Woodward: Cheney Cursed At Me About ‘State of Denial,’ Then Hung Up The Phone
Woodward: Cheney Cursed At Me About ‘State of Denial,’ Then Hung Up The Phone
Today on Meet the Press, Bob Woodward described how Vice President Dick Cheney called him 10 days ago about Woodward’s new book State of Denial. Woodward says Cheney cursed at him (”he said what I was saying was bull-something”) and then hung up the phone.
Woodward called Cheney’s behavior a “metaphor for what’s going on. Hang up when somebody has a different point of view or information you don’t want to deal with.” Watch it:
Full transcript:
MR. RUSSERT: Have you spoken to the president or the vice president since this book came out?
MR. WOODWARD: The vice president called me I guess as it was coming out 10 days ago.
MR. RUSSERT: And?
MR. WOODWARD: Well, he called to complain that I was quoting him about the meetings with Henry Kissinger that he and the president had. I had interviewed Vice President Cheney last year a couple of times at length about material I’m gathering on the Ford administration, on-the-record interviews, but he volunteered, he said, “Oh, by the way, Henry Kissinger comes in” and he, Dick Cheney, sits down with him once a month and the president every two or three months. And Cheney was upset I was quoting him. And I said, “Look, this–on-the-record doesn’t have anything to do with Ford, you volunteered that.” He then used a word which I can’t repeat on the air. And I said, “Look, on the record is on the record,” and he hung up on me.
MR. RUSSERT: What, what do you mean, he swore at you?
MR. WOODWARD: He, he said what I was saying was bull-something. No, but he, but he hung up. Now, look, I can, I can see, I went back and looked at the transcript that he can–ever had a disagreement about ground rules with someone. Have you?
MR. RUSSERT: Well, he thought he was talking, he thought he was talking to you for one project and you used it in another project.
MR. WOODWARD: Well, exactly. But it had nothing to do with it, and it’s clearly spelled out that it’s an on-the-record interview. And so–now, what does he do instead of saying, “Well, OK, I look at it this way, you look at it that way.” It’s a metaphor for what’s going on. Hang up when somebody has a different point of view or information you don’t want to deal with.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
98 Responses to “Woodward: Cheney Cursed At Me About ‘State of Denial,’ Then Hung Up The Phone”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Bob should thank his lucky stars that Cheney hasn’t shot him in the face yet.
October 8th, 2006 at 2:32 pmWoodward called Cheney’s behavior a “metaphor for what’s going on. Hang up when somebody has a different point of view or information you don’t want to deal with.â€
We know all about those metaphors, as we deal with them on a daily basis.
Wingnuts come here spouting crap, and when you debunk them, they run like scared Exleys.
October 8th, 2006 at 2:34 pmGee, Booby, you think you would have figured this out five years ago, but you were too busy trying to keep your membership to the cocktail weenie club.
October 8th, 2006 at 2:36 pmHe said “Go F*CK YOURSELF!”, hung up the phone, then immediately went back to burning small children with cigarettes with Kissinger.
October 8th, 2006 at 2:39 pmNO supprised. It is Cheney of Denial.
October 8th, 2006 at 2:39 pmTP should attach their “F” word filter to Cheney’s mouth and their “N” word filter to Allen’s.
October 8th, 2006 at 2:40 pmI will bring Dick Cheney to his knees.
October 8th, 2006 at 2:45 pmI just finished reading Bob Woodward’s book last night…All I can say is what a f**king mess this administration has made of things…I’d also like to thank Mr Woodward for giving the facts behind the charade…It should be compulsory for every American to read this before voting in November.
October 8th, 2006 at 2:46 pm#8 No need to read the book we’re forced to live this fiction the White House calls the War on Terror everyday.
October 8th, 2006 at 2:54 pmvery interesting comments on this over at crooks and liars…
a different take… “it’s a metaphor”…
is woodword a hero yet? … can we ever forgive him? … should we?
October 8th, 2006 at 3:08 pm.
OT sorry
October 8th, 2006 at 3:18 pmbut the Navy lawyer who won the case against the White House in the Hamden ruling was passed over for promotion, and therefore must leave the navy. The navy has a rule - move up or move out.
Lt. Cmdr. Swift will be just fine, I believe, but this is what happens when you cross Bush&Co.
woodward’s trying hard to rehabilitate himself… maybe even the wapo is getting a clue… i dunno… i sure hope so… this op-ed certainly doesn’t fall into the category of sucking-up…
honor…? integrity…? LOLOLOLOL… you GOTTA be kidding…! no friggin’ way… i defy anyone to name a time this white house has been concerned with honor and integrity…
And, yes, I DO take it personally
October 8th, 2006 at 3:19 pmThat was with Woodward, with any other citizen Dickhead merely orders the Secret Service to detain the person, have them arrested, and charged with anything to intimdate and repudiate the criticism… Woodward is lucky he is on the accepted side of that line
October 8th, 2006 at 3:24 pmCome on. Liberals are open-minded enough to welcome back an old friend. It’s still okay to disagree occassionally; isn’t it?
October 8th, 2006 at 3:26 pmanother interesting woodword tidbit, via c&l comments:
Did Carville Tip Bush Off to Kerry Strategy (Woodward)
October 8th, 2006 at 3:33 pmBy M.J. Rosenberg | bio
I just came across a troubling incident that Bob Woodward reports in his new book. Very troubling.
…
http://www.tpmcafe.com/ blog/ coffeehouse/ 2006/ oct/ 07/ did_carville_tip_bush_off_to_kerry_strategy_woodward
.
The metaphor here is also secrecy. Cheney wanted to keep his and Bush’s meetings with Kissinger secret.
However, clearly the public has a right to know about relevant information. Bush and Cheney want to *rule*, not serve in government.
That’s not how America is supposed to work. The government should work for the people, not the other way around.
October 8th, 2006 at 3:56 pmWoodward is a very credible presence in person. He had all the notes, ready at hand, to bury every line the Administration is spewing. Russert looked like he he had no choice but to give up at the end.
October 8th, 2006 at 4:00 pmWoodward also has this sort of naive quality of doggedness, which, of course, we know has been an utter fiction in his two previous books. However, its very persuasive on camera.
October 8th, 2006 at 4:01 pmThe party of morality, cursing out reporters, cursing out Senators, calling people the “N” word or macawca. Morality my f*^$ing ass.
October 8th, 2006 at 4:19 pmWhen Bob doesn’t show up for work on Monday, we’ll all know dick had him renditioned.
October 8th, 2006 at 4:31 pmBwahahhahaaa!
To disagree is one thing, but to lie with intent, to your very own country and people, as Bush/Cheney cabaal has done, that is unforgivable, and Satan will have them as his personal mistresses soon.
October 8th, 2006 at 4:33 pmI will be so glad when all these cold war warriors, and empire builders are finally gone and we won’t have all this insane propaganda to mush thru.
October 8th, 2006 at 4:35 pmIt’s not good for imperial PNAC people to have an informed public…therefore the outrage.
October 8th, 2006 at 4:47 pmWell, that was in character for the VP…
October 8th, 2006 at 4:50 pmBob has apparently been undercover in the Cocktail weenie crowd.
Welcome back Bob.
I’ll take the truth from wherever I can find it.
October 8th, 2006 at 5:12 pmEnough with the Woodward bashing.
When the sorry history of this era is written, Bob Woodward’s personal meanderings as a journalist will merit a footnote - a significant footnote, but nothing more. The real story is the one Woodward is telling, and I don’t care how he got it, just that it keeps spewing out. As with John Diulio, Ron Suskind (& Paul O’Neill), Sy Hersh and others, every time some of the noxious gases that typify the Cheney Administration escape their hermetically sealed container and are sniffed, the country wins. Keep it comin’, Bob…
October 8th, 2006 at 5:14 pmCuss and Run Republican
October 8th, 2006 at 5:15 pmMy, my. Russert wasn’t able to do his usual job and cover Cheney’s ass this time.
You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
October 8th, 2006 at 5:48 pmLooks like Woodward’s first two books were to ‘SELL BOOKS’….now-
October 8th, 2006 at 6:31 pm‘jump to the left’ and ‘SELL MORE BOOKS’….altho I glad he exposing the bush gang tradiors for what they are.
“Looks like Woodward’s first two books were to ‘SELL BOOKS’….now-
‘jump to the left’ and ‘SELL MORE BOOKS’….altho I glad he exposing the bush gang tradiors for what they are.”
Woodward certainly wants to sell books but the way he goes about it is, well, pretty amazing. Yes, the books were fluff piece for the Bush administration. At the same time Woodward was able to get many on the record interviews with lots of top officials (plus have the books practically endorsed by the white house). If Woodward is believed by, say, generals to be ‘in’ with the Bush camp then they might be more open to speaking with him on the record. The same goes for all of the repub hacks.
All those interviews lead to the damning quotes. Woodward doesn’t have the sources he used to in the sense that he can’t make Bush implode but he is sort of ‘tactical’ in his ‘reporting’/writing which is great.
The sad part is that he’s basically done in Washington unless he can get a great inside source/sources. He’s definately persona non grata as viewed by the repubs.
Bashing Woodward for the past books is pretty much pointless. Their effect was ZERO on the electorate. No one reads fluff pieces like that except people who are bush lovers. There’s a reason this is number 1s on amazon and already into it’s 3rd printing (900,000 copies total for the 3 printings I believe).
The guy is probably a moderate leaning left but is perfectly capable of sucking up to some nasty people. That’s what politicians do and it is certainly what ‘good’ reporters do who want access with politicians.
October 8th, 2006 at 6:39 pmIf this is true, I find it outrageous and hypocritical. A Colorado man says to Cheney’s face that the policies in Iraq are “reprehensible” and gets arrested on assault charges. But Cheney now goes and curses out a man for doing his job. Hand me a pail please; I think I am going to hurl.
October 8th, 2006 at 6:57 pmJames - exactly. That’s also why Sy Hersh always seems so reasonable while describing his findings: it’s not that he doesn’t have strong opinions about them (made clear by the subtext), but that, in order to do any useful work, he needs to maintain his reputation as a reasonably unbiased reporter who can be counted on to paint an accurate picture of the information provided by sources. Otherwise, nobody talks to him, and there’s no story.
Whole different world when you’re actually doing journalism, rather than fantasizing about it.
October 8th, 2006 at 6:59 pmThat story about Halliburton acquiring the asbestos liabilities of Dresser Industries raises an interesting point…
Cheney KNEW that Dresser had the most massive liability issue on planet earth (he had to have known) yet decided to pay good money to bring Dresser’s problems under Halliburton’s tent.
This raises the question…who were the largest shareholders of Dresser - in need of a lifeboat to save their own personal bacon? Anyone named Bush? Anyone named Carlyle?
The deal went like this:
Cheney agrees for Halliburton to take on the Dresser asbestos liability.
It is determined that Bush and Cheney will be (s)elected, and that the PNAC plan will be implemented - using 9/11 as the essential pretext.
Ken Lay plays his role using his Enron smoke and mirrors tactics to create a faux energy crisis in California, causing the public to demand an energy-savvy administration be elected.
With the asbestos liability and other matters hanging in the balance, the election of 2000 simply had to be rigged in order for the plan to go in to effect.
Following the appointment of Bush and Cheney, the secret energy planning meeting established which oil companies would reap the rewards of the pending invasion of Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran.
The timing and the pretext were predetermined, and 9/11 was greenlighted for 9/11/2001. Cheney outsourced the implementation to Mossad, and ran the show from his bunker on D Day under the cover of preplanned drills simulating the exact attack that was proscribed, with NORAD as coconspirator. At least 50 administration officials and countless foreign agents were in on it.
Once the entire charade was concluded, the Administration generally, and Cheney specifically, had every reason in the world to blame Iraq.
The Afghanistan mission could not provide Halliburton with enough revenue to offset the massive asbestos liability claim. Iraq and Iran are essential wars in order to provide cover for the infusion of the billion of TAX DOLLARS necessary to both profit Halliburton for its actual work AND cover the massive asbestos liability claims.
Now you know why Halliburton was awarded the contracts without the need to bid for them. This was all prearranged.
NOTE: Private enterprise pushed its legal/financial obligations onto tax payers using war as the excuse.
The asbestos liability claims of Dresser Industries were ultimately paid by you and me, and our troops in the field, all to ensure that the investors in Dresser didn’t take the multibillion dollar loss.
Just one piece of a very large chessboard.
Hang them for TREASON.
October 8th, 2006 at 7:07 pmWoody should know the vp. Was her shocked? I can’t believe so.
October 8th, 2006 at 7:50 pmThe Penguin is angry my friends…stocks are falling, waaaaaaaaaa! how will he defend Halliburton shares? Waaaaaaaaaaaa! Where are the next government contracts coming from for this ‘private’ enteprise ‘entrepeneur’? Government contracts that he and his goold ol boys have exclusively fueled their business from from Day 1 of their ‘business career! (That’s tax payers money folks!) WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!……………Waaaaaaaaaaaaaa? Waaaaares Richard Perle when you need him????? Under investigation? WAAAAAA!
Tune in next week and find out…same moonbat time, same moonbat channel!
http://www.defworld.blogspot.com
I’m a goddam Moonbat and I’m goddam proud.
October 8th, 2006 at 8:55 pmPs dont feed the trolls.
Such a classy man that Richard Cheney… (sacrcasm off)
“Dick” is an appropriate name for him.
October 8th, 2006 at 9:24 pmWhole different world when you’re actually doing journalism, rather than fantasizing about it.
Comment by cynic — October 8, 2006 @ 6:59 pm
Touche’
October 8th, 2006 at 9:25 pmCheney is very angry weird person and Woodward would be wise to never go hunting with Dick since he might get shot in the face > lol.
October 8th, 2006 at 9:26 pmJUST one more reason to vote these idiots OUT on Nov. 7. THis crap has gone on about 5 years too long already.
October 8th, 2006 at 9:34 pmmore cheney…
Be Afraid…Be Very Afraid
By: Nicole Belle @ 12:11 PM - PDT
It’s election time, so you know it’s time to pull the fear card.
WaPo:
Vice President Cheney sometimes starts speeches with a Ronald Reagan quotation about a “happy” nation needing “hope and faith.” But not much happy talk follows. Not a lot of hope, either. He does, though, talk about the prospect of “mass death in the United States.”
…
http://www.crooksandliars.com/ 2006/ 10/ 08/ be-afraidbe-very-afraid/
i’ll be so glad when elections are publicly financed…
October 8th, 2006 at 10:20 pmso much money… put to no good… so much evil…
“Dick” Cheney is a potty mouth? I’m shocked!
I wouldn’t let him go “hunting” for a while…
October 8th, 2006 at 10:34 pmMaybe instead of the bull____ word he told Woodward about the magic “other priorities” that lead to the Vietnam ear deferments…
October 8th, 2006 at 10:43 pmWoodward just better hope Dick isn’t sitting at home cleaning out his shotgun right now.
October 8th, 2006 at 10:54 pmWow…I am gone for the weekend and yet Barfly is still obsessed with me…. So, barfly, what’s up this time, Chachi?
October 8th, 2006 at 11:27 pm[…] Link […]
October 8th, 2006 at 11:40 pm-the thing is, I’m thinking Bob Woodward got it close, yet didn’t get it exactly right… From his view, it looks like a State of Denial. However, from another view… this isn’t a State of Denial- they (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the rest) know EXACTLY what they are doing. Small, incremental steps, chewing away the Constitution, building power. Move slowly enough, incite fear, confuse, misdirect, and the public and Congress won’t notice, won’t complain, won’t impeach. For those in the inner circle of this mess, it isn’t even about money- it’s about POWER. So… when Cheney calls to say it’s BS, it does sound like he’s unmasked briefly albeit bluntly and in a most revealing manner. There’s no denial going on. They know EXACTLY what they are doing.
Listen to Rumsfeld of late and see how his new military doctrine echoes the strident, fascist leanings of the Depression - “during the 1930s, democracy … discredited even by subtle minds as a hopelessly cumbersome way to meet the challenges of the modern age”
When you get a chance, read FDR’s “Defining Moment” -and the speech he DIDN’T read to the Nation in 1933. See how close we came then. See how far we’re being taken now. http://www.npr.org/ templates/ story/ story.php?storyId=5525748
October 8th, 2006 at 11:47 pmheh heh heh - exley thinks he’s the dennis miller…..gutsy career move there, babe.
…just when you thought we’d never be able to get another “poor man’s p.j. o’rourke…
October 9th, 2006 at 12:04 amCheney is obsessed with oil. That is the reason he is so crude.
October 9th, 2006 at 12:46 amWow…I am gone for the weekend and yet Barfly is still obsessed with me…. So, barfly, what’s up this time, Chachi?
Comment by Exley
No offense 0-6, but you’re a cowardly cretin that runs away when confronted with the truth. Shouldn’t everyone know that before wasting keystokes replying to your ill-thought idiocy? I’m providing a public service for the readers of TP.
You’ve been punked on this site so many times, the only reason possible for your continued presence is masochism. Do you really crave being made a fool of on a daily basis? I only point to you like I would a circus oddity - it’s you that mistakes it for something else. Wishful thinking on your part, I guess.
October 9th, 2006 at 1:56 amHey Barfly,
Still obsessed, I see. What’s on your mind, sport?
October 9th, 2006 at 2:14 amHmmmm….I guess, barfly has retreated…again. What a shock!
October 9th, 2006 at 2:34 amReading comprehension isn’t your strong suit, eh, 0-6? I have run your pathetic arguments through the wringer before - wanna try again? I mentioned you,because your type of “debate” is just like the other republicans - you run away when confronted with facts that don’t comport with you view of reality.
Deny again that I beat you last time we tangled, 0-6, I need a good laugh!
October 9th, 2006 at 2:38 amHmmmm….I guess, barfly has retreated…again. What a shock!
Comment by Exley
I’m here, little one.
October 9th, 2006 at 2:39 amExley, do you agree that Reagan is responsible for the current mess in Iraq? And how do you rationalize selling weapons to the very terrorists who kidnapped americans?
October 9th, 2006 at 2:44 amHeh! Are you referring to the time when you mistakenly asserted that the rule of the Shah of Iran and Pol Pot in Cambodia coincided with the reign of Saddam Hussein????
Well, let’s put aside that embarassing lack of knowledge you previously displayed…I am sure you have learned your lesson, sparky. Let’s move on to whatever is on your mind…You mentioned me waaaaay back in posting #2. So, obviously I am on your mind. What is it?
October 9th, 2006 at 2:46 amExley said: “Saddam was a unique dictator, covering the last thirty years. But he can’t count; thirty years encompasses both Pol Pot and the Shah of iran, who were every bit as brutal as Saddam. Anyone with the brains to google knows who’s right and who’s blowing smoke.
October 9th, 2006 at 2:54 am#54, THAT’S what you wanted to talk to me about? The Iran-Contra affair from 20 years ago? Oooookay. No, I do not believe Ronald Reagan, who left office in 1989, is responsible for the current mess in Iraq. The people responsible for the current mess in Iraq are the indigenous and foreign terrorists who are killing innocent Iraqis and U.S. troops there on almost a daily basis, preventing the Iraqi people from building a democratic and tolerant society after the U.S.-led liberation of that nation.
As for Reagan trading arms-for-hostages, a terrible mistake for which he was rightly criticized, but one which has had no real substantial and long-term impact in the Middle East and beyond.
October 9th, 2006 at 2:54 amExley believes history began after ‘92. Everything before is irrelevant.
October 9th, 2006 at 2:55 amAs for Reagan trading arms-for-hostages, a terrible mistake for which he was rightly criticized, but one which has had no real substantial and long-term impact in the Middle East and beyond.
Comment by Exley
Witness the two-faced Exley: he previously claimed that Reagan’s terrorists dealings were “real politic” - meaning Exley thought it was necessary to arm the same terrorists that held americans hostage.
October 9th, 2006 at 2:58 amYour baffling posting#58 aside, barfly, perhaps you would like to explain why you think Ronald Reagan is responsible for the current problems in Iraq.
October 9th, 2006 at 3:00 amAs for Reagan trading arms-for-hostages, a terrible mistake for which he was rightly criticized, but one which has had no real substantial and long-term impact in the Middle East and beyond.
Comment by Exley
Except Exley omits that Reagan armed both sides of the Iran/Iraq war, and so is responsible for the deaths on both sides. Notice he doesn’t try to refute this, as it is truth. Next, watch him run away again, as he always does.
October 9th, 2006 at 3:02 amYour baffling posting#58 aside, barfly, perhaps you would like to explain why you think Ronald Reagan is responsible for the current problems in Iraq.
Comment by Exley
Notice if you will, Exley appears confused by the fact that his party enabled terrorists (Iran), while arming dictators like Saddam (Iraq), and can’t seem to fathom how Reagan is responsible for the current Middle-East maelstrom.
October 9th, 2006 at 3:07 amBarfly, You okay? You are making even less sense than usual (And THAT is saying something?)…Why would I deny the Iran-Contra Affair? It is a well-documented historical event? What I (and I imagine who else might be reading this) do not understand is what point you are trying to make. Please proceed to explain yourself. I’ll wait.
October 9th, 2006 at 3:08 amBarfly seems to be under the rather bizarre misapprehension that the Middle East was a paragon of peace and stability before the administration of Ronald Reagan.
October 9th, 2006 at 3:10 amAs can been seen, Exley is willfully ignorant of the fact that the current Iraq quagmire can be laid at the feet of republicans, and Reagan in particular.
Who used the Iraqi dead as an excuse to invade? Who is responsible for those deaths (keeping in mind that those who enable murder are also culpable)? Exley’s willful ignorance of history is truly a sight to behold.
October 9th, 2006 at 3:17 amWhy would I deny the Iran-Contra Affair? It is a well-documented historical event?
Comment by Exley — October 9, 2006 @ 3:08
Except that you are on record as supporting it.
October 9th, 2006 at 3:19 amBarfly has still yet to explain how the Iran-Contra Affair and the Iran-Iraq War, which began in 1980 (before Ronald Reagan was president) is responsible for the current situation in Iraq.
Actually, a more powerful argument could be made that our current troubles with radical Islamic fundamentalism can more directly be traced to Jimmy Carter’s feckless and ineffective handling on the Iranian Hostage Crisis.
October 9th, 2006 at 3:22 am#66….Actually, that is false. You cannot provide any citation or posting that shows I supported the trading of arms for hostages by the Reagan Administration. Your description of my explanation of Reagan’s “realpolitik” Middle East/ Persian Gulf policies is inaccurate. I would be more than happy to explain it to you again.
By the way, Barfly, whatever happened to the “Chronicles of Exley” that you promised about 10 days ago. We’ve been looking forward to it, but you don’t appear to have followed through.
October 9th, 2006 at 3:28 amBy the way, Barfly, whatever happened to the “Chronicles of Exley†that you promised about 10 days ago. We’ve been looking forward to it, but you don’t appear to have followed through.
Comment by Exley
Narcissism, thy name is Exley.
I would love to chump you all night long - but I have commitments tommorrow.
I have the dope. I’ll give you a taste tomorrow.
By the way, it now called “the Exley Files” - I couldn’t resist.
Prepare yourself.
October 9th, 2006 at 3:38 am“The Exley Files.”
Clever. Well, the truth IS out there.
“I have commitments tommorrow.”
Agreed. It is late. Until tomorrow. I am sure we’ll meet again.
October 9th, 2006 at 3:42 amYou guys are fu**ing losers.
October 9th, 2006 at 3:43 am#70
Just because we are awake at 3:46 in the morning talking about the U.S./ Iran-Iraq policy of the 1980s? That makes us “losers?????”
Actually….you’re probably right.
October 9th, 2006 at 3:46 am[…] Think Progress » Woodward: Cheney Cursed At Me About ‘State of Denial,’ Then Hung Up The Phone Today on Meet the Press, Bob Woodward described how Vice President Dick Cheney called him 10 days ago about Woodward’s new book State of Denial. Woodward says Cheney cursed at him (â€he said what I was saying was bull-somethingâ€) and then hung up the (tags: video DickCheney HenryKissinger bullshit BS BobWoodward TimRussert denial politics news media funny scary MeetThePress) […]
October 9th, 2006 at 8:22 am[…] Bob Woodward describes to Tim Russert on Meet the Press how Vice President Dick Cheney called him about his new book State of Denial, cursed at him, and then hung up the phone.Woodward calls Cheney’s behavior a “metaphor for what’s going on. Hang up when somebody has a different point of view or information you don’t want to deal with.†Watch the video.–Think Progress […]
October 9th, 2006 at 8:31 amWe’d like to think that Woodward is just calling it like he sees it, but the truth is that he’s as much protecting his own legacy as his is calling out the Bush Administration.
The author of “Bush at War” would like to be remembered for something other than his support for this quagmire when the rest of the world was protesting in the streets.
Better late than never, I suppose.
October 9th, 2006 at 8:39 amI hope L’iL Dick’s hanging…(politically and personally speaking:)
…is well publicized…
…pay-per-view…
October 9th, 2006 at 9:29 amOne of those whining Democrats. Don’t worry, they come in Republican ftoo. This guy is one of those babies who is with the democrat party, who finds ANY small thing he can to whine about. You ALL know who you are and you’re about to do it to me…
October 9th, 2006 at 11:18 amjust when i was learning to hate woodward
he gets the kiss of death from lucifer’s helper….hallichainy
sweet redemption, eh?
October 9th, 2006 at 12:13 pmWoodward: Cheney Swore, Hung Up Phone Over “Denial” Book…
“It’s a metaphor for what’s going on [in the Bush Administration]. Hang up when somebody has a different point of view or information you don’t want to deal with.”…
October 9th, 2006 at 12:28 pmGeorge Bush is a liar.
October 9th, 2006 at 3:00 pmDick Cheney is a liar.
Donald Rumsfeld is a liar.
Condoleeza Rice is a liar.
Obviously, this doesn’t surprise me a bit. This person is a fascist par excellence. He lies, steals, cheats, bullies, and unfortunately gets away with it regularly because, and I quote him:” I don’t have to run for office again so I feel free.”
October 9th, 2006 at 3:23 pmI cannot beleive my eyes. The first comment I saw on here was, “Bob should thank his lucky stars that Cheney hasn’t shot him in the face yet.”
October 9th, 2006 at 3:29 pmIs this the American way? I am, and you should be afraid for your children. Sick people like this are turnning America into a living hell where they welcome comments like this. He is all but saying that Cheney should murder Woodward and that would be justified. In America? That sounds like any holocaust horror story. Wake up America, they have you begging for mass murder. I am a patriotic American and I was always reminded in school that the reason this counry is so great and unique is that we can say whatever we want whenever we want. I hate terrorism, not Muslims. America blew up Bagdad, not Muslims. And Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 so don’t even bring it up. President Bush himself has admitted that Saddam did not help Al Qaeda. Wake up fellow patriotic Americans.
#33 You’ll get complete answers from “American Dynasty” By Kevin Phillips. A great insight into the Bush family bussiness.
October 9th, 2006 at 4:08 pmIs anyone really surprised by this or is it the fact that this is how the men on the hill operate is being publically acknowledged.
Those head honchos on the hill have been hanging up on us for years.
October 9th, 2006 at 4:53 pmNice to see the V-P is “staying the course” on his behavior as well. Don’t like or agree with something someone says? Let the expletives fly.
Very vice-presidential and very Christian Value oriented behavior that.
Personally I hope tons of the people we have in DC, Dems and Republicans alike, are gone after November 7th. We need some new blood in there to remind ourselves about what America is really like. Hating our neighbors because they disagree with us is not part of the American fabric. Trying to get along and do the best for both parties is what I grew up with. Personally I have no respect for the level of partisanship we witness now in our Congress.
It starts at the top and Bush and Cheney act like spoiled brats who always get their way. When they don’t… look out!
October 9th, 2006 at 6:36 pmI read the book state of denial and it is the most boring, poorly written book i have ever read. It’s a real sleeping pill. The author poorly illustrates his point if at all and its really just a bunch of supposed dialogue between big shots in the U.S govt that nobody gives a damn about. I was really lookin forward to this book hoping it would give me some new ammo in my anti bush arsenal, sadly this book was so poorly written i almost finished the book liking bush a little bit more… I did say “almost.” All this hype over this book is nothing more than that, hype. All aimed at seling a product.
October 9th, 2006 at 9:45 pmI want my money back Bob Woodward. Write better Bush bashing literature please i could do much better my own self.
October 9th, 2006 at 9:48 pm“we can not wait for the smoking gun to come in the form of a mushroom cloud” thats right i did say that right after i turned a blind eye to the huge database of intelligence that indicated that there was no solid proof of any wmd.
October 9th, 2006 at 10:09 pm[…] Think Progress » Woodward: Cheney Cursed At Me About ‘State of Denial,’ Then Hung Up The Phone (tags: Articles media news politics scary video usa america republican cheney immoral) […]
October 10th, 2006 at 3:31 am# 68
October 10th, 2006 at 4:35 amHow about you look up “operation ajax”?
#82 - “George Bush is a liar.
Dick Cheney is a liar.
Donald Rumsfeld is a liar.
Condoleeza Rice is a liar.” Comment by Dan
***********WOW!! Talk about PROFOUND!! Dan, allow me to congratulate you - you have regurgitated the ideological rhetoric of the Prog Movement, Hugo Chavez, Ahmedinejead, Kim Jong Il, Osama bin Laden, Fidel Castro, the Democrat Party, Progressive Dems of America, the Congressional Black Caucus, the World Socialist Party, Indy Media, Democracy NOW! Radio, Pacifica Radio, Air America (are they still broadcasting?), etc., etc. in FOUR easy-to-read sentences!!!! QUITE an achievement to pack all that original info into such concise form!!
Now go back to your Dr. Seuss, “One fish. Two fish. Red fish. Blue fish.”
October 10th, 2006 at 11:34 amand “Green Eggs and Ham” should really strike your funny bone…..
Watch out, tricky Dick–too much anger is bad for the old ticker. Then again, like his whole “patriotic American” shtick, it’s just an act, anyway.
October 10th, 2006 at 12:22 pmI think Exley, and some of the others, forgot about one important part of the equation in the Iran-Iraq policy of the Reagan admin: the Contra part. In Nicaragua, HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of people died as a direct result of the Reagan policies. So you see, Exley, it did have a long-lasting impact on many, many people.
October 24th, 2006 at 6:20 amJessie
Such a fun and informative blog! Please visit my site when you can.
March 28th, 2008 at 8:35 amGregory
I declare war on thee.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:27 amCock Dog Dick In Pussy Sucking Dick
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 10th, 2008 at 4:28 pmJessie
Great post, very informative. Have learned a lot from your site.
April 11th, 2008 at 12:21 amcrave records
Didn’t realise there was this type of information out there
April 11th, 2008 at 10:28 am