[Grimmlok]

I love this man, he's hilarious:

By NANCY BENAC
Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON


There he goes again. The vice president has been throwing stones, and he's not the least bit sorry about it.

Dick Cheney took two opportunities this week to declare publicly that 75-year-old Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., seems to be "losing it." Cheney, 64, added in one interview that Rangel is "a lot older than I am, and it shows."

To be fair, it wasn't Cheney who picked the fight. Rangel previously had lobbed a number of barbs at the vice president and suggested that Cheney, who has a history of heart trouble, might not be up to his job.

"I would like to believe he's sick rather than just mean and evil," Rangel said last week.

But Cheney's sharp response _ in separate radio interviews Monday with two conservative talk show hosts _ suggests he made a calculated decision to hit back hard.

Norman Ornstein, a political analyst at the American Enterprise Institute, said Cheney is not a man prone to flashes of anger, but seems "increasingly less inclined to turn the other cheek" these days, particularly with congressional Democrats whom he once served alongside.

"I'm sure that he's growing a little tired of members taking what he believes are gratuitous personal shots at him," said Ornstein.

Rangel, keeping up the tit-for-tat, said Wednesday that Cheney "ought to be ashamed of himself" and apologize.

But there was nothing of the kind coming from the vice president's office. After all, this is the same vice president who used an obscenity beginning with "F" in an exchange with Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., on the Senate floor in June 2004. At the time, Leahy said he was "kind of shocked" by the remark, but Cheney was unrepentant, saying afterward, "I felt better after I said it."

That outburst drew Cheney a national scolding from 12-year-old Ilana Wexler, whose declaration at the Democratic National Convention last summer that the vice president "should be put in a time out" wowed the partisan crowd.

Back when President Bush was first running for the White House, he was caught on an open microphone using an expletive to describe a reporter to Cheney. The vice president was heard seconding the judgment, and he subsequently refused to criticize Bush for making the remark.

Cheney, like many a modern vice president, often has taken on the attack role, particularly during campaign season. He has the ability to turn up on the Sunday talk shows and project gravitas and dignity, yet "he seems to have this other, nasty streak that every so often comes out," said Joel K. Goldstein, a professor at St. Louis University law school and an expert on vice presidents.

Peter Post, one of etiquette maven Emily Post's great-grandchildren and the author of "Essential Manners for Men," said Cheney needs to recognize that "people will try to get his goat, and instead of responding in kind, take the high road." Further, said Post, the vice president's sharp words clash with Bush's frequent claims that he wants to restore civility to partisan Washington.

"We can have discussion without letting it degenerate into personal attacks," said Post.

Cheney's remarks may not have been good manners but they could well turn out to be good politics.

"It's red meat to the base," said Goldstein. At a time when the president is near historic lows in the polls and he is hearing grumbling from the right about his nomination of Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court, Goldstein said, "When Cheney does something like this, the Republican base sort of says 'Amen.'"

That's exactly what Rush Limbaugh did when Cheney said of Rangel, "Charlie's losing it, I guess."

"They're all losing it," agreed Limbaugh. "That's why people think they are ripe to be buried, Mr. Vice President."

"Well, we're working on it," Cheney promised.