Will Bush Drop Cheney?

My first response is ... why?

Hate magnet? Sure. But for heaven's sake, getting rid of Cheney isn't going to change the fact that the Left hates Bush as much as Cheney. And the move would be totally out of character for President Bush.

Now, it would be a nightmare for the Dems as they'd have to think about running against an incumbent VP in 2008. Hmm. Maybe it isn't such a bad idea - one which I doubt will ever happen.

What do you think?

Comments

[COLUMBO]

sounds like left leaning chest thumping...only makes Bush less likely to make changes

[splashtc]

That's ridiculous. Mrs. Cheney is wonderful and his gay daughter is a good role model. They should embrace him. He's a great speaker/debater. He has every right to hate the media-who doesn't. People hate Bush regardless. Bushs' administration has been great for the economy! Give credit where it's most important. If the economy tanks then make changes-the rest is b.s.

[Captain Joe]

Let's see now. Didn't Harry Reid withhold news about his minor stroke for three days recently? Where's the beef?

[sigmund, carl and alfred]

The dems don't really want Cheney dropped.

If that were to happen, the GOP would say, 'now what do you want?' In fact, the president remains poplular and that won't change. There is no sympathetic figure the dems have to offer. Their leadership looks like an SC&A group therapy session.

The dems need to rethink what it is they really wish for.

[tester]

Why bother. I damn near forgot all about Cheney until he blasted that dude. I'll probably forget about him again once his staff takes him back to his bunker. BTW, he sure looks awful pale.

[ViVi]

Keeping Cheney may keep the dems from crying 'Impeach" too loudly and too often. They hate Cheney even more than Bush ,and aren;t likely to want to see him as successor.

Other than that, I dont see any reason at all to drop him--how did the question even come up?

[Bitsey]

Replace Chaney with Bob Dole.

[TC@LeatherPenguin]

Dropping Cheney would be massively dumb. The foaming mouthed Democrat "base" is so wrought up in their Bush Derangement Syndrome, and now Cheneymentia, that they are oblivious to the fact that neither of those two fellows are going to be on the ballot come 2008.

So let them continue their furiously strident and increasingly incoherent assault against the C-in-C and Veep, dragging all the potential '08 Dem candidates further and further to the left to appease the dilletantes jabbering over at Zsa Zsa's HuffingandPuffing Outpost, and lurking under the rocks at joints like Kosickstan and DU....

And watch the GOP gain both House and Senate seats in the fall, when middle of the road Americans observe how whacked out the Democrat party has become.

[Fung gool]

Ah, the Bush Personality Cult. It needs to go the way of Koresh. This Administration has spent more money than all other Presidents combined, even if adjusted for inflation. The best part of The Cult is when someone points this out, they are labelled an Islamofascist Liberal, no matter what their true ideology is. True Conservatives could never join this cult. Perhaps the economy is moving along despite the efforts of Big Oil, et al., but when the debt comes due, buh bye. Hey I could qualify for a million dollar mortgage, but I'd better not buy a home for more than 750k if I don't want that future debt to haunt me. Theodore Roosevelt, that most virile of presidents, insisted that, "To announce that there should be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American people." With that in mind, I say: George W. Bush is no conservative, and his unprincipled abandonment of conservatism under the pressure of events is no statesmanship. William F. Buckley said, "political and economic liberty were indivisible; that government's purpose was protecting those liberties; that the Constitution empowered government to fulfill its proper role while restraining it from the concentration and abuse of power; and that its genius lay in the Tenth Amendment, which makes explicit that the powers not delegated to government are reserved to the states or to the people." Republican state governments are outspending Democrat state governments. "Red states" consume more federal dollars and have higher divorce rates than "blue states". And the reality is that the real deficit spending in the country is in Bush states, where far more is spent there by the federal government than tax revenue is generated.
Here's the irony. So-called "welfare states" like California and New York more than pay their way in the federal system. In fact, the surplus taxes they pay subsidize conservative states like Arizona, Mississippi, Idaho and other states that consistently vote to cut spending that benefits the states paying the taxes, while increasing spending on their own services-- all while not paying their fair share. Despite "aid" after 911, New York state is still getting only 85 cents in spending back for every dollar in taxes it sends to the federal government. And New Jersey, still reeling from the effects of 911 itself, only gets back 62 cents of every dollar it sends. Instead, spending on security and economic recovery in those states is used to subsidize "red states" like Alabama, Oklahoma, South Carolina and other free-loading states that bemoan welfare spending even as they collect their checks each year. Conservative, indeed!

[Conservative who hates Bush]

Wow, Gool, that's so true. George W. Bush claims the mantle of conservative. What is he conserving? Not my tax dollars. Not my liberty. Not the moral standards of my society. The only thing he seems to be conserving – rapidly expanding more like it – is the arbitrary power that the federal government holds over our lives.

[tester]

"George W. Bush is no conservative"

Ain't that the truth.

[shonane]

Good comments Fung goo. And you are correct.

I read once about the California economy and it's relationship to the total US revenue. I don't remember the exact stats, but I do remember it's contribution was enormous and that it did not get back nearly in proportion to the contribution. The discussion that went along with that proposed "what would happened if California broke off and became it's own country." The economic impact was not pretty - especially for some of the red states.

[shonane]

I say leave Cheney in office unless he has criminal charges brought against him, and he may. Not talking about charges re the hunting incident, but some of the other issues under investigation.

I am not pleased with Bush or Cheney, but they are gonna be around for 2 more years so why shift folks right now. Sometimes it is better just to keep someone who at least knows what is going on, rather than put in someone new that doesn't and might be worse>>especially knowing they are out in 2 years.

Leave him in. Will just help the Dems win in 2008.