Opinion:

If your lenses are distorted, don't blame someone else when you run into a wall

    By Jack Grant

Lest anyone think I'm picking on the right-wing, I have problems with the distortions coming from the direction of the left-wing. Oliver Willis recently posted a condemnation of a statement by Vice President Dick Cheney, saying that Cheney implied "those kids in Russia got what they were asking for because their country didn't think invading Iraq was a good idea."

Sorry, Oliver, what the Vice President said was:

I think some have hoped that if they kept their heads down and stayed out of the line of fire, they wouldn't get hit. I think what happened in Russia now demonstrates pretty conclusively that everybody is a target. That Russia, of course, didn't support us in Iraq, they didn't get involved in sending troops there, they've gotten hit anyway.

When viewed through a lens that is not predisposed to distort statements from the Vice President as evil, this statement says:

Not supporting the actions of the United States in Iraq does not provide any immunity from terrorist actions.

"Deserve" was never mentioned, nor was it even implied. Vice President Cheney can be taken to task for being incomplete in the facts, he can be taken to task for not doing a full analysis of the origins of the terrorism in question, but he CANNOT and SHOULD NOT be taken to task for saying "the kids deserved it" because he did NOT say that. If you want to argue against re-electing the President and the Vice President, you should definitely do so; however, there are plenty of items in the record that are indisputable in their interpretation that would serve your cause better. Reading meanings that are not present into statements of those you oppose does not gain you any credibility. Posted by Jack Grant at 17:29 on 17 September 2004