1. There in the bunker came the reports and images that so many Americans remember from that day - word of the crash in Pennsylvania, the final phone calls from hijacked planes, the final horror for those who jumped to their death to escape burning alive. In the years since, I've heard occasional speculation that I'm a different man after 9/11. I wouldn't say that. But I'll freely admit that watching a coordinated, devastating attack on our country from an underground bunker at the White House can affect how you view your responsibilities.

This part of Cheney's speech was key and necessary because he brought back the haunting images that so many Americans have long forgotten. It brought back to life that horrible morning that we sat in front of our tvs and watched people being forced to choose how they would die. It puts into perspective the state of mind in which VP Cheney must have been in as he sat by most likely feeling as helpless and vulnerable as the rest of America felt on that day. An event such as this does change you, and it should. But it was important that he took this all in the way he did because it motivated almost the entirety of his eight years in office.

2. Our government prevented attacks and saved lives through the Terrorist Surveillance Program, which let us intercept calls and track contacts between al-Qaeda operatives and persons inside the United States. The program was top secret, and for good reason, until the editors of the New York Times got it and put it on the front page. After 9/11, the Times had spent months publishing the pictures and the stories of everyone killed by al-Qaeda on 9/11. Now here was that same newspaper publishing secrets in a way that could only help al-Qaeda. It impressed the Pulitzer committee, but it damn sure didn't serve the interests of our country, or the safety of our people.

The bold print is imperative to Cheney's point because it parallels the actions of the Obama Administration right now as they are putting forth confidential information to serve their own interests while disregarding the safety of our nation. It also shows the swift movement that the Times took to demonize Bush and the policies he put into place to continue the preservation of their First Amendment Right.

3. By presidential decision, last month we saw the selective release of documents relating to enhanced interrogations. This is held up as a bold exercise in open government, honoring the public's right to know. We're informed, as well, that there was much agonizing over this decision.

Yet somehow, when the soul-searching was done and the veil was lifted on the policies of the Bush administration, the public was given less than half the truth. The released memos were carefully redacted to leave out references to what our government learned through the methods in question. Other memos, laying out specific terrorist plots that were averted, apparently were not even considered for release. For reasons the administration has yet to explain, they believe the public has a right to know the method of the questions, but not the content of the answers.

The answer to the bold print is plain and simple: The Obama Administration would be stopped in their tracks in their mission to put Bush and Cheney behind bars. Obama is becoming more and more arrogant by the day. He does no wrong. He is incapable of making mistakes. He clearly believes that the American People are incapable of thinking for themselves.

4. We had a lot of blind spots after the attacks on our country. We didn't know about al-Qaeda's plans, but Khalid Sheikh Muhammed and a few others did know. And with many thousands of innocent lives potentially in the balance, we didn't think it made sense to let the terrorists answer questions in their own good time, if they answered them at all.

To this I will make the same point that Bill O'Reilly has asked almost every guest that he debated waterboarding with: If your child was in danger, and someone knew information that would save your child but refused to give it up, would you waterboard them to save your child? This is exactly what waterboarding did. It saved lives, but the Obama Administration REFUSES to release the information that Cheney quite apparently KNOWS is in the memos that are being kept under wraps.

And to answer Bill's question: I would hold the scum under water until his skin disintegrated if he finally gave up the information to save my child. I'd do it to save ANYONE. When there is a perilous situation, you don't have time to putz around with a man that is clearly out of his right state of mind. You do what you have to do to extract the information that is necessary.

And when you hear that there are no more, quote, "enemy combatants," as there were back in the days of that scary war on terror, at first that sounds like progress. The only problem is that the phrase is gone, but the same assortment of killers and would-be mass murderers are still there. And finding some less judgmental or more pleasant-sounding name for terrorists doesn't change what they are - or what they would do if we let them loose....

(parts skipped)

It's one thing to adopt the euphemisms that suggest we're no longer engaged in a war. These are just words, and in the end it's the policies that matter most. You don't want to call them enemy combatants? Fine. Call them what you want - just don't bring them into the United States. Tired of calling it a war? Use any term you prefer. Just remember it is a serious step to begin unraveling some of the very policies that have kept our people safe since 9/11.

To quote one of Obama's favorite sayings: lipstick on a pig. That's all this is. You can call a dog a cat until you are blue in the face, but it will not change the fact that it's a dog. You cannot change a person by being more sensitive to his feelings. This is nothing more than an attempt by the Obama Administration to put the war out of our minds so that they can further push their socialist agenda. If we forget out our national security, it will make it even easier for Obama to cut our military's funding so that the money can be appropriated to support his plethora of social programs.

6. If fine speech-making, appeals to reason, or pleas for compassion had the power to move them, the terrorists would long ago have abandoned the field. And when they see the American government caught up in arguments about interrogations, or whether foreign terrorists have constitutional rights, they don't stand back in awe of our legal system and wonder whether they had misjudged us all along. Instead the terrorists see just what they were hoping for - our unity gone, our resolve shaken, our leaders distracted. In short, they see weakness and opportunity.

This goes right along with point 5 that Cheney made in my list of quotes. We cannot call a person a "man caused disaster" and expect him to just give up his terrorist ways. Life doesn't work that way. These people are on a mission from God, or so some of them believe, and their mission is clear: kill Americans.

Ralph Peters has often made the point in his writings regarding the war that you simply cannot reason with a man that is so moved by religion that he would take his own life and the lives of others to get to heaven. They lack reason, and it's going to take more than a mere "contingency operation" to keep America safe. The sad fact of the matter is that people have to die in war. But why isn't the Obama Administration crying over the lives that Americans have sacrificed? Why are they so concerned that the people that set out on the crazy train to kill us are receiving plush accommodations?

It is because they are cowards. All of them. They are so wrapped up in "me me me" that they forget that they serve US. They fear the backlash of losing their supporters because they have made their supporters NEED THEM. Once their supporters realize that they don't NEED them, they are done.

7. As far as the interrogations are concerned, all that remains an official secret is the information we gained as a result. Some of his defenders say the unseen memos are inconclusive, which only raises the question why they won't let the American people decide that for themselves. I saw that information as vice president, and I reviewed some of it again at the National Archives last month. I've formally asked that it be declassified so the American people can see the intelligence we obtained, the things we learned, and the consequences for national security. And as you may have heard, last week that request was formally rejected. It's worth recalling that ultimate power of declassification belongs to the President himself. President Obama has used his declassification power to reveal what happened in the interrogation of terrorists. Now let him use that same power to show Americans what did not happen, thanks to the good work of our intelligence officials.

Obama is only interested in giving more reasons to apologize for Americans rash and terrible behavior. It is favorable to his cause to release information that makes us look so mean spirited, but it is quite another to release the whole truth.

8. For all the partisan anger that still lingers, our administration will stand up well in history - not despite our actions after 9/11, but because of them. And when I think about all that was to come during our administration and afterward - the recriminations, the second-guessing, the charges of "hubris" - my mind always goes back to that moment.

I am one of many that hope that history will be kind to President Bush and Vice President Cheney when it comes to national security. They made a lot of hard decisions, but the important thing to remember is that they made the decision and without apology because what they did was not self serving. What they did truly served US.