Cheney is a jerk

No doubt about it. Arrogant, head-strong, unable to see beyond the agenda in Iraq ... lots of other things to say about him that are not particularly nice. And most likely true.

One of the things that may be subject to debate is the result of the attempted Blitzer-lynching a few weeks ago (Jan. 25, 2007). Was Blitzer over the line or not? A very good friend of mine asserts that Cheney was and is fair game, as is his family. To be sure, there appears to be an unreconcileable tension between the policies of the Bush administration towards gays and lesbians and the practice in the Cheney family.

The Booshies want to ban "gay-marriage" in the United States. The Booshies appear to regard same-sex "families" with the same approach, although that is less clear. You can call anything (in terms of domestic relations) you want a "family": the distinction comes in the legal recognition of what is a family. That appears to hinge on the marital relations between two people. What gay activists want is the legal recognition of marriage to "frame" the notion of family. Readers of this blog know that I think they should be entitled to the whole "nine yards" of the practice, including counseling, divorce, martial property, marital deductions, estate tax reduction, ... everything.

Back to Cheney. Cheney, ever the party man and supporter of Boosh (though why that should be given his clearly superior intellect to Dubbya, escapes me) has stated that he stands behind the official policies of the administration. Everyone appears to know this and have heard this -- though the amount of people that actually tune Cheney in as opposed to those who claim to have heard him may be wildly divergent -- but what is less well known is that Cheney has repeatedly stated that he considers marriage within the realm of state's rights.

Parse this: Cheney thinks that the people of the individual states have the right to determine the laws as regards marriage within those states. Take that a step further: Cheney thinks that the Federal government has no business in regulating marriage rights. This was very clearly his position in the 2004 election when he was asked his views on marriage, in hopes to trap him.

So perhaps Cheney is really only guilty of standing behind his boss? Would it please liberals and democrats to see dissension within the White House? Of course. And that is why buttholes like Blitzer continue to try and mine this vein. People cannot see past their hatred of Cheney and what he represents in terms of US foreign policy to see him clearly in other regards.

Dick and Lynn Cheney have NEVER tried to hide anything about their daughter. They have only been supportive of her and her lifetsyle choices. Mary Cheney was her father's chief of staff during the 2004 election -- not exactly hiding her from the far-right whackos that form a great deal of the Republican Party's support. In fact, it was far closer to "I really don't care what you think, my daughter is my daughter and you really don't have an electoral alternative anyway." Convenient of liberals to ignore that.

Blitzer is, of course, a far lefty from a far left leaning network. And there is bad blood between the Cheneys and Blitzer going quite a way back. In October 2006, Blizter interviewed Lynn Cheney, the ostensible topic being Lynn's new children's book entitled "These 50 States." But during the 15 minute segment, Blizter allowed only 3 minutes of talk on the ostensible main topic. He then shifted towards questions about waterboarding, her husband's health and the Jim Webb controversy. Blizter actually read from a statement issued by the DNC comparing Lynn Cheney's fiction to the sexually charged fiction of Jim Webb.

Prodded by Blizter, Lynn Cheney struck back asking Blizter why CNN thought it necessary to blatantly politicize their news coverage, pointing to CNN's tagline of "The Broken Government" and similar statements -- RIGHT BEFORE AN ELECTION. She also attacked CNN's decision to air video produced by America's enemies -- "terrorist propaganda."

Cheney: Right. But what is CNN doing running terrorist tape of terrorists shooting Americans? I mean, I thought Duncan Hunter asked you a very good question, and you didn’t answer it. Do you want us to win?

Blitzer: The answer, of course, is we want the United States to win. We are Americans. There’s no doubt about that. You think we want terrorists to win?

Cheney: Then why are you running terrorist propaganda?

Blitzer: With all due respect, with all due respect, this is not terrorist propaganda.

Cheney: Oh, Wolf…

Blitzer: This is reporting the news, which is what we do. We’re not partisan…

Cheney: Where did you get the film?

Blitzer: We got the film…look, this is an issue that has been widely discussed, this is an issue that we reported on extensively. We make no apologies for showing that. That was a very carefully considered decision, why we did that. And I think, and I think, of your…

Cheney: Well, I think it’s shocking.

Blitzer: If you’re a serious journalist, you want to report the news. Sometimes the news is good, sometimes the news isn’t so good.

Cheney: But Wolf, there’s a difference between news and terrorist propaganda. Why did you give the terrorists a forum?

Put simply, in Cheney's eyes Blizter cannot defend himself by claiming to be a serious journalist wanting to report the news. In CNN's editorial eyes, anything bad for the United States is good news -- for so long as a Republican is in office. And since when did Lynn Cheney have input into the decision to waterboard Gitmo detainees? Ironically, Blizter attempted a mugging only to have his teeth kicked in -- he must have forgotten that Lynn Cheney was a "Crossfire" participant.

Back to Dick Cheney. So Blizter attempts to go back to Cheney's daughter ... to hurt him, to ridicule the administration. Blitzer's smarmy "we are all happy for you" is completely transparent and is inappropriate -- given where he was headed with the mugging. If you want to screw with Cheney, just ask if he believes in gay marriage or not. Whether he believes that gays should be entitled to the privileges of a legal familial entity or not. He will then give you the official BS from the GOP. That is his position. Has to be. He still has to answer to his daughter at Christmas -- but Mary Cheney understands this too. That is why she worked for him. That is why she doesn't repudiate him.

But Blitzer, don't even dare to claim that you are only engaged in serious journalism, because you are not. You have a personal and ideological vendetta against the Boosh administration, and maybe the Cheney family in particular. Why not ask Boosh whether he can reconcile his Veep's familial arrangements with his policies? Mary Cheney's baby is not a political statement, it is personal. Between her and her God and family -- she has said as much directly, pointing to the bump in her belly. Respect THAT.

But I also respect that people of different political persuasions may choose to differ. That is why we have the freedoms that we do in the country. In other countries, Blizter may have conveniently had an accident (think of the fate of Putin's critics), and Mary Cheney would have passed through this mortal coil long since (think Taliban). Yet Blizter is so focused on the demise of the GOP and the Booshies that he fails to see the ultimate results his actions might represent. As does most of the liberal-leftwing video and print media in this country.

Back to the melting pot.