Cheney on the way out?

by teejay 21 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  teejay

  Cheney's job at risk
  By David Wastell

  Concern is growing among White House officials that Dick Cheney, George W Bush's most trusted adviser, has become a liability in efforts to distance the administration from the corporate scandals panicking the stock market.

  As the Dow Jones index slumped to its lowest level since October 1998, falling almost five per cent on Friday alone, officials privately admitted that investigations into the American vice-president's past business dealings have turned him into a political problem.

  The Securities and Exchange Commission, America's financial watchdog, is investigating Mr Cheney's previous role running the beleaguered Halliburton oilfield services company.

  Last week's stock market plunges gave rise to unprecedented speculation among Republicans that Mr Cheney, seen until recently as the steadying hand on the tiller, may have to be sacrificed as Mr Bush's running mate for the 2004 election.

  A Republican congressional official said:"Any of those would have at least one big advantage over Cheney. They have not made personal fortunes in big business. In the last election it seemed to be an advantage that both names on the ticket had track records in business. Next time, unless something changes, it will be a liability."

  Mr Cheney is being investigated over allegedly questionable accounting methods employed while he was Halliburton's chief executive.

  Eyebrows have also been raised by the revelation that he made $18.5 million (11.8 million) profit from his sale of company stock in August 2000, two months before the share price began to fall.

  Halliburton shares have been propelled downward to a quarter of their peak value amid warnings of shrinking profits and the announcement of the SEC investigation.

  Last week, Mr Bush was forced to confront the subject in public. Asked at a press conference if he was confident that the SEC would not find any evidence of wrong-doing by Mr Cheney while at Halliburton, Mr Bush said, "Yes, I am."

  Mr Cheney is attempting to keep a low profile, but said on Friday that the Bush administration would vigorously pursue corporate wrongdoers.

  "When there are reports of fraud, the American people can be certain that the government will fully investigate them," he said. "We must not and will not allow the deeds of a few to tarnish our free enterprise system."

  ---

  Source
• 

  ozziepost

  Kinda 'deja vu', ain't it?
• 

  Francois

  What's so odd about all this sudden "concern" and public moral preening - especially by top figures in the democrat socialist party, is that there is no more accomplished "cooker of books" than the Congress of the United States. And more precisely, the congress as it was conducted during the forty years of democrat hegemony.

  Where else can an increase in spending be characterized as a "cut"? Only in the congress. What kind of moral depravity is required to accuse your political opponents of "cutting" funds when you know for a fact that the actual appropriation is a large increase?

  And you'd think the public would be more aware that the democrat party trots out that same tired refrain about how the mean old republican party is going to screw up social security and the old folks aren't going to get their benefits. I mean they do it every election cycle and the mean old republicans haven't done it yet...after forty years of warnings by the democrat party. Why is the use of fear in politics any more moral than the use of fear in religion - like the fear fanned frantically by the JWs all the time? Why can't these bastards tell the truth? the politicans or the JWs?

  And I noticed that the day after Gephardt acquitted himself of yet another session of his peculiar brand of public moral preening, intoning about Bush and his loan from whatever company it was, it was revealed that he, Gephardt, had asked for and accepted a loan just like it of his own. I haven't heard Gephardt utter another word about it. The man has hypocrisy down to a fine art, superceded only by Daschle, the most dangerous socialist in democrat clothing in the Senate.

  I think sometimes we'd be better off throwing all the bastards out, from the dog catcher in Two Gun, Arizona all the way to the President and including the Supreme Court entire, and starting over. And doing away with national politics as a profession: two terms in the senate and you're out; four in the house and you're history. They've given themselves such cover as encumbents it's getting to the point their advantages are so great no challenger has a rat's chance.

  My $1.98.

  francois

  Edited by - Francois on 21 July 2002 10:32:11
• 

  DakotaRed

  Francois, well said. To me, the downfall was when they grouped together in Political Parties. Instead of the good of the nation being foremost, the good of the party agenda took over. Each party has it's own special interest group they pander to and derive their power from. In the middle, is John Q. Public, footing the bill for the whole thing.

  In 1988, all the Democrats could do was ridcule Dan Quayle for having only served in the National Guard during Vietnam. Yet, in 1992, they remained totally silent about Bill Clinton's active role in burning the flag and avoiding the draft.

  Again, in 2000, they decry Bush as just another National Guard pilot and lauded Gore as a Vietnam Veteran. Never mind that Gore was only there for about 5 months, as a news reporter for Starts and Stripes.

  I honestly don't believe that any member of Congress is clean. Before becoming a JW, I registered Independent, desiring to vote for the best person. The outcome has left me disillusioned about our process. One little known fact out of Congress, until 1994, when the Republicans took control of the House and Senate, Congress had exempted themselves from the very laws they passed upon us.

  But, where else can to set and vote in your own pay raise each year while those that pay your salary slave away to pay you? When I hear thses things come out of their mouths I can only think of the pot calling the kettle black.

  Lew W
• 

  JT

  one poster view is as follows:

  "I think sometimes we'd be better off throwing all the bastards out, from the dog catcher in Two Gun, Arizona all the way to the President and including the Supreme Court entire, and starting over. And doing away with national politics as a profession: two terms in the senate and you're out; four in the house and you're history. They've given themselves such cover as encumbents it's getting to the point their advantages are so great no challenger has a rat's chance."

  ############

  This is why we need God's Kingdom Dan 2:44, Jehovah has given man plenty of time to try and test various parties to show clearly that mankind can not solve his problems only to leave persons like the poster frustrated and not knowing where to go, yet there is somewhere to turn to God's Kingdom.

  This is what jw have been trying to tell you for all these years, it is good to see that you are willing to admit mankinds utter failure, so look to the Kingdom for man's solution not just a bandage on a whole sore.

  I will see you at the Hall at 10AM for the Public talk folowed by the consideration of the WT.

  se you

  James

  Yes they were the days when we had an answer for everything
• 

  Francois

  JT - You take up valuable space and you don't add a damn thing to the conversation. Man's wisdom is being allowed to evolve, just like he evolved from the primeval swamps. You are looking down the wrong end of the telescope. And you can rest assured there is no power on earth or in heaven that would get me to set one foot in a Kingdom Hall ever again. If - in the impossible chance that JWs have got it right - then I'd rather be dead that ever waste even one second of a precious life persuing the favor of a God like that murdering bastard Jehovah you people preach.

  Dakota Red - How right you are. Double standards all the way 'round. The democrat socialist party thought that Leiberman's religiosity was the best thing since sliced bread. But Bush's commitment to his religious faith was laughable on the one hand and dangerous on the other. And the dems took BOTH these opposing positions in the SAME fuckin' election. WHAT BALLS!

  I couldn't face myself in the mirror each morning if I engaged in that depth of moral depravity. I'm just like Ronald Regan; I didn't leave the democrat party, the democrat partly left me. And they left me when they made the so-called ideals of Marx and Lenin their gods. There will be an attempt at the armed takeover of this country by the left, because the "RED" part of the American map just isn't going to stand for this socialist bullshit, and people like you and I will be sought out and attempts will be made to throw us alive into blast furnaces like the socialists did after WW II. What a bloody massacre they made of eastern Europe. If they come after me, they'd better damn well be armed. I am and I don't intend to go quietly into that good night.

  francois
• 

  teejay

  Damn, Frank!!!

  I guess you haven't met JT. Allow me to introduce you...

  JT,

  That was funny and unexpected! You cracked me up.

  I just think it's awful funny, is all. The god-save-America Republican were supposedly to bring a return to family values and here, again, it's seen that they are as corrupt -- if not more so -- as the Democrats they replaced in the White House.

  Even then, they *still* claim to hold the high moral ground. And many *still* believe them.
• 

  DakotaRed

  Francois, I was raised in a Democrat family in the South. I too biught ito the garbage that the Republicans were only for the rich. Somewhere back in the 60's, I started seeing that the Democrats were going more and more to Socialism. Believe it or not, I actually liked Nixon, but thought his covering up of Watergate was to be his downfall. But, why shouldn't I like him, me and many others were read a letter of appreciation supposedly signed by him upon our return from Vietnam. THen, we got our "free steak dinner." In an Army mess hall, no less.

  If they all spent more time looking out for the good of all the people and less digging for dirt on each other, tough, maybe the country would be a lot better off.

  The next election, I believe we will see Hillary Clinton running. I just hope more of the voting public searches for what she really stands for instead of believing in accepting what is really said.

  Back in the early 60s, I remember Nikita Kruschev spouting off about how the Soviet Unin would bury America. Many didn't realize that he was not talking about with guns and military, but by Socialist ideas from within. With the Liberal Socialists holding so much of Congress, I'm afraid they have almost succeeded.

  Lew W
• 

  SYN

  LOL @ JT
• 

  Jesus Christ

  I just think its funny in a sad sort of way that someone gets fewer votes than his competitor from all over the nation gets into the white house because of court rulings involving votes in a state where his brother is governor. After that who does this new president who recieved fewer votes make attorney general? A man who lost his bid for senate to a dead man. What does that say about someone when the people who know them best would rather have someone who isn't even alive represent them in the senate? So, for losing this election to a dead man the president, who has less votes but won because of a disputed election in a state where his brother rules, rewards them with one of the most powerful positions in the country. Not only that but once this loser to a dead man gets into his power and after the worst attack on this country ever he starts calling for laws that strip private individuals of their civil liberties saying the government needs those laws to protect its citizens when the previous laws would have worked just fine had they actually been enforced.

  1984? No, not yet. Just give it some time.