I broadly agree with this, but the Vice Presidency is a special case. Technically, the VP doesn't "serve" the president. The presidential nominee may pick the VP out of custom, but he is an elected official in his own right and cannot be fired. Further, there's no way for him to keep the position he was elected to but resign his place at the table.

At the same time, he could have spoken up at the time and asserted his platform as an independently elected official (albeit one with little formal responsibility) and he chose not to. Doing so now somewhat (though not entirely) falls into the category of what you're referring to.

On the last hand, he could have perceived using his position to speak out against the POTUS in a time of war as something less than patriotic whereas speaking out against a former president something different. But he certainly hasn't extended Obama that courtesy.

Lastly, I should point out that by suggesting that Bush was more reasonable and pragmatic in his second term, Cheney is doing him a favor of sorts by bringing attention to Joyner's observations.

I'm not sure the mind of a person who promotes torture can ever fascinate. Certainly it is essential to understand how such a person's mind works, but the study will likely horrify rather than fascinate.

Muffler, so your a big fan of surrounding yourself with yes men?

This apparently not only hurt his feelings but, more importantly, [was] a shift away from a national strategy Cheney legitimately thought necessary to protect his country. As Kevin Drum intimates, it’s amazing that he thought we were on the right course.

:n2: s/legitimately/illegitmately

?