Off The Hook

In an article on Dick Cheney, we get this from Maureen Dowd:

He has no coherent foreign policy viewpoint. He still doesn’t fathom that his brutish invasion of Iraq unbalanced that part of the world, empowered Iran and was a force multiplier for Muslims who hate America. He left our ports unsecured, our food supply unsafe, the Taliban rising and Osama on the loose. No matter if or when terrorists attack here — and they’re on their own timetable, not a partisan red/blue state timetable — Cheney will be deemed the primary one who made America more vulnerable.

I'd been planning to write a post about how lucky Obama must feel that Cheney's the one publicly attacking his policy in the war on terror, but I'm not so sure any more. I was gonna say the public generally agrees with Cheney's argument, but the man himself is so unpopular he discredits his side. But now I wonder. He really seems to be getting to the left. Is it because they hate him so much, or fear he's winning the argument?

As to Dowd's claim, let's not waste too much time on it. We know Al Qaeda wanted to attack us following 9/11, and haven't succeeded yet. But apparently nothing Dick Cheney did could possibly have anything to do with that. On the other hand, if, in the future, anything bad happens, then Cheney must be at fault. Dowd doesn't believe in preemptive war, but she believes in preemptive blame.