Oh, really?
You mean because Edwards was in the room? 
If you feel that way, then don’t you have to say that Kerry met Jane Fonda? I await your dance of rationalization with bated breath.
Even Fox call it a blooper:
But so what? - the point Cheney was making just reads, to me, like a tongue-in-cheek quip about Edwards attendance record- not meant as a truly factual account of their past history together. As a debate issue, it rates a rather large ‘Meh’.
(It reads much like thet ‘jokes’ made 4 years ago about Lieberman’s singing and helping him to ‘go back to private sector’ etc…)
This doesn’t help Edwards case. It shows that he only shows up for free meals, yet misses key votes in the Senate.
I think it takes the wind out of one of the nights roughest soundbites. Even if they just met at a prayer breakfast, it shows that Cheney was lying–and was obviously telling a premeditated lie.
It doesn’t show that Edwards only met him at a prayer breakfast, either–it shows that we have documentary evidence of that meeting. I wouldn’t be surprised if people are combing through C-SPAN archives now to find more footage of senate-floor exchanges between the two.
Give the story time; I predict a big embarrassment for Cheney on this one, and much right-wing spin to say why it wasn’t a significant lie.
Daniel
I’m a Democrat and really don’t like Cheney much (though I give him major props for publically differing from Bush on the gay marriage amendment issue), but I don’t think it’s that big of a deal, and almost certainly isn’t even a lie. That prayer breakfast was 3 years ago; I wouldn’t be surprised if any given politician couldn’t necessarily remember who all was speaking at every event they’ve attended.
On the Today show, Tim Russert said that they also met on Meet the Press. Cheney was coming off and Edwards was coming on. They exchanged pleasantries and shook hands.
Still, doesn’t take the pressure of Edwards Senate attendance record if it is as poor as Cheney says it is.
Thing is, that was obviously a prepared soundbite, something of a bombshell; they should’ve vetted it.
Daniel
Hmmmm, Edwards has a Senate voting record the Republicans claim makes him one of the most liberal senators. Unless “Not Present” equals “a vote on the liberal side of an issue” he must’ve been there a FEW times. Maybe it’s just that Cheney wasn’t there.
True enough; someone dropped the ball there.
Will Cheney take responsibility for that, or will he blame the Intelligence community?
Democrat here - and it doesn’t bother me much. Agreed that as a prepared snap it should have been researched though. Hell, it probably way but the administration figured it was a tenuous enough link to use it anyway. Kind of like the link between 9/11 and Saddam (which it took approximately 9 seconds for Cheney to insinuate).
Not that I know one way or the other, but, yeah, I’d guess that Kerry has met Fonda. Not that that has ANY relevence to this discussion.
But get back to the point - Cheney lied to the American public once again. Are you saying that he was telling the truth? He had never met Edwards before? That is what he said, in a clearly prepared statement. Truth, or lie? Awaiting your response, blah, blah, blah.
I think the point is the he constantly is playing fast and loose with facts, and reality.
I think “meeting someone” implies a hand-shaking greeting, not a speech nod.
Seems like it was just taking a shot for the sake of taking a shot on Cheney’s part. Demonstrably wrong, but really not that big an issue. At least not to me. And I’m gonna vote for Kerry/Edwards.
Now, Cheney claiming that he had never tried to link Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, that pissed me off.
Again: have YOU ever co-chaired a meeting with someone without, well, meeting them?
Keep in mind that they may have been introduced off-camera; the fact that, twelve hours after the debate, we’ve not found documentary evidence of such a meeting doesn’t indicate that it didn’t take place.
What Cheney said was that “The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight.” That seems pretty clearly false to me. His basic point–that Edwards hasn’t shown up as often as he should have to Senate meetings–could have been made without the use of a falsehood.
Daniel
I met the Vice-President in 1991, when he was Secretary of Defense. I doubt he remembers me.
But I have a picture of me shaking his hand.
It would have been better if Mr. Cheney had said, “And yet, so far as I recall, this is the first time I’ve ever met you, on this stage tonight.” That would make room for the reality that a politician meets many more people than he can reasonably be expected to remember.
Except that he wasn’t making that claim about some random yutz whose hand he shook over a decade ago. He was claiming that he had never met Edwards before last night. That’s an untruth, a lie, a falsehood and mendacious as all hell.
It also, at least to me, means less than too many people are making of it. But for you to act as if meeting your election opponent is somehow analogous to meeting some anonymous well wisher is also pretty disingenuous.