Cheney for Prez!

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/28/opinion/28douthat.html

What we really need for President is another Dick.

I think that's a fine idea and should get the republicans some credibility back . Maybe either Sarah of Alaska or Bobby Volcano monitoring is a waste of money Jindal can be his running mate.

Did not this guy just get fired? Politically, Dick is not getting elected to anything. McCain got the nomination because he
had at least a snow flakes chance in hell of winning. He may well have won with a different VP choice. W is taking the high
road and not commenting on the current President, while Dick grovels and growls. May be good for the disgruntled base, but
in terms of the Republican Party, it just shoots them lower in the hole as far as the general public is concerned. It is hugely
cheeky for Dick to comment on anything seeing how he helped run the country into the ditch. I suspect he believes if he keeps
talking we will all forget.......another political calculation that misses the mark. This guy can not hit the target, unless
it is a buddy by accident.

Last I knew you can only be president for (2) 4 year terms. That rules Cheney out.

That would be all the country needs, a draft dodging slug.

Meh,

I expect nothing less from that liberal snot-rag (NY Times)! Must be a slow news day -- no republicans to pick on...

SMITTY wrote:Meh,

I expect nothing less from that liberal snot-rag (NY Times)! Must be a slow news day -- no republicans to pick on...

Or they're trying to divert attenion from the photo opp incident.
Can you imagine what the NY times would have done if that was Bush doing a fly by ???

mr1precision wrote:

SMITTY wrote:Meh,

I expect nothing less from that liberal snot-rag (NY Times)! Must be a slow news day -- no republicans to pick on...

Or they're trying to divert attenion from the photo opp incident.
Can you imagine what the NY times would have done if that was Bush doing a fly by ???

It was on the front page, above the fold with a very large photo. No diverting there.

I'd like to see what the headline was.

If it was Bush, there would be 3 pages about how he should be impeached for allowing this to happen.

tvb wrote:http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages/hr.asp?fpVname=NY_NYT&ref_pge=gal&b_pge=1

Story on page 18, Ya good point!

mr1precision wrote:

tvb wrote:http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages/hr.asp?fpVname=NY_NYT&ref_pge=gal&b_pge=1

Story on page 18, Ya good point!

That's the first page of the metro section - the story in NYC is primarily a metro one.

So, uh, where did it run in your local paper?

tvb wrote:

mr1precision wrote:

tvb wrote:http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages/hr.asp?fpVname=NY_NYT&ref_pge=gal&b_pge=1

Story on page 18, Ya good point!

That's the first page of the metro section - the story in NYC is primarily a metro one.

So, uh, where did it run in your local paper?

I'll let you know sunday mmmmkay.

tvb wrote:

mr1precision wrote:

tvb wrote:http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages/hr.asp?fpVname=NY_NYT&ref_pge=gal&b_pge=1

Story on page 18, Ya good point!

That's the first page of the metro section - the story in NYC is primarily a metro one.

So, uh, where did it run in your local paper?

My local paper is owned by the same liberal snot-rag that you posted.

& I thought you said it was F R O N T P A G E ???? Unless I'm blind, I didn't see any reference to the flyover on that front page! I'm NOT surprised......

I can remember Bush doing a fly-by over New Orleans. The front page of my local paper had an article about a local amusement park thats been closed for years. Oh well, maybe next monday.