ending_the_neoconservative_nightmare

A bit of an aside, but still interesting...Here's an article from Kristol's, The Weekly Standard, dated 5/14/01, "Liberate Iraq".
http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraq-20010514.htm

Understand, the majority of the key people that wrote "Rebuilding America's Defenses" and "A Clean Break" plans, are now in Bush's administration, running foreign policy. Except Wolfesohn, who is now the President of the World Bank. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century

To me, this is not completely tied up with a bow, but it is more than just a little suspicious.

Oh, and here is Congressman Paul, discussing the Neocons and what they are doing:
Here is a speech by him called, "Neo-conned". It is 1 hour in length.

Part 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aewpvcxAwTk
Part 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7Wn7s8cwQs&mode=related&search=
Part 3:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHPoKhF6hW0&mode=related&search=
Part 4:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYdxD8UgG3A&mode=related&search=
Part 5:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8w_aT6L44Mg&mode=related&search=
Part 6:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7i_TmD1Y9tc&mode=related&search=
Part 7:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EDScCuh4bw&mode=related&search=
Part 8:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=el8evuL5Sr4&mode=related&search=
Part 9:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LR31DZrrYDI&mode=related&search=
Part 10:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFOz5zC6drA&mode=related&search=
Part 11:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ymh1iZaGkyM&mode=related&search=



Andrews
You said, "However, like the liberals, you only recognize three categories of people. Those who agree with you (the elect), the stupid and the evil.

Sorry, we can be completely intelligent and well meaning and yet find your argument less than compelling."

If I have made you feel that way, I apologize. It's not my intention. It's a little frustrating sometimes, you know?

Insanity as a political weapon
It is not altogether new to declare a political opponent insane. The government of the Soviet Union did it on a regular basis to purge opponents from the population and send them to remote "care facilities." A milder form of "mental healing" was used by the North Vietnamese after our withdrawal from South Vietnam. Known or suspected dissenters in South Vietnam were placed in indoctrination camps until they learned to think properly. Many other examples exist.

When the neoliberals gain complete dominance within the U.S., probably only the most outspoken and unrepentant political leaders (Chaney, etc), thinkers (Krauthammer, Sowell, etc) and media types (Limbaugh, etc) will need confinement in mental institutions. Ordinary conservatives who might pose a problem for the new order will receive indoctrination training until they become re-educated and understand the error of their ways. And they WILL see the errors of their ways and repent!

The transition should take place quite smoothly since much of the system already is in place. It shouldn't be difficult to transition from the current teaching of political correctness in schools and today's job requirement for "sensitivity training" to complete indoctrination training. With all effective conservative leadership in mental facilities, with a few tweaks to our existing propaganda programs, and further dependence upon big government for our sustenance, the transition should go quite smoothly.

One nagging problem does exist. Our military forces, if the new regime chooses to have such, must also be cleansed and aligned with correct thinking. With such a military force (if we choose to have one at all) it is not clear just how the new regime will choose to ward off troublesome invaders, such as, let us say, those already announcing our death at their hands. This might be a bit much for our new leadership to handle.


rashun ul
Ah, but Cheney is right in there with the neocon crowd.

Correction
In my last post, I expressed concern for how the new neoliberal regime would handle external threats from such as those who already have announced their intent to kill us. Silly me, I should have known the answer. They will negotiate! How could I have forgotten that when they have have given that solution so often already?

Liberty
Yes, of course Cheney is in the neocon crowd and will have to be placed in a mental institution. I mentioned him as the example.

Perhaps I don't understand the significance of your post addressed to me.

Liberty
Interesting links, but they do not answer my question.

I do know what the basic mission of the Air Force is and it and the missions of all service branches can be essentially summed up in seven words -- defend the United States and its interests.

What is wrong with the United States having the most powerful military in the world?

What is wrong with defending the United States?

What is wrong with defending the interests of the United States?

What is your answer to these questions? If any or all of them are bad, why?

Clyde9

Clyde9
"What is wrong with the United States having the most powerful military in the world?"

Nothing. I am all for it. I believe in peace through strength.

"What is wrong with defending the United States?"

Nothing. That is what our military is for.

"What is wrong with defending the interests of the United States?"

It depends on how you define, "interests". I do not believe that our military should be used to:
1. Carry out UN dictates
2. Nation-build
3. Be the globo-cop for international companies
4. "Spread democracy" around the world

Our troops should be used to defend America.




Liberty
By your # "3. Be the globo-cop for international companies"...I take it you mean companies like Halliburton and GW's big-oil buddies, right? Sounds like you've been sipping some liberal pablum.

And your objection to # "4.Spread democracy" around the world" is a little confusing ...considering it comes from someone who chooses the word 'Liberty' as there chat forum name.

What is there about the 'spreading of democracy' that you find so abhorrent? Would you rather we 'spread' some other form of government around the world? Or just practice isolationism?... we know that works really well in history. I guess Hitler's Nazis would have left us alone if we had just minded our own business...after all it wasn't the Germans that attacked our soil in Pearl Harbor, it was the Japanese. I suspect this latter point of isolationism is your true motivating belief.

So is it your belief that we should just simply hide our heads in the sand while Islamic fanatics continue their quest to dominate the world & destroy anyone or any nation that resists them and doesn't convert to Islam!

That's a real brilliant 'plan'. I know our nation is high on their list for destruction...but we're a little too big and powerful right now for them to succeed in their goals in America. Maybe if we leave them alone they will leave the rest of the world alone. Maybe they won't grow any stronger in numbers or in their ability to destroy all infidels in greater and more devastating ways.

I guess you think your plan to 'mind our own business' while these murderous fanatics attempt to dominate the middle east, the African continent, and all of Europe is far superior to 'spreading democracy'.

Here's an idea I bet you hadn't thought of...Maybe we should just 'give' them the atom bomb! Right? That way they would feel secure that we would not try to 'democratize' their countries. I'm sure they would only use their nuclear program for producing electricity...and peaceful purposes. Right?

History assures us that they are a 'peaceful' lot....Right!?

One last question, Mr. Liberty...what happens when America is the only part of the globe that they have not achieved their goal of world domination?
Will Allah decide to give America a pass?...after all...by your plan we didn't try and stop them in their quest, so they should appreciate our isolationism! Right?
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.