I've heard some real ugliness coming from the talking heads over at Faux "news" over the years, but this fearmongering rant by The Five's Kimberly Guilfoyle and her defense of the Cheney's spiteful op-ed in the Wall Street Journal this week has to be some of the worst I've seen in a while.
After first asking if President Obama is "dealing in reality when it comes to the global war on radical Islam, with her cohort Eric Bolling spouting a whole lot of revisionist history, but almost sounding sane in comparison to Guilfoyle, and Juan Williams already at the point where his head was about to explode listening to her, Guilfoyle decided it would be a good time to read part of Cheney's op-ed.
GUIFOYLE: You mentioned Dick Cheney. Here's somebody who gets it and was in the Bush White House and actually we were feared and respected in the world which we don't have right now, so listen to this.
American freedom will not be secured by empty threats, meaningless red lines, leading from behind, appeasing our enemies, abandoning our allies, or apologizing for our great nation—all hallmarks to date of the Obama doctrine. Our security, and the security of our friends around the world, can only be guaranteed with a fundamental reversal of the policies of the past six years.
WILLIAMS: Does that guy have no shame? Is that the same guy that got us in this mess the first time that lead to this mess? I can't believe that the people like Vice President Cheney, I can't believe that there are so many of you guys who want us to go down the same path after they were so wrong!
GUIFOYLE: We had something. In all due respect, Vice President Cheney knows a lot more about it than anybody at this table because of the intel reports and all the information on the ground.
WILLIAMS: Oh yeah. That's why he was so wrong? Oh, I see. So it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter that he was wrong Kimberly. We should send more young people to die?
GUIFOYLE: You're the one saying that. No one wants to sacrifice American lives. We are doing this so we don't have to lose more.
Well, go put on a uniform Kimberly and let us know how that works out for you. And she needs to share whatever the hell she's been smoking if she thinks Cheney had "good intel" on Iraq. I've got a stack of books around here I could recommend she read on that topic, but I'm pretty sure that would be a complete waste of time.
Here's more on the segment from Fox's blog: Is the U.S. Running Out of Options in Iraq?:
President Obama has based his foreign policy on issues including closing Gitmo, ending the war in Iraq, winding down operations in Afghanistan, and the notion that “Al Qaeda is on the path to defeat.”
In the past few weeks, major cities and an oil refinery in Iraq have fallen into the hands of ISIS militants. Now, the United States is contemplating a partnership with Iran to counter the militants.
Eric Bolling said the best way to handle the crisis is to become completely independent from Middle Eastern oil. “Just frack on federal lands, drill offshore and open the Keystone pipeline. One, two, three and we are done with those cockroaches forever.”
Kimberly Guilfoyle pushed back, calling it “naïve” to think the U.S. could decide to be done with the Middle East. “They have bigger goals and agendas which they are actually achieving at a rapid pace because the U.S. sits back and waits.”
Dana Perino agreed that all options should be on the table when it comes to energy. However, she said we can’t ignore the fact that terrorists want to destroy the Western way of life. Perino surmised that there are no good options, but that we’re running out of time to exercise any that the U.S. may have.
“The American president sometimes has to tell the American people what they do not want to hear,” Perino said. “I am willing to be led by the president; I just would like to know where we are going.”
[ad]
