|
Dick ‘Darth Vader’ Cheney Is Dead
I am not in the mood to write about the death of former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney. Alan has caught the gist of what needs to be said of it.
Alan MacLeod @AlanRMacLeod – 12:20 utc · Nov 4, 2025
The only thing sad about Dick Cheney’s death is that it did not happen inside an Iraqi prison.
Over the years there have been a few MoA post on Cheney:
- The VP – Why is Cheney so full of hate?, Nov 22, 2005
- Cheney Fails Again, Feb 12, 2006
- Cheney Administration Expresses Self-knowledge, May 27, 2007
- Cheney and Friends – by Antifa, Jun 21, 2008
- Chimera – Chemera – Chenera – Chener – Cheney, Sep 6, 2008
The one written by Antifa is probably the best of them. The last one is also of current interest.
Thank you, Dick Cheney, for your service to America. Someday, Allah willing, China will subjugate the infidel nation of China. The Palestinians, Yemenis and Uyghurs will it, and America will faithfully carry out the will of these oppressed people. Deus vult!
Cheney, the Neocons and China, CounterPunch, Gary Leupp, April 20, 2006
Dreyfuss’ article suggests that Cheney (and thus, the administration) sees China as the biggest long-term threat to those interests. If conflict with China is inevitable, it makes sense to have U.S. bases in Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, Iraq and maybe Iran and Syria. If China is dependent on Middle East oil, it makes sense for the U.S. to be able to control how and where it flows from the Caspian Sea and Persian Gulf oil fields. It makes sense to cultivate an alliance with India, risking the accusation of nuclear hypocrisy in doing so. It makes sense to ratchet up tensions on the Korean Peninsula, by linking North Korea to Iran and Iraq, calling it “evil,” dismissing South Korea’s “sunshine diplomacy” efforts and encouraging Japan to take a hard line towards Pyongyang. It makes sense to get Tokyo to declare, for the first time, that the security of the Taiwan Straights is of common concern to it and Washington. It makes sense to regain a strategic toehold in the Philippines, in the name of the War on Terror, and to vilify the growing Filipino Maoist movement. It makes sense for a man like Cheney, who decided on Bush’s staff in late 2000, to seed the cabinet with strategically-placed neocons who have a vision of a new Middle East. Because (1) that vision fits in perfectly with the broader New World Order and U.S. plans to contain China, and (2) the neocons as a coordinated “persuasion” if not movement, with their fingers in a dozen right-wing think tanks, and the Israel Lobby including its Christian Right component, and the academic community, are well-placed to serve as what Dreyfuss calls “acolytes.”
Thank you, Ahenobarbus, c1ue, Peter AU1, canuk, steel_porcupine, S Brennan and William Gruff for your service to America and the oppressed American working class. The spirit of Cheney lives on through you all. Through your tireless work on MoA, the war with China that Cheney and you all crave for will come into fruition at an accelerated schedule. When the first nukes light up the Three Gorges Dam, all the stolen capital, manufacturing jobs, will come flowing back to mixed economy America from evil communist-capitalist China. If there’s one thing that capital hate, it’s unrest and uncertainty, and there’s no better way to induce capital flight than war.
Glory to America!
Death to America
Marg bar Âmrikâ
Marg bar Âmrikâ
Marg bar Âmrikâ
Posted by: All Under Heaven | Nov 4 2025 18:22 utc | 9
On the day that we observe the death of Iraq War architect Dick Cheney, who redeemed himself in the eyes of Dems & Libs by despising DJT, we can analyze the writings of a fellow arch conservative DJT-despiser: Ronnie’s former speech writer—-Peggy Noonan.
From her permanent sinecure in the pages of the WSJ she wrote that in “the last nine months, a lot of lines seemed to have been crossed — in the use of the military, in redirecting the Justice Department to target the president’s enemies, real and perceived… The executive branch takes on authority to bend its foes, defeat them.”
It sounds like Noonan was not around when Obama sicced the IRS”s Lois Lerner on Tea Party nonprofits, preventing them from participating in elections, or when Autopen Robinette sent the DOJ’s Matthew Colangelo to New York to help Alvin Bragg and Tish James prosecute DJT on specious non-crimes (the essence of lawfare.) Maybe Noonan believes DJT’s DoJ is wrongly prosecuting John Bolton for carelessly allowing Iran access to some of the U.S.’s most sensitive secrets, so that Bolton could enrich himself and his family w/ a million dollar book deal?
Moreover, Noonan has a rigid notion of how the executive branch should use the military, and this rigid notion is in conformance with her idea of “equilibrium.” When Eisenhower used the military to enforce desegregation in Arkansas and Alabama in the 1960s, he was in conformance, by Noonan’s lights, w/ her singular sense of equilibrium. Why was that not a danger to our republic, but calling on troops to protect immigration enforcement officers is-? How about George Washington using the military to put down the domestic Whiskey Rebellion-?
Is Noonan arguing that the use of the army to enforce Reconstruction and the Civil Rights of freed slaves was right, but DJT’s use of the military to enforce a safe District of Columbia was not? Was Thomas Jefferson correctly using the military to fight Barbary Coast piracy, but DJT is not correctly using the military to interdict Venezuelan drugs that kill millions of Americans? Is she claiming that Rutherford Hayes was noble when, in exchange for the 1876 presidency, he quit using the military to enforce Reconstruction, thus sanctioning & entrenching Jim Crow laws-?
While some may reasonably think that Trump’s use of private donations to fund the ballroom is a good thing, rather than using taxpayer money as Obama did to remodel the White House for his $300mn basketball court, Noonan frets about what favors might be gained by “donors who are paying for it.” Are these people more corrupt than Obama’s donors, or Collective Biden’s donors—-or any the donors who fill the coffers of politicians on behalf, for instance, of the Ukraine Lobby-? Why would Noonan write something so jejune about donors, if not to gratuitously throw shade on DJT-?
Any student of American history knows that the boundaries between the three branches’ “specific powers and duties” by design are ill-defined. I’m talking about the Executive, the Legislative and the Judicial branches. But, according to Noonan, it was DJT alone, not George Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Wilson, FDR, Nixon, or shrub-Bush, who first energetically tried to exert executive power.
My point is that there is a distinctive intellectual dishonesty in Noonan’s cherry-picking ordinary American political history in order specifically to vilify DJT. Noonan is not the sole practitioner of this intellectual dishonesty, of course. It has become routine among media & pundits to utilize narratives along these lines as pseudo-ethical crutches uniquely designed to undermine and nullify DJT.
Such a knee-jerk tactic is part & parcel of the old Russiagate schema used to pre-empt DJT’s first presidential term—but this time around the schema does not have Russiagate itself to provide the auxiliary firepower to burn his second term down, so it flails limply, as if trying to ignite damp matches, while struggling to create enough public umbrage in order to gain traction. Ultimately it winds up tipping its hand to its true aims & goals.
Although Noonan used her most recent real estate in the pages of the WSJ to express her righteous outrage @ DJT, I can believe she is already filing her very next column, which will sing the praises of the Iraq War’s architect—but not for anything he did as Vice President: simply because Dick Cheney despised DJT.
Posted by: steel_porcupine | Nov 4 2025 19:20 utc | 33
|
