Hurting Dick Cheney's feelings

Former Vice President Dick Cheney offered quite a bit of nonsense on "Fox News Sunday" yesterday, but perhaps the most entertaining thing was hearing him talk about how the Obama White House has hurt his feelings. Apparently, the current president was supposed to seek out the former vice president for advice on national security matters.

I guess the other thing that offends the hell out of me, frankly, Chris, is we had a track record now of eight years of defending the nation against any further mass casualty attacks from Al Qaeda. The approach of the Obama administration should be to come to those people who were involved in that policy and say, 'How did you do it? What were the keys to keeping this country safe over that period of time?'"

Got that? What Obama really ought to do, according to Dick Cheney, is seek out the former vice president's guidance and follow it. After all, Cheney believes he's proven himself on the issue.

I seem to recall the Bush/Cheney era a little differently. Cheney thinks it was a sterling success when it came to national security and counter-terrorism. Perhaps there's something to this. After all, except for the catastrophic events of 9/11, and the anthrax attacks against Americans, and terrorist attacks against U.S. allies, and the terrorist attacks against U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Bush's inability to capture those responsible for 9/11, and waging an unnecessary war that inspired more terrorists, and the success terrorists had in exploiting Bush's international unpopularity, the Bush/Cheney record on counter-terrorism was awesome.

After the previous administration established a record like that, President Obama didn't ask Cheney for tips? The nerve.

I am curious about something, though. Terrorists first attacked the World Trade Center in 1993, early on in President Clinton's first year in office. Six people were killed, hundreds more were injured. The Clinton administration caught those responsible, subjected them to the U.S. criminal justice system, and foreign terrorists did not strike again on U.S. soil during Clinton's two terms in office.

So, at any point in 2001, did the Bush White House turn to Bill Clinton and Al Gore and ask, "How did you do it? What were the keys to keeping this country safe over that period of time?" I think we can probably guess the answer.

For that matter, did Al Gore find a sympathetic media personality in order to complain about how it "offends the hell" out of him that Bush/Cheney didn't seek the previous administration's guidance? Clinton/Gore had a track record of eight years of defending the nation against any further attacks from foreign terrorists. The approach of the Bush/Cheney administration should have been to go to those people who were involved in shaping that policy, right?

Follow Steve Benen on Twitter: www.twitter.com/stevebenen

Comments

[RobertHenryEller]

"What Obama really ought to do, according to Dick Cheney, is seek out the former vice president's guidance and follow it.'

Oh yes, yes! Do it, President Obama! Please? Please?

Can I watch?

[dems08]

I AGREE WITH DICK.

He should be sought out for his take on what he did to 'keep us safe', and

it should be done under oath before a grand jury.

[jemborg]

Well done.

That man is so stuffed with psychopathic hubris.

[JAJ2007]

Bush/Cheney didn't ask the Clinton/Gore team. Their modus operandi was "if Clinton did it, we'll do the opposite"
The Clinton/Gore team offered to brief the incoming team on Al-Quaeda and was rebuffed.
Richard Clarke tried to get someone to listen to him - and eventually was fired.

The arrogance of the neocons who attempted to run national security during the Bush/Cheney years will forever be a detriment to our country.

[PPatt]

Cheney is truly delusional. As long as there is a single person left who their terror PR campaign, replete with color coded alerts used for political purposes, worked on he will maintain these fantasies.

[lapsbo]

We have lost more troops since march in Afghanistan than in the last 4 years lets talk about who has a better grasp on protecting Americans. Remember our soldiers either protect them or bring them home.

[disgustedcitizen]

Give me a break, Pal! If bush/cheney had gotten the job done in Afghanistan back in 2002, instead of pulling most of the troops out to start an unjustified war in Iraq, we would probably be done there. You can NOT blame Afghanistan on the Obama administration. They are just, (as with the economy), cleaning up the mess that bush/cheney and the republicans made during their eight years on office.

[lapsbo]

name calling are the response of those who know their positions are too weak to defend. ...

[BlackJAC]

Define "irony": the very gops who accused liberals of being Cut & Run cowards over not wanting to be in Iraq are now wanting to Cut & Run from Afghanistan, which gops started with complete sanction in the first place.

[PPatt]

Double the number of troops there and you will double the casualties. Bush never sent enough to "win", why not? Do you even know how all over the map those in the military are when ask how many will be needed? Define victory.

Full scale occupation with even one American soldier for every Afghan will result in more casualties. Let's forget our schools, hospitals and roads for a decade and make that ratio 1:1, which means you'd have to go yourself. Would that make the casualties drop? Make them love us more?

This is not a simple game of who can summon the most bluster. There are realities and you apparently understand none of them.