opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Joe Conason
Joe Conason
19 Dec 2014
Ending a Policy That's Failed for 50 Years

Listen carefully to the Republican leaders and presidential hopefuls roaring with outrage over President … Read More.

11 Dec 2014
Crimes Without Punishment

With the release of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence report on the use of torture by the CIA after 9/11,… Read More.

4 Dec 2014
What Voters Don't Know (Yet) About Jeb Bush

Whenever the deep thinkers of the Republican establishment glance at their bulging clown car of presidential … Read More.

Dismal Indeed: Why Dick Cheney Disdains The 'Second-Rate' Obama Team


No doubt President Obama was deeply stung over the weekend to hear Dick Cheney criticize his new national security team. At a Wyoming Republican Party dinner, the former vice president briskly dismissed Obama's choices as "dismal," saying that America needs "good people" rather than the "second-rate" figures selected by the president, particularly Vietnam veteran and long-time U.S. senator Chuck Hagel, nominated by the president as Secretary of Defense.

For sage advice on security policy and personnel, after all, there is no living person whose approval could be more meaningful than Cheney. It is hard to imagine a record as profoundly impressive as that of the Bush-Cheney administration, back when everyone knew that he was really in charge of everything important — especially the war on terrorism, the war in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan.

True, Cheney's intelligence apparatus failed to capture or kill Osama bin Laden after 9/11 — indeed, failed to prevent the 9/11 attacks, despite ample warnings that began with Bill Clinton's farewell message in January 2001 and culminated in a blaring President's Daily Brief from the CIA in August 2001. True, Cheney's defense command allowed bin Laden and Mullah Omar to escape following the invasion of Afghanistan, while American and NATO troops slogged through that deadly conflict without a plausible goal or even an exit strategy. And true, the national security cabinet run by Cheney misled the nation into war against Iraq, on false premises, without adequate preparation or clear objectives, at a cost of many thousands of lives and trillions of dollars. And true, too, the ultimate result was to embarrass the United States repeatedly while increasing the regional power of the mullahs in Iran.

How can Obama presume to compare his own record with all of that?

Obviously Cheney's success cannot be measured by achievement alone.

That wouldn't be fair at all. No, his success resides in the capacity to commit disastrous misconduct and malfeasance in office and still be taken seriously by the serious people in Washington, D.C.

If only the president were sensible enough to appoint figures of the same caliber as Cheney's choices in the Bush years — men such as Donald Rumsfeld, whose capacity to deceive the public remains unequaled a full decade after he first declared utter certainty about the whereabouts of Saddam Hussein's huge, perilous cache of "weapons of mass destruction."

"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat," explained Rummy somewhat inanely. He also assured us that the Iraqi people would warmly welcome U.S. troops, that the war would require a commitment of no more than six months and that we wouldn't need to send an overwhelming force of troops to prevail.

Like his old comrade and boss Cheney, Rumsfeld remained perfectly arrogant and absolutely rigid to the end and beyond, even as all his predictions and promises proved tragically hollow. Even when he came under attack by the neoconservative propaganda apparatus, led by Weekly Standard editor William Kristol, for "glibly passing the buck" for administration failures, Rumsfeld never admitted any fault or responsibility. Leaving office in disgrace, he spent years composing a farrago of falsehoods to be published between hard covers, seeking to justify his reign of error — and topped the bestseller lists following a triumphant tour of television and radio.

Now there was a first-rate Defense Secretary. President Obama, please take note.

To find out more about Joe Conason and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at



5 Comments | Post Comment
It is a weak argument to make irrelevant ad hominum attacks instead of defending your own candidates and positions.

Cheney and Rumsfeld are not currently running for office. If they did fail, it should be a warning to those who support candidates whose records they choose not to defend.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Hyrum Smith
Wed Feb 13, 2013 1:22 PM
It is a weak argument to make irrelevant ad hominum attacks instead of defending your own candidates and positions.
tell it to dick cheney
Comment: #2
Posted by: milhous451
Wed Feb 13, 2013 4:38 PM

I like your use of irony. Jonathan Swift would be proud.

Thank you for an incisive, excellently written article.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Jane
Thu Feb 14, 2013 4:22 AM
Re: Hyrum Smith - No you are wrong, completely wrong. It is NOT a weak argument. It makes clear the utter lack of qualification Cheney has to criticize ANYone.
To let what he says go unchallenged is to lend it a legitimacy it does not have.
Before anyone feels the need to defend a position, someone like cheney has to prove he has a point, and his time as VP shows he has NO point to make.
In such a situation, defending yourself or your position only adds to the mistake of letting his lies go unchallenged.
Conesan did the best thing. His ridicule and sarcasm are the right response against utterly idiotic charges from a man who has NO grounds to make them.
Comment: #4
Posted by: jonathan seer
Thu Feb 14, 2013 1:57 PM
Re: jonathan seer. Absolutely correct and well said!
Re: Hyrum Smith, to validate jonathan seer's comments re Cheney, you may want to read my comment on Michael Barone's column. Or not. Just google the sob for yourself.

Comment: #5
Posted by: morgan
Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:07 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right: comments policy
Joe Conason
Dec. `14
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
30 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31 1 2 3
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Walter Williams
Walter E. WilliamsUpdated 24 Dec 2014
Patrick Buchanan
Pat BuchananUpdated 23 Dec 2014
Dennis Prager
Dennis PragerUpdated 23 Dec 2014

9 Aug 2012 The ‘Missing Evidence' in Romney's Tax Records

24 May 2012 Where's the ‘Beef'? Clinton's Answer to Romney Snark

14 Feb 2008 What's Waiting for Obama