MEET LIZ CHENEY: MEDIA HO

During the Bush years – come on you remember those long, loooonnnng Bush years – chances are you heard the name Mary Cheney a few times. The irony of the ultra-conservative Vice-President of the United States fathering a gay daughter was so delicious. Less visible was her older sister, Elizabeth. That’s odd, since “Liz” held high-ranking positions in the state department throughout the Bush years. That is, except for a break in 2004 when she interrupted her duties to work on her father’s re-election campaign. It was Liz’s job to gather the female vote, and by all accounts she did a stellar job. Still, if you ask the average American voter about Dick Cheney’s daughter, you’re likely to hear about Mary. Liz perfected the art of anonymity.

So, it begs the question: Why is Liz Cheney suddenly all over the airwaves, Internet news and information sites, and print publications? Her non-stop interviews running parallel with her father’s inexplicable media mongering is slightly suspect. Sometimes they even appear together and their clothing seems oddly color coordinated. It's slightly creepy. If I had the opportunity to ask Ms. Liz one question, I would just ask “Liz, what is it you want?” Really. What does Liz Cheney want from all of this media exposure? I mean there are already enough talking heads and pundits critiquing and countering every word the President says. The anti-Obama machine is oiled and running, and Liz has not come forward with anything new or revelatory. Even with her impressive credentials and substantial background in matters of State, Mr. & Mrs. America know very little of her and are not likely to offer her their full attention. So…what is Liz Cheney's motive with all of this sudden, chatty media exposure?

Liz is clearly (painfully?) her father’s daughter, as evidenced by some of the positions she espouses on the issues. On waterboarding, Liz says it is not torture; that current administration officials should assess whether the techniques used were effective in gathering intelligence information. The problem with this argument, which she is parroting from umpteen conservative pundits and columnists, is that it negates any other methods of gathering information. Liz, et al, never consider a less neanderthal approach. Also like some of her counterparts, Liz interrupts a lot and has little tolerance for viewpoints other than hers…and dad’s. Watch:

What Liz Cheney was not counting on when she embarked on her current media blitz was the intense scrutiny under which she would operate. It has become a favorite pastime/obsession with some media types to monitor every point she makes. Jason Linkins, who you may have read about here the other day in “Are You The Future of Journalism,” poked so many holes in Liz’s recent verbal spar with NBC’s Andrea Mitchell, that it seems the empress has no clothes. Watch the exchange, and then click here to read Linkins’ rebuttal:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

If Liz Cheney wants to enter the national conversation, for whatever reasons or with whatever agenda she has, I say, 'Come on down,' Liz. But we citizens have a few ground rules and I’m more than a little surprised that you didn’t know about them. I just think I better lay them out for you:

1. When you commit to an interview during which you’re going to talk about what has or hasn’t been said publicly by officials, make sure you know what has or hasn’t been said by public officials. Otherwise, we citizens have a name for that: “Rewriting History.”
2. An interview is a con – ver – sa – tion. Both people get to speak, and in the best of times both people get to complete sentences before the other person speaks.
3. Experienced journalists like those with whom you have spoken lately, do their homework. We are in the information business. It is what we do. If we convey inaccurate information, it compromises our credibility. So, you may want to think twice before you condescend to the questioner. Chances are, we’re not saying something we haven’t checked, double-checked and re-checked before we say it. Can you say the same about yourself? Liz? Come on now….can you?

Liz Cheney appears to be a very self-assured woman. She expresses herself earnestly and assertively. She just seems to have forsaken the key element to undertaking a media tour that relies on knowledge of the issues – preparation. And she seems to have forgotten that the manner in which you earnestly assert yourself has a lot to do with how it is received by the masses. Say it with a sincere commitment to the truth and we’re probably listening, Liz. But say it with nothing more or less than disdain for those who don’t share your worldview, and we’re tuning out.

Cheney, Part II is getting on our collective nerves. And once that happens, we can’t really remember what the hell she said.

GREAT MOMENTS IN TV: VENTURA vs. HASSELBACK

What happens when former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura debates torture with neocon TV host Elisabeth Hasselback? Ventura, who has been waterboarded, appeared this morning on ABC's "The View." Interesting to hear from a guy who knows from where he speaks, as opposed to Hasselback who...well...not so much. This clip is priceless, especially Ventura's last line:

OF TORTURE AND CONSEQUENCES

I am one of those people who annoyingly and too frequently reminds people I know that life is a gift. So, in those rare moments in your life when someone you deeply care about talks of ending it all, or how much easier it would be to just “check out,” there I am, repeating my sometimes unwelcome mantra, “Life is a gift.”

That being said, you might guess how I feel about the latest debate over torture. I want to get ahold of torture proponents and remind them of a little something called the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted by the United Nations in 1984. Prior to that, in 1975, the General Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Oh, and way before all that, in 1948, the U.N. enacted the the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which clearly stated ‘”No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” Not only did all of this take place, but each of these instruments had safeguards in place that were supposed to ensure that any possible violations would be avoided.

So, tell me, what happened that a 21st century President of the United States, George W. Bush, found it permissible to allow simulated drowning (“waterboarding”) on his watch? And how is it that the self-proclaimed holiest among us, white evangelicals and Roman Catholics say in majority that torture can “sometimes” or “often” be justified? And tell me, when did life and death issues become fodder for glib, often uninformed talking heads on cable television, such as Sean Hannity and Keith Olberman? Watch this:



Further, has everybody conveniently forgotten about the U.S. Code? That’s the set of permanent U.S. Federal laws. I want to point out Title 18 of the Code: “Whoever outside the United States commits or attempts to commit torture shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both, and if death results to any person from conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life.”

Listen, even if none of the above has any meaning to you, consider this: Even with its internationally tainted image, the United States is still looked upon as the epicenter of high civilization. If individuals at the highest levels of the American government demonstrate tolerance for something as uncivilized and inhumane as torture of human beings, will nations of lesser moral fiber and far lesser development not follow suit? If the U.S. does it, well it must be the thing to do, right? Irreversible precedents are being set here. Doesn’t anybody get that? Didn’t George W. Bush (right), Dick Cheney and Condaleeza Rice get that?

I could go on and on about how inhumane, unethical and primitive torture is. I could try to pull your heartstrings by reminding you that all of those individuals who have been tortured are human beings with somebody somewhere who loves them. I could try to scare you by reminding you that once we exercise leniency in the act of torturing other human beings, we open ourselves up to such an act if and when the global tables are turned on us. Instead, I think I’ll just appeal to your basic intelligence and sense of logic: If a person believes he or she is going to die as you simulate drowning on their person, isn’t it likely that they’ll say anything you want them to say? Even Olberman said that in his interview in the video you saw above. How accurate can information be when you are simply coercing someone to say what you want them to say by threatening their life? Aside from how disgusting the act itself is, the concept is idiotic.
So, how widespread is the use of “enhanced interrogation” techniques? That is what proponents of acts such as waterboarding call torture. Does it go way, way beyond Gitmo? Did Bush, Cheney, Condy, (left) et. al. cavalierly endorse the use of barbaric methods to get information that is probably not worth a damn anyway? Spain and the U.K. seem to think they did. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) concurs.

If torture was not okay in Nazi German, or in Rwanda, or in more than 150 countries in which Amnesty International has documented instances or torture, is it acceptable when the most highly civilized society in the world does it? I think not. It seems unfathomable that there is even debate about the use of torture. If the gracious and poised Ms. Rice condoned the use of “enhanced interrogation,” she must be held accountable. If the Prince of Darkness, Dick Cheney (right) encouraged the infliction of pain and suffering, even against terrorists, he likely disobeyed the law and should be punished. And since the buck clearly stopped at the desk of George W. Bush, it needs to be fully investigated, including interrogation of the former President, and ultimately appropriate punishment.

MY FIRST LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA

DEAR MR. PRESIDENT:

I know every time you see those words – Dear Mr. President – you probably think of that really cool Pink song, but trust me, I’m so not that cool. No, actually I’m sending this before your first day in the White House, in hopes that I can get your full, undivided attention for a few minutes. With all due respect, please…turn off your cell, lose the headphones, put the DVR on pause and just give me 10 solid minutes. Call me crazy, but I figured maybe you’d be interested in my top five requests of you for the next eight years - yes, eight…I’m an optimist, like you.

1. Since for all intents and purposes the U.S. government is nationalizing the auto industry, I’d appreciate it if you would deflate the CEO salaries. The Chrysler guy, Robert Nardelli doesn’t reveal his salary, because Chrysler is privately owned. But here’s what we do know: his last employer, Home Depot dumped him, but the fall was cushy. The severance package was reportedly worth more than $200 million. GM’s CEO, Rick Wagoner grossed $2.2 million in 2008. Ford’s CEO, Alan Mulally is at $2 million plus bonuses. Have you seen America's parking lot (right)? Many people (including me) are driving 10-year-old cars and earning…well, let’s just say not $2 million annually. Perhaps you could do something real innovative like tying CEO salaries to productivity, sales and overall job performance. Any thoughts on this?

2. Listen, is there anything you can do about Anne Coulter? Short of revising the First Amendment, I mean. There just has to be a way to make her stop talking. Really, I'm not asking you to do anything about her 1970s Gloria Steinem hairdo or that crazy wardrobe of hers. But what if you just made her an ambassador? Oh, I know, I know. She’s no diplomat. But just send her somewhere. I’m thinking Bangladesh. Or how about Chad? There she could be one of those women who carry baskets of water on their heads. Barack – may I call you Barack? This is a matter of national urgency. Puh-leaze have a Come To Jesus chat with Anne and explain that the Freedom of Speech we enjoy in America comes with strings called “responsibility.” Poor, leggy Anne – somebody forgot to tell her that part.

3.So sorry to bring up sore subjects, but could we talk about George Bush? I’m worried. I mean George is moving into his new $2.2 million dollar home in the tony Preston Hollows enclave in North Dallas, where they didn’t even let black people in until the year 2000, and he’s going to be doodling in the den trying to figure out how to make his new library pretty and all that. But my concern has to do with war crimes. Was it really okay that this administration allowed water boarding, the interrogation technique that simulates drowning? Is it just me or is there something just a little whacked out about water boarding in the 21st century in a civilized society? Representative John Conyers, who as you know, is the House Judiciary Committee Chairman, wants to assemble a bipartisan committee to investigate this and illegal wiretapping by the Bush administration. Okay then. Let’s do it. Why? Because if we don’t hold Bush accountable for arguably torturing detainees, then what is to stop future Chief Execs from doing the same or worse? And as I said…we’re civilized, right? And since we only have about a scintilla or privacy left in our culture, shouldn’t we do everything possible to safeguard it? Wiretapping? I don’t like it. Do you? Here’s how I see it: We invaded Iraq for no reason; we tortured detainees who may have had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks and then we wiretapped anybody who we deemed suspicious, even though our suspicions were largely unfounded. And we’re the United States of America. Could you weigh in on this, B? May I call you B?

4. How was your lunch with Carter, Clinton, George, Sr. and President Bush? Is it true you had Mexican food? That’s the scuttlebutt on the street. Wouldn’t that have been a great moment for the first use of Laura Bush’s $587,000 worth of new White House china? I’m not nitpicking here, but B, don’t you think half a million dollars and change worth of plates is a bit extravagant at a moment when record numbers of Americans are losing their homes and jobs? The other day somebody said unemployment may hit eight percent this year. You yourself said the economy is going to get worse, much worse in 2009. Laura spent half a mill on plates. And then she posed for pictures with her new plates, in the exact moment the American dream seems to be dying. And then she tried to justify the expense by saying it was ordered three years ago. Listen, I live in New Orleans. Need I remind you or Laura what happened here just over three years ago? Not to be nasty here, but we really don’t want to hear about china. We would like to hear more about federal dollars that were promised to us for rebuilding our city that have yet to float through the bureaucracy. You might be surprised how many homes could be rebuilt here with $587,000. Could you just do us all a favor and do a walk-through of your new house and see if she also snuck in a bunch of new linens and flatware and maybe wine glasses? We found out she bought a new rug, but nobody’s giving us a dollar figure on that. We’re a little pissed down here. Can you blame us B?

5. Look, I’d love to talk to you about some other stuff – AIDS funding, Darfur, that pesky Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, China and Russia buying up all the prime NYC real estate, gay marriage, breast cancer research, Cuba, Bernie Madoff, and that idiot who’s destroying the Plaza Hotel square foot by square foot, Rush Limbaugh’s salary…oh God, I could just go on and on, couldn’t you? Why not bring Michelle and the kids down to New Orleans and we’ll have dinner at Arnaud’s and then go on the devastation tour? Won’t that be fun? Maybe you could meet Mayor Ray Nagin while you’re here and gently persuade him to resign a little early, and if you want, we can drive past former Congressman William Jefferson’s house and point. Just text me and give me some dates and let’s work it out.

Best,
P