The VP Debate: Too Bad Dick Cheney's Best Line Was A Lie

Published on October 6, 2004 By blogic In Politics

Cheney's best line of the night was that he had never met Edwards before the debate. Unfortunately for Cheney, it was easy for the Blogosphere to prove this assertion wasn't true. Already, the most popular interesting debate story at yahoo -- that is, story that isn't a generic roundup -- is about the falsehood of Cheney's quip.

On this point, that helps Edwards. I doubt that voters care whether Edwards was present at the Senate while campaigning -- this is not a frame that has any traction. Cheney was smarter when he went more generally after Edwards's lack of experience and he should have hammered that more. Cheney's false statement about meeting Edwards directly plays into a worry that people already have about Cheney -- that he may be dishonest -- and connections to a general concern by voters that Bush and Cheney seem cocooned from the reality in Iraq.

A final note on which attacks work against which candidates. You'll notice that Edwards kept saying that Cheney was dishonest. This is an attack that would not have worked against Bush. People trust Bush, which is why Kerry generally says Bush is mistaken about Iraq, not dishonest. People are worried that Bush is distanced from reality, but they aren't worried about Bush's truthfullness. Similarly, Bush could have made the I've-Never-Met-You mistake that Cheney did, and no one would have cared. But people are already worried about Cheney's honesty, so he bleeds.

Comments (Page 2)

WiseFawn

on Oct 06, 2004

It's a perfect example of what Cheney's done for his country, blogic.

grins wickedly

on Oct 06, 2004

Vice-President Dick Cheney did not lie. He just tended to forget. He's "old and senile" remember??? John Edwards is an impotent. He doesn't deserve the job. He's done NOTHING for the American people if he hasn't even shown up and voted. Even if he were to show up, close his eyes and pick a choice he would still be doing something and this wouldn't be coming up, because Cheney would have "met" Edwards.

Stick it up your hiney.

Jamie Burnside

on Oct 06, 2004

So Cheney told a lie during the debate.

That's just like passing a check that you can't cash. Like the current budget deficit.

It's just like free money!

landen81

on Oct 06, 2004

Dick Cheney did not lie

Other Dubious Claims.

Cheney used a misleading figure to support the idea that the administration was "deeply concerned" about the toll that AIDS has taken on poor countries, stating that the administration has "proposed and gotten through the Congress authorization for $15 billion to help in the international effort." That's true, but the $15-billion figure was to be spread over five years -- and when it came to asking for money to be actually appropriated and spent Bush sought only $2 billion for the fiscal year that just ended. Congress increased that to $2.4 billion.

Cheney and Edwards both made misleading statements about each other's education records, specifically on the No Child Left Behind law.
Cheney claimed "they were for it; now they're against it." But while Kerry has criticized the law as being underfunded and called for some changes he has not called for the law's repeal. Edwards claimed "they said they were going to fund their No Child Left Behind; $27 billion short today." In fact, overall federal funding for education grew 58% in Bush's first three years, though many governors and congressional Democrats say even more is required.

Cheney said Edwards "has got his facts wrong. I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11." But The Washington Post reported Oct. 6 that Cheney often "skated close to the line in ways that may have certainly left that impression on viewers," especially by repeatedly citing the possibility that hijacker Mohamed Atta met with an Iraqi official, a theory disputed by the 9/11 Commission.

Cheney claimed Kerry had voted 98 times to raise taxes. As we've pointed out before, that's an inflated figure that counts multiple votes on the same tax bills, and also counts votes on budget measures that only set tax targets but don't actually bring about tax increases by themselves.

Link factcheck.org

BlueDev

on Oct 06, 2004

Some of you guys are so far gone that you don't even get the point - Edwards rarely bothers to show up. He misses a large percentage of votes, he rarely attends committee meetings and this is all from a first term senator.

No, I think many of us got the point perfectly the first time. And the point Cheney made was a good one I think. Some of us were simply pointing out that what was said was not true. No more, no less.

It's either that or Edwards is an idiot. Take your pick.

I'll take both please. They are politicians. Simply put, they lie, they cheat, they step on whomever they need to in order to get where they want to. Both of them. All of them.

Bungy32

on Oct 06, 2004

Other Dubious Claims.

It is interesting to me that two of landen81's critiques of Cheney's facts have included links to factcheck.org. Cheney mentioned this site in the debate as a place to go to uncover Edwards faulty claims. At the time, I felt that this was a mistake on his part. After all, factcheck is the closest thing we've got to a non-partisan analysis watchdog. Surely there would be just as much evidence that Cheney's claims and those of the Bush administration were flawed. And it turns out, there are -- including this memorable soundbyte about never meeting Edwards before.

It was a good soundbyte, but it was wrong. It may have been in service to a legitimate complaint about Edwards' voting record in the senate (note: evidence of some missed votes DOES NOT EQUAL evidence of never voting in the senate, however), but it was wrong. It may have been the result of forgetfulness on Cheney's (and Edwards') part, but it was wrong. It was wrong and Cheney's own cited websource says it was wrong. To downplay or dismiss that this byte is inaccurate (and maybe even a deliberate lie) is to participate in a double standard. But then, why should that really surprise anyone at this point...?

blogic

on Oct 06, 2004

This is from a September 2003 article: "Before this year, Edwards missed just seven votes out of 1,307 in his first four years in office, Briggs said. During his five years in the Senate, Edwards voted 1,551 times out of 1,626 roll-call votes, Briggs ... or 95.4 percent."

For a Senator running for office, his attendance is actually unusually good: "Edwards, like other presidential candidates who serve in Congress, regularly misses roll-call votes as he campaigns. Edwards skipped 38 votes of the 119 tallies cast during June and July, Senate records show ... So far this year, Edwards has missed 69 votes out of 321, or about 21 percent, spokesman Michael Briggs said. 'I try to look at the votes and see what looks like it's important not only for North Carolina but also the country, and try to be there for those votes,' Edwards said."

In other words, it must be Cheney who's been all but absent from the Senate.

drmiler

on Oct 06, 2004

Reply #10 By: *grins wickedly* - 10/6/2004 10:34:22 AM
Edwards rarely bothers to show up. He misses a large percentage of votes, he rarely attends committee meetings and this is all from a first term senator.

True, true, Draginol. That is pretty scary to think about the fact that Edwards is running for Veep and hasn't even done anything for the country while in the senate. He needs to wait for a while before running for Veep and maybe, oh, actually vote on something.

Does anyone know if Edwards has something lined up to where he stays in the senate if Kerry Edwards loses, like Leiberman did??

Lovvens,
ME

Actually if you want to compare... Kerry's attendence record isn't much better than his running mate Edwards!

Myrrander

on Oct 06, 2004

This is a similiar discussion as I heard out of some people about Bush in 2000. Some people were complaining that Bush hadn't been on hand to run the Texas government because he was running for president. My opinion is that it's perfectly understandable for someone running for an office to do what is necessary to run.

drmiler

on Oct 06, 2004

Reply #22 By: blogic - 10/6/2004 12:15:44 PM
This is from a September 2003 article: "Before this year, Edwards missed just seven votes out of 1,307 in his first four years in office, Briggs said. During his five years in the Senate, Edwards voted 1,551 times out of 1,626 roll-call votes, Briggs ... or 95.4 percent."

For a Senator running for office, his attendance is actually unusually good: "Edwards, like other presidential candidates who serve in Congress, regularly misses roll-call votes as he campaigns. Edwards skipped 38 votes of the 119 tallies cast during June and July, Senate records show ... So far this year, Edwards has missed 69 votes out of 321, or about 21 percent, spokesman Michael Briggs said. 'I try to look at the votes and see what looks like it's important not only for North Carolina but also the country, and try to be there for those votes,' Edwards said."

In other words, it must be Cheney who's been all but absent from the Senate.

Try this link:
Link

or this one for John Kerry:

Link

Or this one:

Link

Dr Guy

on Oct 06, 2004

The fact that all the democrats can come up with to criticize Cheney's performance in the debate speaks volumes as to who they really think won the debate.

Call it a lie, call it senility, call it a blooper or a stumble. The most glaring fact is that except for 2 occassions, it was true (and they were not in the Senate per-se), and the public listening to the debate will more remember that statement, than 2 obscure times they bumbed into each other.

blogic

on Oct 06, 2004

Last night, Cheney said this: "In my capacity as vice president, I am the president of Senate, the presiding officer. I'm up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they're in session."

So, it turns out Cheney has actually presided over the Senate only *twice* in the last four years, according to the Senate diaries. Not only that, but Cheney and Edwards met at least once on the Senate floor: "by morning, the Kerry-Edwards campaign had produced irrefutable evidence that when Elizabeth Dole was sworn in by Senate President Cheney as the junior senator from North Carolina just last year, it was Senator Edwards who (with her husband) escorted her to Mr. Cheney. Senator Dole was sworn in using Mrs. Edwards' bible."

I know you don't like Edwards -- I'm not trying to change your mind on that. Cheney's "most Tuesdays" statement wasn't caused by forgetfulness, and his sharp performance shows he's not senile. His comment was very misleading, and if John Kerry had done this, you'd be all over him as a liar. Do you really deny that?

russellmz2

on Oct 06, 2004

drmiler:

All this and not one shred of proof that they met on the floor of the senate! So what if Cheney met him at some functions. The fact remains that he didn't see him on the senate floor. Cheney was trying to make the point that Edwards was an absentee senator. "The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/6/104324/489

see that bald cheney-looking guy at the left swearing in elizabeth dole? and that john edwards-looing guy in the right back?

is that the kind of photographic, undisputable proof you were looking for, drmiler?

also in the article:

Update: Tim Russert is going around saying that Edwards and Cheney met backstage on his show, and shook hands and exchanged pleasentries.

also at http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/6/11163/2940:

cheney has only presided in the senate on tuesdays twice.

Bungy32

on Oct 06, 2004

Yeah, right. This Cheney gaff is such a non-issue. I can't believe us Dems are making such a big deal about it!

What's REALLY important is that I am pretty sure I saw Edwards hiding that super-spy pen with Kerry's cheat notes in it. We should all really spend our time talking about that.

The Trellinator

on Oct 06, 2004

Yeah, and exept for the fact that Saddam didn't have weapons of mass destruction, what Cheney said on that topic is true.

And except for the fact that Saddam isn't tied to Al Qaida, what he said about that is true.

And except for this picture, this quote from Cheney to Edwards "The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight." is also true.

And except for this quote, "In September, Cheney said Iraq had been 'the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11.'", Cheney's assertion during the debate that "The senator has got his facts wrong. I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11", is also true.

Hmmm, I think I see a pattern developing here. Perhaps it's time to restore honor and integrity to the whitehouse.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!