I'm pretty sure Dick Cheney has destroyed Dick Cheney. In the way you're suggesting, that is.

I was hoping for The Man Himself, a man-sized safe and an explosive charge - all live in the studio.

/ Left disappointed

Oh shiat, yeah me to for a second there.

liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.

RandomExcess: liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.

This.

RandomExcess: Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Someone didn't get the "prom" joke.

Fools did follow it. Which is why we've farked ourselves into an ethical/moral/legal shiathole.

Why do we keep getting daily show links every day? Isn't the large amount of daily kos and huffpo greenlights enough?

RandomExcess: liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.

Conservatives turning us into something worse than the terrorists?


Just because the little voice in your head you call Jesus says it's okay to kill and torture brown people doesn't make it okay.

Death to America: RandomExcess: liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.

This.

Why not just kill them when they try to surrender? It would save money, time and effort spent unnecessarily. Bullets are cheap.

Same in this country, catch a murderer and kill him. Save on trial and housing, food, medication, babysitting by police, etc. I mean, you point a weapon at someone and you basically take your chances regardless.

/except for all those who actually aren't guilty
//It would suck to be them

Death to America: RandomExcess: liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.

This.

So simple even an alt can agree with it.

RandomExcess: liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.

Not everyone in Gitmo is guilty. Such a blatant disregard for due process should be held in contempt by us.
There's no reason for us to throw out due process for expediency by imprisoning people for years without charging and trying them in a fair trial.
Next time it might be you in a prison without access to due process. Just because someone points their finger and accuses someone doesn't mean they are guilty.

Sad it takes a comedian to call out this despicable human being.

RandomExcess: liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.

I'm not a liberal. In fact, I'm conservative. But Jon Stewart is right. Dick Cheney is a piece of shiat. There isn't anything liberal or conservative about this. Either you understand it, or you're a farking retard that has no clue what our values are.

RandomExcess: liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.

Except many of the inmates in Gitmo are there based purely on blame and speculation, rather than evidence. Big cash rewards are given to people that turn in terrorists, except not much investigation is put into whether or not the 'terrorist' is even guilty.

It's along the lines of your neighbor claiming you once molested a child, so the police arrest, detain and repeatedly beat the living shiat out of you without ever offering you a trial or a lawyer. But hey, extraordinary situations require extraordinary means, right?

RandomExcess: liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.


So we've only tortured killers of Americans, right? We haven't tortured some poor farking goat farmer because a rival tribal member lied to U.S. troops and had him shipped off to a CIA black site? If they're accused of being terrorists, it's guilty until proven innocent? Never mind the guys we've held onto for SEVEN FARKING YEARS, only to release them with NO CHARGES, right? Never mind the fact that torturing a detainee makes it impossible to ever prosecute them, right? Never mind that it goes completely against everything the United States of America is supposed to stand for to the rest of the world, right?

You're such a pussy, man. "Give me liberty or give me death!" doesn't mean shiat to you. You'll gladly flush all of it down the toilet so you don't wet the bed at night having nightmares of a mean old Muslim terrorist farking you up. Grow a farking sack.

It really does blow my mind that people still support him. After everything that has come out, everything we know...and people still think he's a good guy and did the right things?

It's kind of depressing.

Dick is pretty good at shoving his own old wrinkled cock up his own ass. and he wants to bring you along......

Republicans for Dick!!

RandomExcess: liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.



mmm, sweet sweet neocon tears....

/successful troll is successful!

chipspastic: So simple even an alt can agree with it.

LOL, perfect!

RandomExcess: liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.

Excuse me if I refuse to condone descending to the level of madness and depraved sadism in the interests of 'security'.

Instead I will hold the position that it is just. not. possible to reach the level of protection that Bush and Cheney boasted about without completely compromising every principle this country used to stand for.

Now, papers please and shut the fark up, you're not in a 'free speech zone.'

RandomExcess: liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.

awww.. c'mon. trolling with a dragnet is no fun.

shower_in_my_socks: RandomExcess: liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.


So we've only tortured killers of Americans, right? We haven't tortured some poor farking goat farmer because a rival tribal member lied to U.S. troops and had him shipped off to a CIA black site? If they're accused of being terrorists, it's guilty until proven innocent? Never mind the guys we've held onto for SEVEN FARKING YEARS, only to release them with NO CHARGES, right? Never mind the fact that torturing a detainee makes it impossible to ever prosecute them, right? Never mind that it goes completely against everything the United States of America is supposed to stand for to the rest of the world, right?

You're such a pussy, man. "Give me liberty or give me death!" doesn't mean shiat to you. You'll gladly flush all of it down the toilet so you don't wet the bed at night having nightmares of a mean old Muslim terrorist farking you up. Grow a farking sack.

THIS.

Everytime someone gets taken off of an airplane because their skin is suspiciously brown, the terrorists have won. The goal of terrorism is to make one's enemies live in fear, and Dick Cheney certainly isn't making it any harder for Al Qaeda to achieve that goal.

wolvernova: RandomExcess: liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.

I'm not a liberal. In fact, I'm conservative. But Jon Stewart is right. Dick Cheney is a piece of shiat. There isn't anything liberal or conservative about this. Either you understand it, or you're a farking retard that has no clue what our values are.

It's been interesting to watch my conservative friends over the last 8 years. Real conservatives, not neo-con pricks; they believe in less government, prevention rather than preemptive action, and they don't give a shiat what religion anyone wants to follow.

When Bush would do something insane, I'd turn to them and ask "what the hell, man? How is this your dude?" and usually their response would be, "this is not our dude. I cannot believe that this guy got elected."

So I do not blame conservatives for Bush, if they will not blame my party for Carter. Let's all just agree that the dude was a mistake and try to work together to help the new guy do his job.

CatJumpJohn: So I do not blame conservatives for Bush, if they will not blame my party for Carter. Let's all just agree that the dude was a mistake and try to work together to help the new guy do his job.

I didn't vote for him either time. Only recently have I started accepting and forgiving people for voting for him in 2004. But yes, it's time to get over it.

But I do still eagerly await Dick's departure from this planet, and will watch in HD the rabid, insulting protests at his funeral with satisfaction.

I propose an executive order mandating that Dick Cheney and Jimmy Carter be forced to share an apartment together for the rest of their unnatural lives. their zany antics and hilarious sub-textual antisemitism will be televised for the whole world to enjoy.

RandomExcess: liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.

Whackadoodles still insisting that Iraq had something to do with 9/11. While you were sucking Bush's cock for 8 years, we dropped the ball in Afghanistan.

DIAF

I've already started working on my speech for Cheney's funeral. here is what I have got so far:
"Dick Cheney was not a great man, and was loved by only a very privileged few, but that does not mean that this is a time for sadness: Let us not mourn his life, but celebrate his death, as surely he would have done all of ours."

anyone got any advice?

RandomExcess: liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.

I agree completely. Which is why I advocate the arrest and detention without trial of all registered Republicans. We all know they're guilty, right? Prosecution is too good for them.

inthrees: Excuse me if I refuse to condone descending to the level of madness and depraved sadism in the interests of 'security'.

Instead I will hold the position that it is just. not. possible to reach the level of protection that Bush and Cheney boasted about without completely compromising every principle this country used to stand for.

Now, papers please and shut the fark up, you're not in a 'free speech zone.'

You're right, but it's not just that. It's also that giving up our civil liberties and all the principles we stand for isn't even necessary in order for us to achieve the greatest level of "homeland security" that is reasonably possible. We can't ever protect against all terrorist threats, so why give up all these things that are precious to us as Americans in a futile attempt to try? There is no inherent conflict between security and liberty. The fact that people like Dick Cheney are so eager to portray the debate as a tradeoff between freedom and security damningly proves that people like Dick Cheney are more interested in taking away our freedoms and destroying America than in protecting us.

shower_in_my_socks:

You're such a pussy, man. "Give me liberty or give me death!" doesn't mean shiat to you. You'll gladly flush all of it down the toilet so you don't wet the bed at night having nightmares of a mean old Muslim terrorist farking you up. Grow a farking sack.

Expertly said. The 'cost of freedom' is risk, not giving up freedom to protect what little shred of freedom is left.

RandomExcess: liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.


I don't know about following it, but a fool certainly wrote it.

"Those who would sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither."

"Do they speak English in what?"

Ohh ohh Jon Stewart. If Jon Stewart couldn't schtick, he would have been a lounge singer in the mold of Neil Diamond.

Desterion: Why do we keep getting daily show links every day? Isn't the large amount of daily kos and huffpo greenlights enough?

The Daily Show was on fire recently. Took on Obama, the press sec, congressional republicans and this great take down on Cheney.

I forget who said it, or how exactly it was said, but I remember a wise man once saying something to the effect that the difference between a wise man and a fool was not their ability to follow a line of reasoning, but their ability to reject it as foolish.

I'll look it up.

Desterion: Why do we keep getting daily show links every day? Isn't the large amount of daily kos and huffpo greenlights enough?

Because conservative attempts at humor fail to be funny. Or because it's fun to watch the Independents whine that the funny and intelligent people refuse to see things their way. Or because hypocrites deserve to be held up to ridicule.

So many reasons.

Who?

Oh, that guy from the past.

You're a real progressive there Jon.

I don't quite understand the "OMG, we're letting known terrorists roam the streets again!" scare tactic. If they are KNOWN TERRORISTS, then try them in a court of law (like we do for every American criminal) and as outlined in the Constitution (which has worked pretty darn well over the past 200+ years). If we have all this evidence that each of them is an Al Q. terrorist, then they'll be found guilty and have to live their lives in jail (just like other murderers, conspirators, etc). On the other hand, it seems that we don't have any evidence AT ALL for some of the Guantanamo detainees, which means that we've detained entirely innocent (not necessarily smart, but legally innocent) people for half a decade for no reason. Yeah, that's American of us.

If we have evidence that someone's a terrorist, then try them in a court of law, and throw them in jail. If we don't have evidence? Well, that's the way the American court system works. You can't just justify holding innocent people for years and years without any speedy trial or even legal counsel by thinking to yourself, "Gee, he's a 'towel-head' and lives in a hut and rides camels. Haha, see, he's not like me and my familiy, so LOCK HIM UP!"

WxGuy1: If we have evidence that someone's a terrorist, then try them in a court of law, and throw them in jail. If we don't have evidence? Well, that's the way the American court system works. You can't just justify holding innocent people for years and years without any speedy trial or even legal counsel by thinking to yourself, "Gee, he's a 'towel-head' and lives in a hut and rides camels. Haha, see, he's not like me and my familiy, so LOCK HIM UP!"

I agree. The latest whining wharrgarbl about why we can't just do this is that other countries don't want to accept them back for resettlement even if there is no evidence against them. Well, in that case, the solution is actually simple. We created the problem, so we should resettle them in America. No other country has an obligation to clean up our mess for us. And actually, it would probably be easier for our intelligence services to monitor them in the future if they're here in America and not somewhere else.

quierosteak:
Everytime someone gets taken off of an airplane because their skin is suspiciously brown, the terrorists have won. The goal of terrorism is to make one's enemies live in fear, and Dick Cheney certainly isn't making it any harder for Al Qaeda to achieve that goal.

THIS².

When I think of the Brits in WWII, having those buzz-bombs hitting London day after day after day, not cowering in their basements, but going to work to keep the nation going... The years of the IRA bombings.... They kept on.

We. Turned. In. To. Pussies.

RandomExcess: liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.

It still amazes me how people have wet dreams about living in a police state. Believe me, it's not very comforting when the police or state can do whatever the fark they want, and you're woken at 6am to have the police ransack your apartment just for the hell of it.

You have absolutely no appreciation of your freedoms.

Dear NeoCons;

Regardless of the political/military outcomes in the Middle East, Bin Laden has won. He can die of natural causes a happy man, proud of his work. You and your leaders handed him the win. 9/11 wasn't executed to provoke a war. It was done in the hopes that America would over-react, empty its treasury, ruin its economy and operate from a position of fear. This was Bin Laden's stated goal in attacking us.

BushCo obliged him with flying colors. And get this: BushCo and its retarded employees accused their detractors of being Bin Laden supporters! The cognitive dissonance is mind-boggling.

NeoCons have neither brains nor balls. If we had competent leadership after 9/11, we could have beaten Bin Laden at his own game. We could have cemented a global police effort to hunt down radicals. We could have used political clout and massive bribes to get every nation on Earth to join in the effort. We could have used money to build up the security and civility of the places these radicals exploit. Instead, we got BushCo and the waaaargharblers, turning Afghanistan and Iraq into basket-case radicalism factories. In the mean time, radicals continue to fester in Africa, Indonesia and Pakistan.

Bush and the NeoCons are the unwitting dupes of radical Islam. They cannot think strategically. It's just too much for them. They are ruled by fear and stupidity. It will take decades for us to recover, if we can recover a all.

What bothers me is the people, and Cheney seems to be one of them, who equate closing Gitmo with letting all the people there go free. It's not like they're going to be dumped in Miami with 50 bucks and a new suit.....

The Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, talk about "All men" not just ones who happen to live in America. Anyone who doesn't see it as a short step between denying foreign people we claim are terrorists the right to hear the charges brought against them, to face their accusers, to mount a defense of their actions and denying those same rights to any American is so wrong it makes my head spin.

Mnemia: I agree. The latest whining wharrgarbl about why we can't just do this is that other countries don't want to accept them back for resettlement even if there is no evidence against them. Well, in that case, the solution is actually simple. We created the problem, so we should resettle them in America. No other country has an obligation to clean up our mess for us. And actually, it would probably be easier for our intelligence services to monitor them in the future if they're here in America and not somewhere else.

Big fat this.

WxGuy1: I don't quite understand the "OMG, we're letting known terrorists roam the streets again!" scare tactic. If they are KNOWN TERRORISTS, then try them in a court of law (like we do for every American criminal) and as outlined in the Constitution (which has worked pretty darn well over the past 200+ years). If we have all this evidence that each of them is an Al Q. terrorist, then they'll be found guilty and have to live their lives in jail (just like other murderers, conspirators, etc). On the other hand, it seems that we don't have any evidence AT ALL for some of the Guantanamo detainees, which means that we've detained entirely innocent (not necessarily smart, but legally innocent) people for half a decade for no reason. Yeah, that's American of us.

If we have evidence that someone's a terrorist, then try them in a court of law, and throw them in jail. If we don't have evidence? Well, that's the way the American court system works. You can't just justify holding innocent people for years and years without any speedy trial or even legal counsel by thinking to yourself, "Gee, he's a 'towel-head' and lives in a hut and rides camels. Haha, see, he's not like me and my familiy, so LOCK HIM UP!"

This this this. I find it hard to believe that we can so easily convict and jail people for having a small quantity of plant on them, even though they harmed no one else, yet have such a hard time with "known terrorists."

Unless by 'terrorist' they mean 'furriner' or 'brownskin' or 'he disagrees wtih us' or something.

Remember kids, it's patriotic to blindly obey.

shower_in_my_socks: RandomExcess: liberals trying to relive an rewrite history. Extraordinary situations require extraordinary means. Less therapy and more interrogation for killers of Americans.

Seems so simple a fool could follow it.


So we've only tortured killers of Americans, right? We haven't tortured some poor farking goat farmer because a rival tribal member lied to U.S. troops and had him shipped off to a CIA black site? If they're accused of being terrorists, it's guilty until proven innocent? Never mind the guys we've held onto for SEVEN FARKING YEARS, only to release them with NO CHARGES, right? Never mind the fact that torturing a detainee makes it impossible to ever prosecute them, right? Never mind that it goes completely against everything the United States of America is supposed to stand for to the rest of the world, right?

You're such a pussy, man. "Give me liberty or give me death!" doesn't mean shiat to you. You'll gladly flush all of it down the toilet so you don't wet the bed at night having nightmares of a mean old Muslim terrorist farking you up. Grow a farking sack.

Bravo, sir. Bravo.

That's great, maybe next week he can destroy somebody equally relevant these days, like Spiro Agnew.

Impossible! Dick Cheney can only be killed by stabbing him in the heart with the Bone Sabre of Zubakabras!

Dick Cheney's craps are bigger than John Stewart.