Posted on 10/06/2004 12:00:15 PM PDT by GaryL
We can all agree that Dick Chaney made mince meat out of John Edwards last night, and actually performed much better than Bush did last week. However, it seems that Chaney did not have a good response to Edward’s attacks about Chaney’s relationship to Haliburton.
In corresponding with my 19 year old son today (who is a sophomore student at liberal George Washington University in D.C. and who writes a column of conservative political commentary for the school newspaper), I thought the readers of Free Republic would find his comments on this subject of interest. Here’s what he wrote:
Hey Dad,
I am still frustrated by Cheney's performance last night. Like Bush, he started off very strong, but, somehow he let Edwards crawl back into the debate. Cheney was really killing him at the beginning, but, by debate's end, I think Edwards had brought it to a draw. I didn't see the whole thing, though, only the first forty minutes. Why didn’t Cheney have a better prepared response to the Haliburton thing. That's the only strong point Edward's was able to make last night and Cheney just refused to answer it. Come on, "factcheck.org??"
Cheney should respond to the Haliburton charges like this:
"Well it’s nice to see that our vice-presidential candidate is taking his talking points from no other then Michael Moore. (He could then point at him) John, I think you've been to one too many movies lately. I thought we were here to have a substantive debate on the issue of the Iraq War. We can all disagree about the war, but to resort to wild conspiracy theories that were the subject of obvious leftist propaganda, really shows naiveté and severe lack of judgment on your part.”
“You know we have troops in the field as we speak here tonight; what a shame that a man who wants to lead them can't cherish and recognize the importance of their sacrifices. Mr. Edwards, you can have Michael Moore and these conspiracy theories; just leave fighting the war on terrorism to the brave men and women of our armed forces and President Bush. These are perilous times and we don't have the luxury of entertaining such childish charges”. [Note how I am constantly using words like "naiveté" and “childish,” trying to reinforce in voters’ minds that Edwards is young and inexperienced.]
“Just what are you implying, John? Are you saying that we brought the country to war just to help my old company get business? What a grave disservice you do to our troops by even suggesting that, John. By the way, Haliburton DID bid for contracts in Iraq during the Clinton years and even my predecessor Al Gore remarked that they have the most experience in doing the type of work they are currently doing in Iraq. They bid five years before the war and won; they have done a good job, why should they have to bid again, especially when national security is on the line as it was in Iraq?”
“Look, working in the private sector is tough and sometimes your business and your employees don't behave the way you'd like them to. Anyone who has worked an honest day in the private sector knows that. I'm not surprised that my opponent can't understand this, given that he's spent a career preying on private businesses - all the while fattening his pockets on their misfortunes! As I know - and so many others know - it’s hard enough running a business in this country; we need a vice president who understands the concerns of the private sector, not someone, like Mr. Edwards, who has spent a lifetime attacking it.”
Talk to you soon, Dad.
Gary
Somehow I feel that this response from my 19 year old son would have gone over a little better! What a shame Chaney wasn’t able to make it.
If I was advising the VP, I would first take the time to learn how to spell his name.
Anyone who has ever worked in government contracts knows the process takes many many months and sometimes years for the dollar amounts here. Many times the losers protest the awards and delays it even more. Haliburton had the experience and contractual vehicles in place. The only way to get the job done on time was to award it to someone they already had under contract.
I think responding to the baseless Halliburton charges would look too defensive.
I think Cheney did the right thing by just ignoring it (since it's all BS) and then attacking Kerry/Edwards attendance in the Senate.
Sure, the red meat folks don't like it. But they are going to find something to nit-pick anyway.
Sometimes the best response is NO response. People aren't giving the RAT's Halliburton lie one iota of consideration.
However, Cheney quoting the right Web site would have helped. It's up to us to get that information out there.
Hahahahaha
That's fine as far as it goes, but Edwards was also making allegations about bribery, dealing illegally with Iran, etc. Halliburton addresses - and denies - these allegations on their website, but it's impossible to address the complex legal matters in a 30 second response time. These involve complex laws governing corporations and their subsidiaries; HB claims it is in compliance with the appropriate laws, but Waxman and others have been on a fishing expedition, throwing as much mud as they can at HB and hoping it splashes onto Cheney.
And the company name.
The hypocrisy of the left is astounding and more people are seeing this every day. We just must continue to educate our fellow citizens by exposing the lies of the liberals.
Just heard a great retort on Rush's program. John, you attacked me on outsourcing jobs here and out on your campaign trail, and now you want to outsource these jobs that Haliburton does employing Americans? I hope this idea is absorbed by the Bush debate team! Kerry/Edwards wants to outsource Haliburton & prescription drugs (Canada)! Take 'um away democrats!
I'm pleased to see your son is so astute - however - those words sound more like Ann Coulter's instead of Dick Cheney's. The substance was definitely there - and personally I like the style - but the mainstream would think it was too caustic.
Great ideas however!
C'mon you guys - give the guy credit for the post - You've never misspeled (sic) a word?
Interesting!
>
>
> The Human Mind
>
> Don't delete this because it looks weird. Believe it or not you can read
> it.
>
> I cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdgnieg.
> The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid. Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at
> Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer inwaht oredr the ltteers in a
> wrod
> are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in
> the
> rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it
> wouthit
> a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by
> istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh? yaeh and I awlyas thought
> slpeling was ipmorantt!
>
But as I said, good points. Your son is to be commended for his astute observations -- and his parents are to be commended for raising their son to think for himself! (unlike most other young people these days)
If I were Haliburton, I'd hire a PR firm and begin a series of ads promoting the company telling everyone what the media won't. As Edwards contended about Israel, Haliburton has the right and the obligation to defend itself.</p>
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.