Yeah, the totalitarian side of Cheney was rather transparent to those who have eyes.
Printable View
And after Obama was inaugurated, he reiterated yet again on Fox that he had moles in the CIA, keeping him informed.
This guy is a threat to national security and needs to be silenced. :cool:
That's Moles.
I know. I spelled it that way in deference to the other poster. I'ts been corrected.:rolleyes:
Now for some real fun from today's NYT and the on point Maureen Dowd:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/14/op..._r=1&th&emc=th
Superb take on the emerging cabal of freaky family values from the spawn of Dick.
He is dangerous because he has contacts in the CIA? No, liberals aren't at all paranoid.
He is dangerous because he continues to attempt to influence public policy through his moles in the CIA.
And it isn't paranoia if he really is out to get us.
Very true, but I have a hard time believing he's got many "moles" of any consequence at the CIA.
I understand his legal right to see daily briefings from the CIA post-presidency has been hampered by Obama's CIA- they have been accused of feeding Cheney sanitized reports just to shut him up.
Yep...that is quite paranoid. Who is the head of the CIA? Appointed by whom? Of what political party affiliation?
Does it matter? I'm sure the party affiliation of his "moles" is not of consequence; the fact that he still apparently has "buddies" on the inside that feed him info is of consequence.
Feed him what? Information? Legally? All above board, otherwise he wouldn't have made it known that he had friends acting this way inside the agency
Cheney is rather like the Geico lizard- one is a cold blooded reptile, the other is the Geico lizard. :eek:
I'll have to remember that one for the next time my kids are hanging out at the swings at recess...it is sure to impress their friends.
Yes...3 gifts of immeasurable value and I spend all of my [[and their) spare time with them as the best possible experience a person can have...as it should be.
Reverse that and you are closer to correct.
Or maybe they are home schooled.
Home schooled kids happen to be the group of kids that perform highest in all measurable aspects.
Kids hanging out at a schoolyard is creepy?
No, you hanging out at the school yard is creepy.
And since there's a schoolyard involved, guess there's no home schooling going on.
Tests administered by a parent are objective? Doesn't this fly in the face of objectivist thinking?
How does this prepare kids to deal with the real world? No, or little interaction with other kids during the course of a school year is a good thing?
Sounds more like an isolation tank, or worse, indoctrination camp, especially for the religious zealots who engage in this sort of behavior as a routine.