15 February 2010

Biden vs. Cheney - Due Process Loses

I love Joe Biden. Dick Cheney? Well, not so much. And yet Cheney has won the last little tussle with Joe, and this, like so much related to Cheney, infuriates me. He has won because he got Joe to agree with an implied premise in his argument.

Cheney is upset that the Nigerian crotch-bomber was read his Miranda rights. Joe counters that the same thing happened to the ped-bomber from England under Bush's administration. Cheney doesn't think that would-be terrorists deserve rights. Joe seems to (sort of) agree with this inane suggestion, which is why the two VPs upset me.

The executive branch has a duty to execute the laws. VPs, for instance, are sworn into office promising to uphold the constitution. This seems to me a vote of confidence in our laws. And note that our laws are such that having rights does NOT mean that one can't or won't be punished.

So, when Cheney expresses his anger that someone may have hinted that the crotch-bomber (which, by the way, could make for an attention-getting chat name (as opposed to CB handle)) had rights, I have to ask this: if Cheney doesn't trust our laws or due process, why on earth did he waste 8 years of his life as the second-highest ranking member of the branch of government sworn to uphold those laws?

Biden was right to call out Cheney yesterday. He could have gone further and simply said that his faith in our legal system is so great that if an accused terrorist is found innocent he'd accept that verdict as more trust-worthy than trial by media.

I know that it is fashionable not to trust in government. It would be nice, though, if the people heading it up showed a little faith in it.


Big Al said...

Ron, if former VP Cheney would read what you wrote (wouldn't THAT be a hoot!) I'm sure he'd say he believes in our legal system but that a terrorist is a war criminal and therefore is either NOT protected or cannot BE protected by our legal system. In fact, if you would ask Cheney directly if he believes the ped-bomber should've been read his Miranda rights I'm betting dear old Dick would say "Hell no!", or similar such words.

Anonymous said...

Joe Biden is one reason I pray for Obama's safety each and every night.

Big Al said...


Your sentiments are exactly what I would've written if McCain would've been elected.

On a side note, I think Congress should rent out their offices or at least make them available for others to use since the Congressional stalemate means Congress doesn't seem to be doing any meaningful work these days. Hard to say one party is worse than the other what with the GOP saying they'll filibuster any legislation and the Dems seemingly paralyzed by all this. sigh . . .

Lifehiker said...

Cheney gives me the creeps.

I object to this whole idea of a "war on terror" and thinking of everything regarding it in military terms - even if our military is heavily involved with trying to defeat these Islamic militants.

The militants are criminals, not soldiers. We should try them in Federal Court and not give them the dignity of military justice.

And, lastly, if extra security would cost a billion dollars if they are tried in Federal Court, then our Homeland Security guys are totally incompetent and we've wasted our money on them.

Have we Americans lost our guts due to the fear-mongering of asses like Cheney? Seems so.

Big Al said...


I understand what you're saying about trying the criminals/terrorists in Federal Court vs. military justice. What I don't know, though, is what would we charge them under in a Federal Court. I'm wondering if a reason for not trying them in Federal Court might be because we don't have a legal means to do so, if that makes any sense. As I'm not a lawyer, I don't know about these things and it could be just as likely what I'm writing here is 100% incorrect.

Anonymous said...

Big Al,

there are many reasons McCain wasn't elected, but his VP most likely wasn't one. Although, I would have been uneasy with her one heartbeat away from the oval office, just as I am Biden.

As far as the Republicans threatening to filibuster? What else can a minority do when the majority refuses to let them participate in the process? Closed-door meetings? Come on. I say the Republicans should embrace the title of "party of NO" given by Obama. Same thing would happen were the roles revered.

The upcoming elections are going to be a house-cleaning. It will be quite refreshing, I think.

Career politicians are going to learn that you cannot ignore your constituency and stay in office (Reps and Dems). Good riddance!

Ron Davison said...

Allen, LH, and Jen,

Here's something of interest: