If.....

[tunaplanet 0]

Now I know this isn't likely to happen but recent rumors have came up saying Bush may name Cheney as the new head of the CIA and select a VP who could run as POTUS in 08 if Bush wins this years election.

So.

If Bush appoints Cheney as the head of the CIA who do you think would be his choice as VP to run in the upcoming elections?

Forty-two

[happythoughts 0]

Paris Hilton. At least we'd listen to the State of the Union address and visit his website.

[wmw999 2,589]

If he'd actually listen to either of them, I'd like to see him with either Powell or McCain. They seem to hear all sides (rather than tuning out what doesn't agree with their viewpoints) better than the other choices.

But it'd never happen; he'd be far more likely to pick someone he's comfortable with.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Nightingale 0]

Powell wouldn't do it. He's turned down the option of that kind of political office before.

I think Giuliani would do it. I don't think Bush'd pick Rice. I don't think McCain would take the nomination.

just my feeling.

[Jib 0]

McCain would upset too many conservative backers (NRA for one).

Guiliani could draw some democrats from NY. So, Guiliani.

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

[tunaplanet 0]

Quote

Powell wouldn't do it. He's turned down the option of that kind of political office before.

People don't change their mind? Maybe at the time he didn't think he had a legitimate shot at winning. Maybe he he didn't want it at the time. Maybe he felt he wasn't ready for the job. Maybe his personal life didn't allow him the time to put forth the desired devotion it takes to be president.

Saying he won't do it now because he didn't do it in the past is not thinking outside the box.

If the above scenario went down he would most likely choose Powell. Personally I would love to see Giuliani.

Forty-two

[jdhill 0]

I don't think Powell would accept it, McCain is too much of a rebel, Rice isn't ready... so that leaves the G-man.

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

People don't change their mind?

You're forgetting that this is Washington we're talking about, where aparently people aren't allowed to change minds. People in Washington who change their minds are called "flip-floppers", and "fence sitters".

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[tunaplanet 0]

I was going to add Ashcroft to the list but I felt it was too early for that sort of sick and demented humor. Besides...most of us are sober at the moment.

Forty-two

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

If he'd actually listen to either of them, I'd like to see him with either Powell or McCain. They seem to hear all sides (rather than tuning out what doesn't agree with their viewpoints) better than the other choices.

But it'd never happen; he'd be far more likely to pick someone he's comfortable with.

Wendy W.

It's bad enough that McCain is pretty much a Democrat in all but name, but he's also anti-gun AND he wrote that abysmal, almost-universally-repudiated "campaign finance reform law" which really utterly FAILS at its state purpose of "taking the money out of politics," but DOES do a really spiffy job of GUTTING THE FIRST AMENDMENT.

So I'd like McCain to get passed over, as punishment for taking a big shit on the Constitution.

I'd say go with Powell. Let's hear what the NAACP would say about Bush if he ran alongside a black man. They'd probably just call Powell an Uncle Tom. Maybe they'd have Whoopie-cushion Goldberg make some nasty comments about him. She seems to be the Democrat mouthpiece(-of shit) lately.

-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

McCain would upset too many conservative backers (NRA for one).

Guiliani could draw some democrats from NY. So, Guiliani.

It would piss me off to no end, for sure. I liked McCain back when I thought he was an independent voice for reason, until I realized he was a shill for gun control as bad as any other.

But Giuliani is no friend of gun owners, either! And he's no friend of freedom of choice. He was the scumbag who used underhanded tricks and his puritan sensibilities to run the adult shops out of Times Square so that it could "Disneyfied." He ran NYC when the NRA's theme restaurant was denigrated and maligned. He presided over NYC as it continued to make concealed carry permits available to the rich and famous, but screw the average Joe or Jane who wants personal protection from crime.

I don't like Giuliani OR McCain. I think Rice or Powell should be considered. I'd love to see the faces of Democrats as the REPUBLICANS become the first party to have a female VP elected! LOL!

-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[aprilcat 0]

...puritan sensibilities...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
He cheated on his wife and got BUSTED. Isn't that a big shiny deal with polititians? Who cheated while in office?~~April

Camelot II, the Electric Boogaloo!

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

...puritan sensibilities...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
He cheated on his wife and got BUSTED. Isn't that a big shiny deal with polititians? Who cheated while in office?~~April

I was saying it derogatorily. I abhor when politicians or anyone in a position of power decide that because THEY find something offensive, EVERYONE must now be forced to do without it. If Giuliani cheated on his wife, all the less legitimacy he has to claim any kind of moral high ground.

-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[Muenkel 0]

Here's what the talking heads I've listened to have had to say. Replacing your VP at this stage in the game could very much backfire on GWB. It is a risky decision to make, but it still may be made. Ofcourse the Rep's will come up with a dignified way of doing it. Perhaps Cheney's health issues. The bottom line is that the decision will not be made until perhaps August before the RNC, but after the DNC. Look for quite a bump in the polls for Kerry/Edwards right after the DNC. Whether they can hold that lead, remains to be seen. If it was my choice, I'd pick Powell...but he doesn't want it. 2nd Choice is Rice, but I'm not sure she's ready. 3rd is Giuliani who btw is pro-choice. If he was to pick Ashcroft, he might as well concede now.

Personally, GWB has my vote, even if he picks Mickey Mouse.

_________________________________________
Chris

[tunaplanet 0]

Quote

but he doesn't want it.

Unless I have missed something Powell has not said that. Powell would put the election in the bag.

Forty-two

[quade 4]

Putting Cheney in charge of the CIA would be one of the stupidest ideas floated in awhile.

What experience does he have with directing intelligence?

Don't we deserve somebody that's been a part of the intel community?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[tunaplanet 0]

Cheney would be a phenominal selection. Not many people are more well suited than he.

Forty-two

[tunaplanet 0]

Honestly, the short-list will most likely be...

- Richard Armitage
- Sam Nunn
- Porter Goss
- John Lehman

If Cheney is not selected (and probably won't be) I am rooting for Lehman. Gotta pull for the navy boy.

Forty-two

[quade 4]

Quote

Cheney would be a phenominal selection. Not many people are more well suited than he.

Is "Phenominal Selection" the new "Superb Job"?

Seriously -- on what the f do you base your opinion that Cheney is suited to this position at all -- let alone more well suited than most others?

He has ZERO experience in the area. True, he receives information daily, but that's a far cry from running The Company.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[quade 4]

Oh thank goodness you weren't being serious . . . I thought you really had gone off the deep end.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Gravitymaster 0]

Talk about being a sheep. I can't believe your thinking is so inside the box that you excluded J.C. Watts or Mitt Romney in your poll.

Baaaaaaaaaaaah.......

[crwtom 0]

don't know about Rice but the others are all to one extend or another
pro-choice - in a campaing so harshly driven by pounding on "moral values"
(whatever that's supposed to mean) none of them has a snowball's
chance in hell ...

Rice, incidentally, would get fried alive for botching seriously the coordination
of state dept, DoD, NSC, and Veep office. At the very least Armitage was
very harshly critical of her. She'd also get a lot of heat for making AMB
treaties with Russia (... and I shit you not!) a far higher priorioty than fighting
Al Quaeda before the attacks - contrary to the advices of the previous admin
and numerous high-up security experts. The only thing she's going for her is
that Bush feel comfortable and unintimidated by her when she coaches him
in foreign policy (sheesh!).

If you're feeling uncomfy with Cheney - well then that's just tough luck.
He's stands right at the core of this year's GOP campaign. Better get used
to it.

Cheers, T

*******************************************************************
Fear causes hesitation, and hesitation will cause your worst fears to come true

[Muenkel 0]

Rice, also is pro-choice.

_________________________________________
Chris

[jdhill 0]

Quote

He has ZERO experience in the area. True, he receives information daily, but that's a far cry from running The Company.

I'm not saying that Cheney would be good as the DCI, but he was the SecDef from 89-93... the DoD is part of the Intel community... so to say ZERO experiance is a bit of an exageration, IMO...

add to that that the DCI is a political appointment, experiance is not alway the driving factor. And in the case of CIA, a fresh set of eyes may be a good thing.

To really make CIA free of political influence, you need to make the DCI position similar to the Director of the FBI, or Chairman of the FED... once appointed, you serve a given term that does not necessarily coincide with the change of administraions.

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke