EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- One American Who Isn't For Sale
- Edward Snowden: Saving Us from the United Stasi of America
- Major Loss to Organic Farmers as Court Rules in Favor of Monsanto
- The Judicial Lynching of Bradley Manning
- Remembering Satyajit Ray’s Hirok Rajar Deshe: On Edward Snowden, Resistance and Inverted Totalitarianism
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Chapter That Went Missing From Dick Cheney's Book
Dick Cheney’s hyper-hyped autobiography is short on revelations (it turns out that the “secret undisclosed location” was his house) but long, very long, on excuse making when it comes to the wars of whim into which he steered the United States. The former vice president is still sure there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, dismissing any talk of apologizing for his own weapons of mass deception pontificating in the run-up to the Iraq War. In fact, Cheney remains enthusiastic about every aspect of the wars of whim he steered the country into as Ronald Reagan’s chief congressional ally during the Iran-Contra scandal, George H.W. Bush’s hapless secretary of defense and George W. Bush’s neoconman prince regent, But where’s the chapter on Cheney’s heroic service in Vietnam? Of, that’s right, he had “other priorities” than responding to draft notices.
Try as readers may to find the tale of Cheney’s Vietnam service or, to be more precise, his meticulous avoidance of service, they just won’t find that In My Times offers much in the way of revelation about Cheney’s times.
Cheney has always positioned himself as an arch militarist. But when he had a chance to get on the frontlines, he instead deferments. A lot of them
Richard Bruce Cheney was “of age” for service durng the Vietnam conflict. Faced with the chance to engage on the battlefield or the home front, however, he dodged out—not for moral reasons but selfish ones. Pulitzer Prize–winning author David Maraniss, who interviewed Cheney for his book They Marched Into Sunlight, says the vice president just couldn’t be bothered. “I think he’s emblematic of a certain type. He wasn’t against the war, just didn’t want anything to do with it,” explains Maraniss. “He wanted to get on with his life and not let the world get in the way.”
Unfortunately, the world had a tendency to get in the way of young men who, like Cheney, were of draft age when the US troop presence in Vietnam began to rise in the mid-1960s. As a result, there was one sense in which Cheney mirrored the actions, if not the politics, of his fellow students. Dick Cheney was definitely opposed to the draft, at least as far as it affected him. Indeed, unlike George W. Bush, who performed some sort of service—ill-defined and unrecorded as it may have been—in the Texas Air National Guard, Cheney reacted to the prospect of wearing his country’s uniform like a man with a deadly allergy to olive drab. Between 1963 and 1965, Cheney used his student status at Casper College and the University of Wyoming to apply for and receive four 2-S draft deferments. As the war in Vietnam heated up, Cheney fought to defend and expand his deferments. Twenty-two days after Congress approved the Gulf of Tonkin resolution in August 1964, raising the prospect of a rapid expansion of the draft, he “coincidentally”—in the words of a Washington Post profile—married longtime girflriend Lynne Vincent. The advantage was that even if his student deferment was lifted, his married status might carry some weight with his draft board.
But the Vietnamese were not cooperating with Cheney’s schemes. The war kept demanding more and more young American men, and the range of those who were eligible for the draft expanded rapidly. On May 19, 1965, Cheney was reclassified with the most dangerous draft status: 1-A, “available for military service.” Soon afterward, Lyndon Johnson announced that draft call-ups would double, and on October 26, Selective Service constraints on the drafting of childless married men were lifted. Danang was calling. And it didn’t look like Dick had any excuses left.
But there was one way for ambitious young men to avoid serving their country while maintaining their political viability. If Cheney had a child, he’d be reclassified 3-A, removing him from the pool of those likely to be drafted. Cheney needed a kid—quick. And he got one. Precisely nine months and two days after the Selective Service eliminated special protections for childless married men, Cheney was no longer childless. His daughter Elizabeth was born on July 28, 1966. Convenient? Coincidence? That’s not Cheney’s style. Writer Timothy Noah did the math and suggested that the timing of Elizabeth’s arrival “would seem to indicate that the Cheneys, though doubtless planning to have children sometime, were seized with an untamable passion the moment Dick Cheney became vulnerable to the Vietnam draft. And acted on it. Carpe diem! Who says government policy can’t affect human behavior?”
Cheney applied for 3-A status immediately, receiving it on January l9, 1966, when Lynne was still in the first trimester of her pregnancy.
Twenty-three years later, when Cheney appeared before the Senate to plead the case for his confirmation as George Herbert Walker Bush’s defense secretary, he was questioned about his failure to serve. Cheney responded that he “would have obviously been happy to serve had I been called.” In a more truthful moment that same year, Cheney admitted to a reporter, “I had other priorities in the ’60s than military service.” Cheney’s lie to the Senate has never caused much concern, but that “other priorities” line has dogged him. After he selected himself to serve on the 2000 Republican ticket, former Secretary of Veterans Affairs Jesse Brown, a Vietnam veteran disabled by a gunshot wound to his right arm, said, “As a former Marine who was wounded and nearly lost his life, I personally resent that comment. I resent that he had ‘other priorities,’ when 58,000 people died and over 300,000 returned wounded and disabled. In my mind there is no doubt that because he had ‘other priorities’ someone died or was injured in his place.”
That may sound like a harsh assessment, but the fact is that at least a dozen men aged 19 to 47 from Cheney’s adopted hometown of Casper, Wyoming, died in Vietnam during the period when Cheney might have served. Because local draft boards had to fill quotas when a man who was eligible got a deferment, someone else had to fill the slot. The vagaries of draft quotas, military service and the war itself make it impossible to say whether Leroy Robert Cardenas or Walter Elmer Handy or Douglas Tyrone Patrick or any of the other sons of Casper who perished in Southeast Asia might have survived the war years and gone on to explore their “other priorities” if Cheney had responded to his country’s call. But that doesn’t stop some of those who served from asking, “Who died in your place, Dick Cheney?”
When Cheney served as vice president, Vietnam veteran Dennis Mansker raised that question on a website, where he maintained a list of the dead from Casper. Maybe Cheney did have other priorities, Mansker argues, but “so did these guys.”
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...




23 Comments so far
Show AllLook, the Cheney's of this world are the eternal parasites and blood suckers, no doubt about it. But somehow they rise to the top of power and there don't seem to be any "good men" or women to stop them. All of Washington--Republicans and Democrats--are responsible for allowing the Bush and Obama administrations to get away with murder. Let's stop focusing on individuals--evil as they may be--and look at the corrupt system that is called Washington. And that includes both parties. To the core! But it also includes the clueless American public who vote these people into office and then stand around doing nothing as their electees commit atrocities both domestically and on foreign soil. Americans are not simply dumb--although they certainly are that. They are also morally repugnant.
Donna
While I certainly agree that Americans should stop voting into office people like Dick Cheney as a Vietnam veteran I must emphatically disagree that we should "stop focusing on individuals" such as Cheney. Articles like this should be printed in every major newspaper in this country as they clearly expose what chickenhawks like Cheney are all about and that is hypocrisy. They are hypocritical because they are saying that they are all for dragging the United States into war while they themselves came nowhere near a field of combat while wearing a military uniform. I think that is extremely important and should always be mentioned in regard to our country's warmongers whether they are Cheney, GW Bush or Barack Obama.
The motto of the chickenhawks would appear to be: Do as I say, not as I do. The leaders of this country are quite content to wage war on third word countries just as long as it is not they or their children who take the risk of coming back to this country without an arm or a leg or brain damaged or in a wheelchair or in a body bag. One suspects that if the advice on one of my buttons was heeded then there would be a lot less eagerness for the United States to engage in their senseless wars and that would be:
Draft the Rich- It's Their War
Chickenhawks-perhaps one of the most loathsome creatures ever to walk on the face of this earth.
I would also add that we far too often separate the impunity for hypocritical actions on the part of "leadership" from the introduction into society of irreconcilable differences and ultimately resulting in sub-clinical "schizophrenic" conditions far exceeding any reasonable level of "cognitive dissonance" expected for social / societal wellbeing. Sectors of legitimately frustrated people, overworked and underpaid are then bought off by Koch-types. A game as old as the empire - the re-strung violin- the drop kick - etc.
Erroll,
The political epithet "Chickenhawk" used to describe individuals such as Dick Cheney is an insult to Chickenhawks. The Chickenhawk is a noble and brave variety of birds. Chickenhawks are particular hawks that prey on other birds.
Satirist Calvin Trillin has a more appropriate term for individuals such as Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, Jonah Goldberg, William Kristol and others who constantly advocate for war and military intervention yet never took upon themselves to go into harms way by serving in the military. He refers to them as "Sissyhawks".
"Sissyhawks". LOL.... THAT'S PERFECT!
deleted
I agree "generally". Having worked in government for 30 years I actually prefer that we focus on the individual and we call out the individual by name! I get your point about corruption in general but it isn't the CIA that is corrupt it is the individuals within the CIA. It isn't Homeland Security that is wasting billions on private contracts it's individual congressional people in collusion with gov't who are. I don't like it when journalists say the Defense Dept. is wasting money or that the CIA is illegally torturing people without naming names. It gives the cover to everyone. I'm not going to claim the republican or democratic party is anything but a collection of people but I'm happy to discuss the leaders and/or individuals within these organizations who are simply using people for their own gain.
Another good example: News Corp. is not a corrupt organization; in fact an organization is only an organization but there are obviously people within News Corp. who are corrupt and they should be named. And yes, when the leaders are corrupt the generalization is valid but the generalization avoids specific blame-giving the cover to everyone.
Dick Cheney's legacy is that he is a war criminal and the historical record will show that one day when all the people on both sides aren't around to continue to rewrite the history. A good historian will someday read the e-mails and documentation of this era and it will be plain to see. I want names whenever possible we need to quit putting the blame on large organizations which then gives the cover to all those corrupt people inside.
But the system IS the cover. And the corporation is the core of the system.
The corporation floats the wrong people to the top, for the wrong reasons. They then fund candidates who are corruptible, bribe, write their legislation and give them jobs after that. The corporation's hand fits into the Anti-Christ's glove....anthropologically, historically, and even religiously, as allegory meets reality.
Match the fruits of the corporation with the nightmare in Rev....
Well playing the deferments never hurt John Wayne's celebrity status why should it hurt Cheney's.
Gardenvariety- It does hurt his status, the point of the article is that this info gets squashed by the oligarchy, who promote the war economy and hide under the bleachers. Cheney is a criminal, his celebrity status not withstanding, who is,must, and will be held responsible. Do you support the effort to expose his hypocrisy? It is part of the process of bringing them to account.
You totally missed the sarcasm. (Been there, done that, not passing judgment Ana, just noting the error.)
No doubt he had to work on his access to the financier oligarchy, to apply for an "agent-of-empire" position, from which he can help form & steer policy-for-empire. You can't do that while fighting & dying, in one of the many "sucker/no-win wars" that the global empire arranges for nation-states to engage in (to their exhaustion, thus removing themselves from being a threat to empire).
Cheney was the ultimate successful American politician who used his government position to make himself and his corporate partner extremely rich which is the real goal of every corrupt politician..
Exposing a specimen of human garbage such as Dick Cheney is definitely important, and does not in the least exclude denouncing the totally corrupt political elites that are loitering in the Congress and the White House.
Frankly, I find Obama to be more of a danger than Dick Cheney. Both despicable, but Cheney obvious, whereas Obama has neutered opposition.
"Precisely nine months and two days after the Selective Service eliminated special protections for childless married men, Cheney was no longer childless." This certainly gives new meaning to the term "draft dodger."
Can a vile, amoral, power-lusting man without any conscience come to power in a country that is not itself totally corrupt in all of its institutions?
Cheney is a war criminal that belongs in jail. Instead of writing a book that is a pack lies called My Times, he should be doing time!
Paul R.
Excellent point.
Until the people learn how to recognize and prevent psychopaths from holding positions of political power, we're going have more Cheneys and Rumsfelds ruining this once-great nation,
When we have to draw our candidates from the cesspit of American politics, we'll keep ending up with turds. I'm in favor of draining the swamp.
The corporation floats the wrong people to the top, for the wrong reasons. They fund candidates who are corruptible, then bribe, write their legislation and give them jobs after that. The corporation's hand fits into the Anti-Christ's glove.
Cheney is a traitor.. who needs to be arrested, tried, and executed. That is how you drain the swamp. That is how you show that our Constitution is alive and is being enforced. That is how you make evil individuals conform to the law. It is the people who have the power, have the duty, to defend their laws. It is up to the people to remove Cheney in a very public way. He must be arrested and charged.