Posted on 07/18/2002 9:08:29 AM PDT by PhiKapMom
Press Hounded Cheney to Sell, Now Engaged in Character Assassination
By: Rush Limbaugh
July 17, 2002
One of the reasons the liberals are so furious that Vice President Cheney made money off his stock sales, is that they're hate "the rich." They hate anyone with more than $50 in their pocket. No matter what he does, it's never right. For example, they're screaming that Cheney sold his stock in Halliburton, and Bush sold his in Harken Energy.
Yet they're the ones that demanded Cheney sell when he sold! In a bunch of editorials that we and we alone in the media took the time to look up, they screamed that it looked like a conflict of interest (although it wasn't by law) for Cheney to hold stock while running for VP. So Cheney sold, taking "a bath" as he put it with a laugh on Larry King Alive. Why? So he could serve the nation. He didn't take home all that money either, because he paid a capital gains tax of 30% or 40% or whatever it is, plus other taxes. Besides that, he gave multi-millions to charities.
Dana Millbank's column in Tuesday's Washington Post gives us a lesson on how the media destroys people. They're all over Cheney and Bush, and the Republicans aren't out there doing a thing to defend him. (See the Limbaugh Institute: If We Can Do It, You Can Do It, RNC) Millbank charges, "Whether through serendipity or shrewdness, Cheney made an $18.5 million profit selling his shares for more than $52 each in August of 2000." It should say that he was pressured to do so by the Democrats and the press. There should at least be a companion story about DNC head Terry McAuliffe's $18 million profit off $100,000 invested in Global Crossing.
Way down in the story, we read in passing, "Though Cheney was under pressure to sever his future financial interest in Halliburton, conflict-of-interest laws did not require the sale." Exactly! He did it anyway because he cared more about the nation's trust than making money. Why not quote this Associated Press story from September 1, 2000: "Republican vice presidential candidate Dick Cheney said today he was fully prepared to forfiet oil company stock options that he would otherwise continue to hold after taking office, if he and George W. Bush win in November." Forfiet, you see that? Forfiet his money.
This AP story makes clear that Cheney at all times was acting in the public interest, to the point of throwing a fortune in stock options out the window because they wouldn't have vested until after he took office. And as I recall, he sold some of his stock options during the campaign in response to claims by these same Democrats, led by Gore, that he was tied to oil interests. Poor Cheney cannot win here! By divesting himself of stock options, either through sales or forfieting them, he's accused of timing his sale to beat a slump in the stock. Bush sells Harken Energy and the stock soars instead of tanking, and they say he's corrupt too. Which is it!?
All of Cheney's actions were taken in the public view and motivated by the highest ethical standards. My brother write a column on September 27th, 2000 about how Cokie Roberts grilled Cheney on the supposed conflict represented by his holding stock. If Mr. Cheney had retained the stock throughout the election, he would have been accused of urging energy exploration and price policies for personal benefit. What we have is the big media and their puppeteers in the Democratic Party thinking that we are so stupid that we don't remember any of this.
ON August 18th, 2000, the Washington Post ran an editorial headlined "Mr. Cheney's Stock Options," trying to make the case that Cheney was resisting the effort being made on the part of others to get him to sell. The August 24, 2000 New York Times urged Cheney to cash out too. "Mr. Cheney needs to summon all of his gravitas and do the right thing. That means he should just say no to any options that would vest after he is in office."
I have not seen this angle mentioned anywhere else in the press. Since this show is show prep for the rest of the media, I'm sure this is going to show up elsewhere now, and the word will get spread. We're not going to let these skunks continue to get away with this kind of rotgut. They're lying, and they're besmirching the name of a fine, fine man for their own political gain. You need to scream this from the rooftops.
Not so sure about this statement. Why should the GOP go on the defensive when there is nothing that needs defending? Sometimes it's frustrating, but this administration has shown in the past that often the best defense is to remain on the high road and let the left spin itself dizzy.
Laziest too. They prefer to let their articles come in completed over the fax from the DNC nowadays.
I posed the question when was the last time anyone saw or heard the RNC chairman on ANYTHING?
The DNC guy, McCauliffe is all over the tube and the printed media almost every day with his evil, but at least he's doing what he's being paid to do.
For decades, the GOP has been functionally disabled in using the media to further its goals. We're always waiting for them to change, but it never happens.
Please don't tell me all the Pubs are completely denied face-time on the Capitol steps, the Presidential bully-pulpit or the talk shows. Not true, and it's no excuse.
Bring back Haley Barbour! At the least, when he was RNC chairman, we knew what he looked like.
Leni
I guess next we'll see the notice that about being back fully on the Judicial Watch team..... LOL
Because no one is above the law.....
Let the IRS audit begin
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.