The Vote That "Was Due To Dean" Is A Cheney Fantasy

[MrBenchley]

Blogger holden straightens this lie out...

Cheney: "And with respect to this particular operation, we‘ve seen a situation in which, first, they voted to commit the troops, to send them to war, John Edwards and John Kerry, then they came back and when the question was whether or not you provide them with the resources they needed—body armor, spare parts, ammunition—they voted against it.
I couldn‘t figure out why that happened initially. And then I looked and figured out that what was happening was Howard Dean was making major progress in the Democratic primaries, running away with the primaries based on an anti-war record. So they, in effect, decided they would cast an anti-war vote and they voted against the troops."

You heard it yourself, my friends. Howard Dean and his anit-war message was "running away with the primaries" when the vote on $87 billion in supplemental funds for Chimpy's Iraqi Adventure went before the senate, so Kerry and Edwards voted against it.
That sounds great until you realize that the senate vote to which the vice president refers was held on November 4, 2003 and the first democratic primary of this campaign was held in New Hampshire on January 27, 2004, two-and-a-half months after the senate vote.
Maybe poor old Dick's heart isn't supplying his brain with enough oxygen these days and he meant that Howard Dean was "running away" with the Iowa Caucus just prior to the senate vote. No, wait, the Iowa Caucus was held on January 19, 2004, and John Kerry won that contest, not Howard Dean.

[Wickerman]

1. Thanks for confirming that

I was gonna look thta up because it didn't ring true when he said it(like anything he ever says does). Of course, I haven't seent he high paid pundits mention that yet.

[MrBenchley]

4. Send a letter to your local editor

[displacedtexan]

2. Couldn't stand up to Howard Dean? I didn't see Dean sitting beside Dick..

last night, did I?

What a crock!

[MrBenchley]

6. By the way, the "Senator Gone" crack is ALSO a lie...

CHENEY: "Your hometown newspaper has taken to calling you Senator Gone." (An archive search finds no such reference in The News & Observer.)

http://www.newsobserver.com/politics/story/1705399p-7958298c.html

[Norquist Nemesis]

3. What I don't understand is

why Kerry and Edwards don't come out and highlight clearly that the $87 bill was CHANGED because the Bush Administration threatened to VETO it! How much clearer can it be that the "flip-flop" is an orchestrated FLIM-FLAM. Bush doesn't want his on-the-record stance to make sure and stick it to the American people to pay the tab or he won't fund the support of troops for equipment.

Why don't they bring this up again and again and again? To me, it's not just a clear explanation of their vote, it's a smackdown of this Administration! :mad:

[indie_voter]

5. Me too. Why aren't they doing this? n/t

[terrya]

7. Mr. Benchley, you're the best. I hope you don't mind using your facts...

as a letter to the editor to the Chicago Tribune. These lies of Cheney need to see the light of day.

Terry

[MrBenchley]

9. Please do--but credit the hardworking folks at firstdraft.com

for putting this out...

[NashVegas]

8. Cheney Keeps Bringing Up Dean

And I have to wonder what he's thinking/smoking on this one.

We know last year Rove et al said they wanted to run against Dean. Does this mean they're still trying to, by associating Kerry/Edwards with Dean?

Is he trying to compare Kerry/Edwards to Dean unfavorably and remind Dem voters of our bitter spring squabble?

Personally, I think it's a strategy destined to backfire: I know plenty of moderate Republicans who would have loved the chance to vote for Dean in November.

[ibegurpard]

10. They're trying to exploit the Dean supporter anger with the Party

problem for them is that most of us are focused on our party-changing efforts for the near future. For right now, priority number one is getting these criminals out of office.

[MrBenchley]

11. Amazing, isn't it?

Remember, Cheney had to pretend that he had never claimed Iraq had anything to do with 9/11...and then he wants to bring up Dean opposing the war as if there's something WRONG with that?