Obama vs. Cheney

It was the polished and thoughtful constitutional lawyer against the irreproachable and contemptuous lifetime bureaucrat. President Barack Obama and former Vice President Dick Cheney engaged in a remarkable battle of words over national security, torture and the future of Guantanamo prison.

While not face to face, it may be the most important debate of our time because it was about the soul of America. Obama's central theme was that some Bush/Cheney policies were illegal, ineffective and weakened our country. Cheney's theme was that his administration's policies were legal and they kept America safe from another terrorist attack.

Vice President Cheney has been a lone but forceful voice in defending the battered Bush/Cheney legacy. Why did his newly elected administration not take seriously 2001 intelligence reports that Al Qaeda was about to strike America? He even raised it in his speech at the American Enterprise Institute; "Nine-eleven caused everyone to take a serious second look at threats that had been gathering for a while, and enemies whose plans were getting bolder and more sophisticated."

The World Trade Center terrorist attack was devastating. The Bush/Cheney administration went into overdrive to make up for their initial mistakes. "Everyone expected a follow-on attack, and our job was to stop it," Cheney recounted yesterday, "Al Qaeda was seeking nuclear technology...we had an anthrax attack from an unknown source...and dictators like Saddam Hussein with ties to Mideast terrorists."

From the earliest moment Bush and Cheney linked Saddam Hussein to Al Qaeda and targeted him for attack. They built a case for an American invasion of Iraq by claiming his complicity in the American attacks and his possession of weapons of mass destruction, WMD's. But no link would be found and there were no WMD's. More than 4,000 U.S. soldiers have died in Iraq since the poorly planned invasion and occupation began. As Obama said, "Faced with an uncertain threat, our government made a series of hasty decisions...all too often our government made decisions based on fear rather than foresight."

Another one of those decisions was to use enhanced interrogation techniques. Cheney defended them as legal and effective, "(their use) prevented the violent death of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of innocent people." He quoted President Obama's Director of National Intelligence, Admiral Dennis Blair, as saying, "High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the Al Qaeda organization that was attacking this country." But Cheney did not mention that Blair also said, "The bottom line is that these techniques hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."

Obama's position on these techniques was firm, "I categorically reject the assertion that these are the most effective means of interrogation." Cheney's was righteous, "In my long experience in Washington, few matters have inspired such contrived indignation and phony moralizing as the interrogation methods applied to a few captured terrorists." Cheney's claim that the enhanced interrogation techniques used were legal is manipulating the truth. This country has long declared that waterboarding is torture. Further, in 2002 terrorists were waterboarded well before the ginned up and misguided Justice Department approval was given for its use.

Former Vice President Cheney also criticized the "selective release" of documents relating to the interrogations by the President. "For reasons the administration has yet to explain, they believe the public has the right to know the method of the questions, but not the content of the answers." The President said he released those memos because, "We will not be interrogating terrorists using that approach. That approach is now prohibited." But the argument may not be settled until the President releases all the memos.

With regard to Guantanamo, Cheney accused Obama of acting hastily. "On his second day in office, President Obama announced that (he was) closing the detention facility," Cheney said, "The step came with little deliberation and no plan." Cheney then played the fear card, "The President says some of these terrorists should be brought to American soil for trial in our court system." He added that he agreed with many Democrats who were "Unsure how to explain to their constituents why terrorists might soon be relocating into their states." But Obama described Guantanamo as a symbol that helped Al Qaeda recruit terrorists. "The problem of what to do with Guantanamo detainees was not caused by my decision to close the facility, " Obama said, "The problem exists because of the decision to open Guantanamo in the first place." Today Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a holdover Bush appointee, defended Obama's decision to close the Guantanamo facility.

The blight of Abu Ghraib came up when Cheney blamed "a few sadistic prison guards" for abusing inmates "in violation of American law, military regulations and simple decency." He said that the guards had received Army justice but failed to point out that responsibility for Abu Ghraib runs all the way up the chain of command to former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Obama seems to be trying to find a pragmatic way to deal with all of these problems. "National security requires a delicate balance," he said, "On the one hand, our democracy depends on transparency. On the other hand, some information must be protected from public disclosure for the sake of our security." But will he remain pragmatic should there be another devastating terrorist attack on this country? He raised that possibility in his speech.

And how will history treat the Bush/Cheney administration? The difficult and costly Iraq war that America should have never waged, a failed Katrina response, a collapsed economy, incredible deficit spending and the use of torture are among the missteps that do not bode well for their legacy.

Yet Cheney remains defiant and outspoken because he has nothing to lose. "For all the partisan anger that still lingers," he said yesterday, "our administration will stand up well in history--not despite our actions after 9/11, but because of them."

The former Vice President doth protest too much!

Comments

[ThesagaciousOne]

'... "I categorically reject the assertion that these are the most effective means of interrogat­ion." ...'

Interesting. If that is the case why is he prepared to use them?

From: Executive Order 13491 - Ensuring Lawful Interrogations

" ... (c) Interpretations of Common Article 3 and the Army Field Manual. From this day forward, unless the Attorney General with appropriate consultation provides further guidance, officers, employees, and other agents of the United States Government may, in conducting interrogations, act in reliance upon Army Field Manual 2 22.3, but may not, in conducting interrogations, rely upon any interpretation of the law governing interrogation ... Convention Against Torture, Common Article 3, Army Field Manual 2 22.3, and its predecessor document, Army Field Manual 34 52 issued by the Department of Justice between September 11, 2001, and January 20, 2009. ..."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/EnsuringLawfulInterrogations/

The key words are:
"... unless the Attorney General with appropriate consultation provides further guidance ..."

This is a loop hole large enough to drive a truck full of waterboards through. If he intended to use only the Field Manual, this phrase is not necessary. If this phrase were not present, and he wished to change the parameters, he could just issue a new E.O. to pubicly state what the new guide lines were. With this phrase he can, quietly, institute "Guided Interrogations" to do anything he wants.

Perhaps we should read what our president writes, not just listen to what he says.

[williambanzai7]

CHENEY DOES THE NEO-CON WARP AGAIN
(Lets Do the Time Warp, Rocky Horror Picture Show)
WilliamBanzai7

Sing along link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBHONx9vTtI

It's astounding, political legacies are fleeting
Madness rules the polls
But listen closely, not for very much longer
We Neo-Con geeks got to keep control

I remember doing the Neo-Con Warp
Drinking those moments when
The blankness would hit me and the intellectual void would be calling
Let's do the Neo-Con warp again...
Let's do the Neo-Con warp again!

It's just a big kick to the left
And then a big step to the extreme right
With your hands on your Neo-Con hips
You bring your knobby knees in tight
But it's the public trust that really drives you insane,
Let's do the Neo-Con Warp again!

Con't on William Banzai 7 Blog

[DeloresT]

It galls me for the mainstream media to promote this as an idealogical "fight". It's an old "has been" politician attempting to rewrite history and I fear that much of the media is in on it....simp­ly because they were also guilty of rushing off to join Bush/Cheney ( embedded journalists?) when this country attacked Iraq.
The media is even letting Cheney's daughter in on the action. Cheney's daughter was on CNN's Anderson Cooper and he let her run all over him. It was terrible to see.....He must be what Glenn Beck calls himself :: a commentator, because he's certainly NOT a journalist.

[BumpyKnight]

Bravo DeeTee! We all need to remember the role the "embedded" mainstream media had in this mess.

[Paul Krik]

http://www.amazon.com/Able-Danger/dp/B0027HM7GY/

[Poboy]

To compare the two is like comparing apples to oranges.

President Obama was draped by the magnificent painting of the Founders, with the Declaration of Independence and Constitution in the background holding up his Presidency as he spoke for and to the country.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/05/21/obama-guantanamo-security021.html

Cheney was speaking from a podium of the AEI, surrounding by guards and old people, nothing against them, talking gibberish trying to keep his butt out of jail.

Comparing the two is to belittle the Presidency, while elevating a scoundrel.

[BumpyKnight]

Excellent Photo! Thanks for the link.

[Rescisco]

"For all the partisan anger that still lingers," he said yesterday, "our administration will stand up well in history--not despite our actions after 9/11, but because of them."

Actually, this stuff dosen't "stand up," it floats!

[marignymitch]

Vice could cut the guy who's protecting him some slack, I think..

[sagebrush5]

Cheney's running all over the country protesting his "legacy" and it is certainly a case of "thou doth protest too much"...he­'s trying to convince himself that he was right in the abuses of people, our constitution and the Geneva convention etc. He's not right. He never will be. I'd also venture to say that it says a lot about who you are if you support him. How many times do we have to tell his right-wing supporters­...it was UNDER HIS and BUSH' S WATCH that 9-11 happened. The terror unleashed on the world after that was at the direction of those two and their sinister team .