Skip

It's nice to share. Cheney sued over not releasing VP documents to the public.
September 16, 2008 1:39 PM   Subscribe


 
NO AUTHOR FOUND NO BACKLINK FOUND "Cheney argues that he does not need to make his records public since he is not part of the executive branch but rather a 'barnacle on the legislative branch'."

s/barnacle/cancer/
posted by mullingitover at 1:51 PM on September 16, 2008 [2 favorites]


Heh. I read the first link as "Society of American Anarchists," and wondered what their connection was to Darth Cheney.
posted by beelzbubba at 1:54 PM on September 16, 2008


Doh! I was too hasty.
posted by rokabiri at 1:55 PM on September 16, 2008


Wikipedia: Barnacles are of economic consequence as they often attach themselves to man-made structures, sometimes to the structure's detriment. Particularly in the case of ships, they are classified as fouling organisms.

Go Steve. I hope my former district votes to keep you around.
posted by Tehanu at 1:58 PM on September 16, 2008 [1 favorite]


Barnacles increase fuel usage, have a crusty shell, are hermaphroditic (can f*ck neighbors), are regarded as a pest, and are spineless.
posted by benzenedream at 2:03 PM on September 16, 2008


Interestingly, there was a fire in Cheney's ceremonial office late last year.
posted by Tehanu at 2:11 PM on September 16, 2008


You need to scrape barnacles off your ship more than once every eight years. Drag that thing into drydock and get to work.

No wonder we're listing so badly.
posted by rokusan at 2:11 PM on September 16, 2008


Good luck with that.

Neocon breaks law.
Progressive blusters and demands investigation.
Neocon eats breakfast.
Nothing happens.
Group sues.
Neocon calls up buddy judge.
Case dismissed, nothing to see here.
Progressive blusters and demands change in Washington.
Neocon has beer with dinner.

Lather, rinse, repeat.
posted by Chuffy at 2:17 PM on September 16, 2008


Barnacles they are anthropods
That affix themselves to man-mades facades;
They belong to the infraclass Cirripedia --
Or such are the claims of the liberal media;
They are in the subphylum Crustacea
And excrete amonia and urea;
They are sessile suspension feeders --
It's the sort of thing we want from all our leaders;
Each has an impermeable calcite shell
For in desiccated zones barnacles dwell;
Their sessile lives make reproduction hard
But Marjorie and Richard Herbert produced Richard;
He rose to preside in the White House halls
Making him a legend among barnacles;
Of fouling organisms, there are many
But there is only one Richard Cheney.
posted by Astro Zombie at 2:24 PM on September 16, 2008 [7 favorites]


A 'barnacle on the legislative branch'?

I'm looking forward to him to become a fly, splattered on the windshield of justice.
posted by three blind mice at 2:31 PM on September 16, 2008


Chuffy writes "Lather, rinse, repeat."

No, keep going! We're almost there.

More lathering, rinsing, repeating.
A few decades pass.
Country arrives at Brazil-style income gap between enormous mobs of poor and hungry and tiny group of fabulously wealthy.
Neocons are shocked to find themselves first against wall when revolution comes.
posted by mullingitover at 2:38 PM on September 16, 2008


mullingitover writes "NO AUTHOR FOUND NO BACKLINK FOUND"

sorry about that
posted by orthogonality at 2:39 PM on September 16, 2008


Maybe he's just fond of those records
posted by Lacking Subtlety at 2:42 PM on September 16, 2008


You don't fuck with archivists.
posted by Pope Guilty at 3:03 PM on September 16, 2008 [8 favorites]


Cheney argues that he does not need to make his records public since he is not part of the executive branch but rather a 'barnacle on the legislative branch'.

The linked article doesn't say that Vice President Cheney is arguing that.
posted by Slap Factory at 3:03 PM on September 16, 2008


From the first article: Vice President Cheney has said he does not have to make his papers public after leaving office because he is not part of the executive branch.

In fairness, Cheney himself has never claimed to be a barnacle.
posted by Astro Zombie at 3:12 PM on September 16, 2008




None of these groups have standing to sue. And they know it. This is a stunt.
posted by Ironmouth at 4:03 PM on September 16, 2008


The fire in Cheney's office closet? That was the shredder burning out. He's since got a weekly on-site contract with Iron Mountain through (who else) Halliburton.
posted by seanmpuckett at 4:17 PM on September 16, 2008


None of these groups have standing to sue.
If none of those groups can come up with a reason that's at least as good as Massachusetts' in Mass v. EPA, they don't have very imaginative lawyers...
posted by Inkoate at 5:53 PM on September 16, 2008 [1 favorite]


Why don't we just shoot him?
posted by Bathtub Bobsled at 7:33 PM on September 16, 2008




Do not mess with historians nor archivists because we will kick your ass.
posted by LarryC at 10:54 PM on September 16, 2008


None of these groups have standing to sue. And they know it. This is a stunt.

Seems to me they do. The law enforcers they (we) hired have decided that a number of laws (including this one) doesn't apply to them. Congress sits on its hands. Some people decide to do something, maybe force a branch of the government to actually perform some of the checks and balances they should be doing anyway and obviously it must be a stunt? No one is allowed to care about America or the Constitution or open government, that would be un-American. The terrorists will have won one, and not for the Gipper. My outrage meter used to go off at stuff like this, but now I realize that this is what people really want. Well fuck it then, everything is a stunt, everyone is a liar, and we're all doomed.
posted by IvoShandor at 2:03 AM on September 17, 2008


None of these groups have standing to sue. And they know it. This is a stunt.

Yes, it's viral marketting to promote those crafty archivists.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 2:17 AM on September 17, 2008 [2 favorites]


Do not mess with historians nor archivists because we will kick your ass.

...and then we will quietly hide the evidence of our involvement in said ass-kicking so that only we know where the records are ...

Yes, it's viral marketting to promote those crafty archivists.

Yep. That's it ... the Archivist Strike Force has been activated, as per the General Alarum sounded at the recent SAA meeting last month, and is now going on the offensive.

GIVE US YOUR RECORDS! OR ELSE! WE ARE THE ANARCHIVISTS!
posted by aldus_manutius at 5:49 AM on September 17, 2008 [2 favorites]


Anarchivists.
posted by box at 12:38 PM on September 17, 2008


Seems to me they do.

Let me explain. For a party to initiate a lawsuit, they must have standing to sue. This means that a party must have a link to the action and must show that they personally will be harmed by the law or action in question. These types of suits have been shot down so many times that counsel for the organizations in question damn well know they are initiating an action that will be dismissed for failure to state a claim.

I hate Cheney, disagree with his policy on this and many other matters, but these organizations have no standing and thus should not be bringing this matter to the courts.
posted by Ironmouth at 10:44 AM on September 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


If none of those groups can come up with a reason that's at least as good as Massachusetts' in Mass v. EPA, they don't have very imaginative lawyers...

In that case there was a cognizable harm--the loss of land to the state due to rising sea levels. What do you see here as the cogzniable harm or the link to the action?
posted by Ironmouth at 10:49 AM on September 18, 2008


Let me explain.

So then, what option is one left with when the law enforcers refuse to abide by the law they are supposed to enforce? Should we just call the police? I wish that would work.
posted by IvoShandor at 12:43 AM on September 20, 2008




« Older twilight zone, the edge of light   |   I'd contribute to her defense if she gets caught. Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post