The Note, 5/22/2009: Audacity of Nuance — Obama paints in grays, against Cheney’s black-and-white
EmailBy RICK KLEIN That was fun — want to do it again? (Who do you think would rather have an encore?) The great Obama-Cheney event got us everywhere and nowhere. Everywhere in the sense that this, finally, was the national-security debate that never was in a campaign dominated by other issues and two candidates who agreed on Gitmo and torture; nowhere in the sense that we’re right where we were before. What President Obama is trying to do is actually more audacious than hope: It’s nuance. He’s painting in grays for an audience that’s used to black and white. He’s sewing a patchwork that Vice President Dick Cheney says is really an “unraveling.” Obama will, for the foreseeable future, be a more effective messenger than Cheney. But among the president’s problems is that he needs to be having a fundamentally different debate, when even members of his own party in Congress are watching an old one. With the split-screen moment done, the president gets the stage to himself again. But he’s still not where he wants to be. On that subject, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., gets one more shot at the cameras Friday, with a 10:15 am ET press conference before she joins her colleagues in leaving town for the Memorial Day recess. (She heads to China — think we’ll hear about human rights?) (And when Obama was envisioning those 30-second ads that would go up against Democrats, did he think it would be this fast and this, well, explosive? The RNC goes “Daisy,” as Chairman Michael Steele announces himself in the debate over Gitmo.) As for where we stand: Cheney is Cheney, Obama is Obama, and the national debate remains largely where it was Jan. 20. “Neither Cheney nor Obama brought significant new information to bear on the debate that has roiled Washington for weeks,” the AP’s Jennifer Loven writes. “Instead, each presented what amounted to lengthy — and dueling — summations of entrenched positions. Reaction afterward followed well-tilled ground as well, with no sign that Obama was winning the votes he will need to close the prison.” What makes it hard to rally behind: “Obama enjoys broad popularity, even on the national security issues that have long vexed his party. But his lengthy address, in which he conceded that his policies were still evolving, laid out a mixed approach that could be portrayed as squishy,” Peter Wallsten and Janet Hook write in the Los Angeles Times. “Obama is left to advocate his developing doctrine of flexibility while Cheney and other Republicans, warning actively of another attack, insist on implacability as they try to win back their old advantage,” they write. “Their views are entirely different, but both claimed to be speaking for American values,” ABC’s Jonathan Karl reported on “Good Morning America” Friday. “Arguably on the defensive over policy for the first time since taking office, Mr. Obama is gambling that his oratorical powers can reassure the public that bringing terrorism suspects to prisons on American soil will not put the public in danger,” Peter Baker writes in The New York Times. “At the same time, he must explain and win support for a nuanced set of positions that fall somewhere between George W. Bush and the American Civil Liberties Union.” “For the first time in his presidency, Americans are getting a glimpse of Barack Obama on defense,” Politico’s Ben Smith and Jonathan Martin write. “The most popular politician in the country found himself pushed up against a wall by one of the least popular in Cheney — the leading voice in a budding Republican attack on Obama over national defense, one of the GOP’s oldest (and most successful) cudgels against Democrats.” Who needs reassurances, again? “Late Thursday, it wasn’t clear whether Mr. Obama had allayed doubts,” Peter Spiegel and Jonathan Weisman write in The Wall Street Journal. ” ‘We’re all awaiting the details of the plan and the president is going to come up with one,’ Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said after the speech, suggesting that Democrats still needed information before they draw ranks around the Obama policies.” Who might he really be campaigning against? “Obama’s appearance at the National Archives had the feel of a campaign event, one aimed at convincing the American public and a recalcitrant Democratic Congress that strict adherence to the rule of law combined with an embrace of civil liberties is the most effective way to defeat America’s enemies,” Scott Wilson and Michael A. Fletcher write in The Washington Post. The line that wasn’t said: “According to his prepared remarks, Obama had . . . planned to say that those debates had been settled ‘most clearly at the ballot box in November,’ ” Wilson and Fletcher write. Watching his left: “He made at least one announcement that human rights groups say is completely at odds with the Constitution,” ABC’s Jake Tapper writes. “The president described those who face indefinite detention, ‘people who cannot be prosecuted for past crimes, in some cases, because evidence may be tainted, but who, nonetheless, pose a threat to the security of the United States.’ “ What will this groundwork mean? “Cheney laid down a marker that he and his party will redeem at the first sign of a breach in national security, while Obama placed himself firmly on the high road,” The Boston Globe’s Peter Canellos writes. “In taking on a president near the height of his popularity, Cheney was on a risky mission, to say the least. But the former vice president, already unpopular, had nothing to lose and much to gain.” “Cheney is seriously the only person who’s gotten the White House to change its policy,” Dan Senor, a former foreign policy adviser in the Bush administration, tells The New York Times’ Jim Rutenberg. “He’s setting the terms of the debate,” Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., tells Politico. “On paper, Obama should be an easy victor in his duel with Cheney; Obama is viewed favorably by about 60 percent of the public, Cheney by about 25 percent. And yet Cheney seems to be winning this fight,” The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank writes. “For the moment, at least, Obama’s intellectual arguments can’t match Cheney’s visceral rage.” “Former Vice President Dick Cheney accomplished something yesterday that Republicans have seldom been able to do: directly challenge President Barack Obama in real time on a major policy issue,” Bloomberg’s Hans Nichols writes. “Most Republicans would probably prefer to be represented by a standard-bearer whose name was ‘picked out of a hat’ rather than Cheney, [Rahm] Emanuel said in an interview.” “This is the first time that Republicans feel like they have some momentum,” said Republican consultant John Feehery. Who do you think Bill Kristol liked? Cheney was “sober, realistic and concrete, stands up for his country and its public officials, and has an acute awareness of the consequences of the choices one makes as a public official and a willingness to take responsibility for those choices,” he writes for The Weekly Standard. Who do you think former Gov. Mitt Romney, R-Mass., liked? “[Obama] said that the last thing he thinks about when he goes to sleep at night is keeping America safe. That’s a big difference with Vice President Cheney — when it came to protecting Americans, he never went to sleep,” Romney writes, at National Review. (Really — that’s a “big difference”? Does he know what’s in Cheney’s wildest dreams?) Obama’s not the only one grappling with nuance: “When Cheney lambastes the change in security policy, he’s not really attacking the Obama administration. He’s attacking the Bush administration,” David Brooks writes in his New York Times column. “In his speech on Thursday, he repeated in public a lot of the same arguments he had been making within the Bush White House as the policy decisions went more and more the other way.” Maybe there is a middle ground: “The bottom line is that Obama has taken a series of moderate and time-tested policy compromises. He has preserved and reformed them intelligently. He has fit them into a persuasive framework. By doing that, he has not made us less safe. He has made us more secure,” Brooks writes. The Washington Post’s Charles Krauthammer: “The Bush policies in the war on terror won’t have to await vindication by historians. Obama is doing it day by day. His denials mean nothing. Look at his deeds.” If Obama wanted a higher plane . . . “I regard it as the national security equivalent of his Jeremiah Wright speech. Why? Because it managed to reach a place apart from, while being fully part of, the furious debates we have been having,” The Atlantic’s Andrew Sullivan blogs. Helping to unpack the politics — and provide the perspective: “I think 2010 is likely to be about spending and borrowing and the anxiety the public have there as well as the failure to deal with other looming fiscal challenges like entitlement reform that threaten to swamp us,” Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, said at a Christian Science Monitor Breakfast, per ABC’s David Chalian. Vice President Joe Biden, as always, a reality check: “It’s like opening Pandora’s Box,” Biden said of Guantanamo, per Newsweek’s Holly Bailey. “We don’t know what’s inside the box.” (What does the president really think of his vice president? “President Obama is so ‘distracted by his vice president’s indiscipline’ that he has been forced to rebuke privately Vice President Joe Biden, according to a new book by Newsweek journalist Richard Wolffe, who interviewed Obama a dozen times,” Fox’s Bill Sammon reports. ” ‘He can’t keep his mouth shut,’ Wolffe quotes a ‘senior Obama aide’ as saying of the gaffe-prone Biden in ‘Renegade: The Making of a President,’ set for release June 2.”) (Plus a newsy tidbit: “If I had a Muslim summit, I think that I can speak credibly to them about the fact that I respect their culture,” Obama tells Wolffe.) Michael Steele announces that new RNC era with a bang. It’s a “Daisy” ad, complete with clips from the original LBJ ad — even Lyndon Johnson’s voice — to make the GOP case on Democratic divisions over Gitmo. “To close it, to close it not,” the little girl with the daisy (and the older-sounding voice) ponders, per ABC News. (What does President Bush think of all this? “I no longer feel that great sense of responsibility that I had when I was in the Oval Office. And frankly, it’s a liberating feeling,” he told seniors from Artesia High School in New Mexico, per the AP.) And the Pelosi show gets an encore performance Friday. “Nancy Pelosi was baffled and bewildered by the CIA. Unfortunately, she was also unbothered,” Politico’s Roger Simon writes. Where is Porter Goss — who was in that room with Pelosi in the September 2002 briefing? “He believes that his Op-ed makes it very clear and is not engaging beyond it at this time,” a spokeswoman tells The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent, on The Plum Line blog. In another time, in an alternate universe, this might have been a huge energy week: “The House Energy and Commerce Committee, splitting largely along party lines, approved on Thursday the most ambitious energy and global warming legislation ever debated in Congress,” John M. Broder writes in The New York Times. “The bill’s passage, on a 33-to-25 vote, served as a bookend to a week that began with President Obama’s announcing a deal with auto manufacturers to impose tough new mileage and emissions standards for all cars and trucks sold in the United States starting in 2012.” (When’s the last time a committee vote got a presidential statement — plus a statement from former Vice President Al Gore?) Committee approval “followed weeks of negotiations between liberal and moderate Democrats over how to soften the measure’s impact on consumers and various sectors of the economy. If enacted, it could transform the way the U.S. manufactures a range of products, heats offices and builds homes,” The Wall Street Journal’s Ian Talley and Stephen Power report. Don’t turn the lights off yet: “This stuff is going no place in the Senate,” Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn., told reporters, per Marty Katy’s “Huddle” blog. “They can do whatever they want with this, but I can tell you, there is no way this is going to pass.” Palin watch: “Gov. Sarah Palin is back at war with state lawmakers after vetoing their acceptance of federal stimulus money for energy cost relief,” Sean Cockerham writes in the Anchorage Daily News. “Legislators, who had voted overwhelmingly to take the money, said it will just go to other states to spend while Alaska could have funded weatherization work and renewable energy projects. They said no other state has rejected it.” Coming up on “This Week” Sunday: George Stephanopoulos interviews Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The roundtable: George Will, Donna Brazile, David Brooks of The New York Times, and E.J. Dionne from The Washington Post. The Kicker: “There was an awareness that he was speaking.” — White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, his word choice more passive than the president’s. “Well, good morning, or perhaps good afternoon.” — Former Vice President Dick Cheney, clearly aware of who else was speaking. The Note’s morning analysis won’t publish on Memorial Day. We’ll be back Tuesday, May 26 — enjoy your holiday. Today on “Top Line,” ABCNews.com’s daily political Webcast: Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, and ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. Noon ET. Follow The Note on Twitter: http://twitter.com/thenote For up-to-the-minute political updates check out The Note’s blog . . . all day every day: http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/
Santorum: Money Will Not Defeat Obama, Ideas Will 
Rick Santorum's Full Speech at CPAC 2012
Bottom line on Gitmo is that closing it will help our troops. The commanders on the ground agree with Obama. cheney is wrong…….again. Cheney has been wrong about EVERYTHING he ever raised his ugly head to cry about —Saddam has WMD – WRONG! “We not only know he has them, we know where they are” -D. Cheney —WRONG! Obama puts up witness after witness after witness, CIA interrogators who said torture DID NOT WORK, it was counter productive, it ignored the endgame, it was used as a recruitment tool for AQ, it was a disasterous policy put forth by contractors (hired by cheney) who had no experience with interrogation or middle eastern affairs. WHere’s the counter witness to say it didn’t work?????? just one???? Can Cheney find ONE person who witnessed it working??? no way Obama is going to release all the confessions of all the prisoners. We might as well give up all our weapons defense blue prints as well. Ridiculous cheney is asking for something he knows will never be released. Show us ONE PERSON , ONE interrogator who saw good stuff come from torture. Just one. shut up Cheney. YOu’ve been 100% wrong about everything you ever put your head into and we are just glad you’re GONE!
Posted by: frank | May 22, 2009, 8:39 am 8:39 am
It is apparent that President Obama and Cheney have philisophical differences when it comes to what is torture and what isn’t. Cheney beleives that if we are scared enough we can do anything we want without forsight, or approval of the world courts or our allies. It is called alienation of all things moral and wise. President Obama feels that torture undermines our countries integrity, and allows for more fervent recruitment of terrorists due to arrogance and the lawlessness we portray. I prefer the latter, as it is a more common sense approach, thought out, reasoned, and appropriate for what this country stands for. Cheney on the other hand has no difficulty whatsoever breaking the law, lying, and scaring the American people into an unjustified and deceptive frenzy. It is called yelling fire in a theater when there is none. It is immoral, void of character, and extremely self serving. He is only trying to fix the Bush/Cheney legacy from that of war mongers who lied to their country knowingly, and something in the way of respectable. Sorry but America told you loud and clear how they felt last November.
Posted by: Chuck | May 22, 2009, 8:43 am 8:43 am
Bottom line on Gitmo is that closing it will help our troops.
Posted by: frank | May 22, 2009 8:39:34
—————————————-
And just how would closing GTMO help the troops????
Posted by: dragoon70056 | May 22, 2009, 8:44 am 8:44 am
LMAO Cheney has the kid on the ropes…Thanks to Cheney and Bush and the FBI for bringing down the terrorist cell in NYC, they worked a year on this ..Take a note Obamie. on how professionals protect America..Have anything to say now Nancy Pelosi or “I Surrender” Harry reid?
Posted by: Nancy Pelosi, accomplice to torture | May 22, 2009, 8:58 am 8:58 am
Why are we even listening to cheney anyways. If not for him and his crooked politics, we would not be in this situation. It sounds to me that he is trying to cover his self. He is just a thug in a suit. Obama is trying to clean up this mess that was left behind. I believe that cheney has something he wants to hide from us and that is why he’s running off at the mouth. He is very slick and I have never trusted him.
Posted by: Belinda | May 22, 2009, 8:58 am 8:58 am
LOL, Cheney and Bush in on the FBI bust? That’s amusing.
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | May 22, 2009, 9:07 am 9:07 am
Blah, Blah, Blah, the media is out qouting each other to make their case, it isn’t about Cheney, Bush, Obama, Pelosi, Reid, or whoever, it is about the media and look at us.
Tripe!
Posted by: Thinking | May 22, 2009, 9:09 am 9:09 am
No wonder Cheney is so angry all the time. All his Haliburton money is drying up now that Iraq is winding down. No more war profiteering Cheney! Disappear! Go shoot some more friends in the face.
Posted by: Cheney is a Criminal | May 22, 2009, 9:10 am 9:10 am
Kudos, Rick Klein, you hit the nail on the head, regarding Obama painting in grays vs Cheney’s black and white. “No middle ground,” Cheney asserts, between throwing our justice system out the window and welcoming terrorists into our homes to rape the children.
How to you compare apples to oranges? Yesterday, Obama was talking about moving the gitmo prisoners through the justice system and Cheney was defending his administration’s actions after 9/11. Two different topics. Obama is President now and he is moving us forward, Cheney is singing his swan song for those who want to listen. I don’t want to listen to Cheney.
Posted by: Amy B Maine | May 22, 2009, 9:11 am 9:11 am
Cheney Only sees things His way And Expects The Obama Administration to do things his Way. umm Thanks but No Thanks Cheney you messed this Country up. oh and by the way you did not Keep us safe, 911 Happened On your Watch you and Bush and Republicans all Held Power your Job Was to Keep us safe you FAILED 911 Happened and If you would of Paid attention to the Warnings of Bin Laden Maybe you could of Prevented it!
Posted by: Angie in Pa | May 22, 2009, 9:15 am 9:15 am
As usual the angry republicans on here have to be ignorant, call names, offer no real reflection on the situation and just continue their rhetoric and rancor. There is no thought process in their opinions, just blind acceptance of what their leaders tell them. Sort of like a religious cult if you ask me. I admire a president who can think on his own, be resilient, and compromise when appropriate. I have no admiration for the republicans and Cheney who have locked their minds to intuitive thought and reasoning. It is their way and there can be no other right way. Again sort of like a cult.
Posted by: Chuck | May 22, 2009, 9:16 am 9:16 am
It is kinda crazy. Cheney hid out in his office like a mole. Quiet about all of his evil doings…..Just stay that way. Take your approval ratings like a man. LOL It is too late to justify yourself. Your record stands and in the future, your history has been already recorded. GIVE IT UP! Go back in you hole, mole.
Posted by: scentsofroses | May 22, 2009, 9:26 am 9:26 am
BTW, the “terrorist cell in NYC” looks to be more of a “wanna be” operation. But the FBI did their work and foiled the plot. That’s called vigilance—keeping the eye on the ball—something we didn’t do because we got distracted by Iraq.
Cheney thinks we need to be afraid or operate from fear. Terror=fear. If we operate from fear then the terrorists have won. They have caused us to change our values—the Constitution does a good job of stating what those values are.
The “daisy” commercial the RNC has put out is another fear tactic. It failed to make an impression on me.
Posted by: George | May 22, 2009, 9:37 am 9:37 am
I Get It I see whats Going on the Republicans Want to bring back the Old Fear Card Because they Know thats How Bush Won his 2nd term FEAR! Seeing that the republicans are bankrupt on ideas, and how the country is blaming them for the economic mess as well as all the other messes, they feel the only way to regain power is the good old magic FEAR CARD Because they have nothing else to offer just the same and people are Rejecting the same
Posted by: Angie in Pa | May 22, 2009, 9:44 am 9:44 am
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference. And by the way, can you please try to place all Gitmo detainees in houses next to the bleeding heart liberals who post here? A welcome party would be thrown in their honor.
Posted by: older&wiser | May 22, 2009, 9:51 am 9:51 am
The Republicans have no faith in our American super max prisons how sad what cowards!
Posted by: Angie in Pa | May 22, 2009, 10:02 am 10:02 am
GITMO detainees have not been convicted of anything. They are suspects. Those who are convicted will be in prison. Those who are not convicted will be released.
That someone is or was a detainee does not make them guilty of anything.
olderandwiser I would have thought you knew this.
BTW: judging from the recent work of the FBI and NYPD, it appears that we are being vigilant. Vigilance pays off.
Posted by: George | May 22, 2009, 10:03 am 10:03 am
we need a independent moderate for president in 2012 not this president he lives in a world of the 60′s love fest oh yeah cheney blew him a way. gitmos going no where watch this its going to be great his democratic buddies our going to shut him down.god bless america
Posted by: natale from mass. | May 22, 2009, 10:11 am 10:11 am
The decision has been made. Its closing. The media wants to drag this out. They love the needless mudslinging. In fact they are fanning the flames. Its done. Its closing. Move on.
Posted by: jeff | May 22, 2009, 10:23 am 10:23 am
Obama is apparently too naive or something is underfoot. It makes no sense why this President is harping on this business of techniques used on terrorists, and only three of them at that. Remember folks, these guys planned the WTC attacks, and the Pentagon. What kind of man would want to appease the rest of the world with the policies and issues he keeps bringing up about Gitmo. It doesn’t make any sense at all, and the economy is the focal point right now. Forget the damned terrorists. Let’s move on!!
Posted by: Steve | May 22, 2009, 10:26 am 10:26 am
jeff not gonna happen but remain in your little dream world.some times its a good place to be
Posted by: natale from mass. | May 22, 2009, 10:27 am 10:27 am
Not only should the Gitmo detainess be placed in houses next to the radical liberal thinkers on this site, we need to make sure the detainees are armed as criminals usually are and the libs have no guns as they wish for all of us.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | May 22, 2009, 10:35 am 10:35 am
Dr. Evil is a disgrace to the world at large. After cheating and lying and leading the nation to a needless war, spent billions of dollars and loss of innocent lies, Torture at will, he still has the cheek to speak up. Why has not anyone start impeachment proceedings against him???
Repubicans are such a DISGRACE!!!
Posted by: Al | May 22, 2009, 10:39 am 10:39 am
Cheney may be right or wrong when he says, for example, that waterboarding is legal and should be used on high-value detainees with knowledge of terror plans. However, Obama cannot be right when he says that waterboarding is torture but that he won’t prosecute torture and will reserve to himself the right to order such torture. What neither will propose is a ban on all harsh interrogation techniques written into US law by Congressional action.
Posted by: nuanain | May 22, 2009, 10:40 am 10:40 am
Closing Gitmo will help our troops. Torture has accounted for more terrorist recruiting than anything else. These are speculations that play to his support base, nothing more. Our president is entitled to his opinion as are his supporters. Don’t be misled by theories. He is yet to address the fact that we have been safe since 9/11. It’s undeniable fact. Another fact is we did, according to those in the know, extract useful information during those interrogations that has headed off subsequent attacks. No brag. No conjecture. Not a matter of political posturing. Just the facts.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | May 22, 2009, 10:42 am 10:42 am
That was my point – no one wants them next door, but anywhere on American soil seems too close. Super-maxes are great, but there are still issues of court appearances, testimony, exhibits and the like that have not been addressed. Trials that occurred in American courtrooms so far have turned into circuses and prompted additional acts of violence against us in retaliation. I don’t have an answer – yes, closing Gitmo would help troops because it would let those stationed there come home. I don’t know how else it could help – and there are a lot of liberals and moderates who may actually do great harm. The President has said no more “torture” so why do you keep bringing it up. Even the most powerful woman in Congress, and the Democratic Party, won’t let it go. If she had, there would be no war of words with the CIA or anyone else. She could focus her efforts on the economy, the environment, health care reform and a myriad of issues that we face right here, right now.
By the way, my son is in Iraq flying over ground troops keeping them safe. Yes, I would love to have him home and it scares me to think that all the clamor over photos and memos will give the enemy the incentive and ammunition to bring him and his fellow soldiers great harm. The religious zealots already think America is weakened and our focus has shifted from fighting them to self-implosion. Let’s not give them further proof continuing to squabble over a past practice that has ended. You do trust your leader, right?
Posted by: older&wiser | May 22, 2009, 10:43 am 10:43 am
jeff; We’ll see about that closing. Congress doesn’t think so.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | May 22, 2009, 10:46 am 10:46 am
Ok..enough finger pointing !!Let’s get the facts out.Let’s see the whole picture.Everythig should be exposed. How many got waterboarded and the information gained from each ?Show everyone the plots that were averted and how many people were saved.I’m tired of hearing the same stupid rethorics from both sides. Democrats are spilling hate and are on the roll now, they should not. Danger still lurking and if something happens they are the ones to blame. Let’s stop this name calling are breaking the law crap. Show me the facts. Right now is all hear say. Little pieces of information for political gain. Stop the attacks and show the facts.
Posted by: Frank | May 22, 2009, 10:47 am 10:47 am
Ok ..Close Guantanamo, the terroists don’t care. Have your way. Ohhh anyone is stupid enough to think the war will be over when the base is closed ?? Close the Da mm thing !! Ohh what ?? the world is going to love americans because we close it ?/ Are you stupid ?? It’s the economy stupid !! The world want to put us aside and run with the money, China , Russia, Saudi Arabia, South America, Europe. They don’t care about Guantanamo !! They want to have the power of money and the weapons to bargain. U. S. A is sooo stupid.
Posted by: Frank | May 22, 2009, 10:55 am 10:55 am
Angie in Pa.; Still blinded by the assumption of power are you? If Clinton had heeded the warnings and threats of Bin Laden maybe Bush and Cheney wouldn’t have had to deal with 9/11. It was soft national security that promoted boldness and opportunity for terrorist actions. Speculation? I call it 20/20 hindsight based on the facts that have been revealed.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | May 22, 2009, 10:58 am 10:58 am
al billions on a war if it saves just one american life yes. trillions on bailouts just plain dumb.
Posted by: natale from mass. | May 22, 2009, 11:00 am 11:00 am
Chuck you said it all…the Republicans are like a religious cult…same old spreading of fear…why didn’t they do something the eight years they were in office? Now we have a huge mess and they blame Obama? They are ignorant and narrowminded…their party is going down….with the likes of Rush, Gingrich, Palin, God help us all.
Posted by: Barb | May 22, 2009, 11:08 am 11:08 am
AND too bad Cheney didn’t do some speaking up the eight years he and Bush were in charge. He was hidden away…now he comes out like the pitbull he is and spreads lies and fear.
He should be thoroughly investigated.
Posted by: Barb | May 22, 2009, 11:10 am 11:10 am
Cheney needs a cell & Obama needs to make himself very clear about “Definite Detention”. People do not retaliate for no apparent reason & Obama doesn’t want to bring the constituency down on himself.
Posted by: Atheistno1 | May 22, 2009, 11:14 am 11:14 am
I love it…..Cheney burried Obama in this so called debate and the dems can only repeat old lines and attack his family. It is tough to fight facts but the same old democratic way is finally being seen by all….if you know you lost then try and attack his family and distract people by your crazy bogs…..you time is coming to an end and you only have yourselves to blame..LOL ha ha ha
Posted by: safetynet1 | May 22, 2009, 11:25 am 11:25 am
“Not only should the Gitmo detainess be placed in houses next to the radical liberal thinkers on this site, we need to make sure the detainees are armed as criminals usually are and the libs have no guns as they wish for all of us.”
“Closing Gitmo will help our troops. Torture has accounted for more terrorist recruiting than anything else. These are speculations that play to his support base, nothing more. Our president is entitled to his opinion as are his supporters. Don’t be misled by theories. He is yet to address the fact that we have been safe since 9/11. It’s undeniable fact. Another fact is we did, according to those in the know, extract useful information during those interrogations that has headed off subsequent attacks. No brag. No conjecture. Not a matter of political posturing. Just the facts.”
Wow, monroe, the right talk radio people sure have a devoted listener in you. My husband, a right-wing republican is even starting think that Repubs are barking up the wrong tree and he was duped.
The facts…..Terrorists do not have the same time-table as the rest of us. They are patient and have the luxury of affording to wait to plot their attacks. Their attacks on the World Trade Center were many years apart. Oh a lot more than eight years. How do YOU know we were safe? Many experts have said over the past eight years about how many times something could have and did slip through the cracks on the safety issues. Don’t give Cheney and his dummy more credit than is their due. THE FACTS
Posted by: scentsofroses | May 22, 2009, 11:26 am 11:26 am
Posted by: Atheistno1 | May 22, 2009 11:14:25 AM
You claim Obama need to be clear but he has never been clear on anything since he took office. He solves problems without understanding the whole picture…he passes bills he does not even read…..Obama is looking more foolish each and every day.
Posted by: safetynet1 | May 22, 2009, 11:28 am 11:28 am
Safetynet1: To Whom? Your numbers are deteriorating. Everyone has their own idea on who the fools are. LOL
Posted by: scentsofroses | May 22, 2009, 11:37 am 11:37 am
Secretary Gates has said GITMO needs to be closed and stated why.
Waterboarding is said to have been done on only three. Other kinds of torture was used on others such as scalpal cuts on genitals.
American soldiers were court martialed for using waterboarding on filipino POW during the Spanish American War (1898). A Texas sheriff and his deputies were convicted and sentenced for waterboarding in the 1980s. We obviously have developed amnesia or didn’t bother to check back far enough to realize that in 2002 it was still illegal.
In 1984 Ronald Reagan signed the UN convention against torture. He delivered a strong statement about the significance of this convention.
Saying it is okay if it keeps us safe is a lie if we believe in the rule of law and the principles set forth in the Constitution. That is what the President is saying—that’s not opinion.
Posted by: George | May 22, 2009, 11:41 am 11:41 am
Cheney is doing more to hurt the country than he realizes. He is wrong and he lied to us about weapons of mass destruction. More importantly he broke the law..don’t forget that, people. We cannot obey the laws we like and break the ones we don’t. Many intelligence agents have said over and over that the information we get by waterboarding is of no use. They lie to stop the pain. Even Sen. Mc Cain says this is so..so why does Cheney insist it was helpful? To restore his image…forget it Cheney. If you really loved this country you would have done something useful while in power. i.e. education, s.s., health care, etc. Remember, 9/11 was on your watch and I feel you almost want it to happen on Obama’s watch. How american is that?
Posted by: talmag | May 22, 2009, 11:45 am 11:45 am
as a moderate independent im sorry but this president just doesnt get it hes clueless and quite naive.
Posted by: natale from mass. | May 22, 2009, 11:49 am 11:49 am
In some area in life there is gray and in some areas there is just the bottom line…people who interject gray into clear cut choices only serve to complicate things more than necessary…as aresult nothing can get done…to solve a problem the simplist path is always the best way…hopefully that clarifies the BS about “nuance and gray”…we need to concern ourselves with keeping Americans free from the known fact that people want to kill us…the rights of these individuals and the process should be of no concern …the end result is what is important …its a war not an academic discussion…its leadership not political pandering…some intellectuals just don’t get it
Posted by: phillysmart | May 22, 2009, 11:53 am 11:53 am
Clueless and naive about what, natale from mass?
Posted by: George | May 22, 2009, 11:53 am 11:53 am
Oh and another thing…you have home grown muslim terrorist who were brainwashed in jail trying to blow up synague…ironically after our national security chief put a target on the back of white christians these men happen to be black muslims (played down in the media by the way) now you want to put some more terrorist in our jails so they can recruit all the scumbags we have locked up…this adminstration is becoming a joke and they are way in over their head…god help us
Posted by: phillysmart | May 22, 2009, 11:58 am 11:58 am
mmonroeliveson
Do provide us with these “facts”: who says waterboarding the three detainees over 100 times in a month extracted information that saved lives? Cheney? Cheney is your source? He’s the one who promoted the practice and defends it now. Rather circular logic, isn’t that?
What facts do you have to support the theory that anything Cheney/Bush did prevented attacks in the US since 9/11?
You want to credit them with our saftey post 9/11 but won’t credit Bill Clinton
with the peace and prosperity (and successful resolution of war in Bosnia)we experienced under his administration. Rather hypocritical aren’t you? Different standards for different Presidents. Your arguments don’t hold water.
Posted by: Amy B Maine | May 22, 2009, 12:02 pm 12:02 pm
As if we need the media to explain to us what Obama is doing. Those in a dream world are the liberal democrats. The scary and dangerous things are they believe they are so smart and know what is best for the country. The politicians they worship have them right where they want them; in the palm of their little hands; doing their bidding and the ‘running of the bull’.
Posted by: Banderman | May 22, 2009, 12:02 pm 12:02 pm
first: a great speech by President Obama; articulate, clear, intentions put forward & a reminder of constitutional law in regard to torture.
second: a secondary benefit: It “drew cheney out” we might say. His twisted hateful ideas are quite obvious to any fairly intelligent human being…even John mcCain disagrees with his extreme views. Cheney continues to reveal himself, before our eyes. He’s a disgrace and public enemy.
Posted by: gus amaral | May 22, 2009, 12:05 pm 12:05 pm
So phillysmart, you believe the “end justifies the means” even if the “means” are contrary to American principles established in our Constitution.
Those People don’t want to kill us, they want to kill our way of life. Sure they will use guns, mortars, even airplanes to achieve their goals because they believe the “end justifies the means.” Alcaida’s goal is to bring down our way of life, make us see how foolish our way is. They will torture, destroy, kill anyone who appears to believe as we do–even their own people.
To the extent that we use their methods, to that extend they will have succeeded in accomplishing their goal.
Posted by: George | May 22, 2009, 12:07 pm 12:07 pm
Close the the d a m m thing ! I will care less open or closes so are the terrorists, they don’t care. Ohhh..You think they are going to stop killing americans becasuse the prison is closed ? Very stupid thinking… Ohhh Nations are going to love us..really ???It is the economy stupid !! China, Europe, Russia , Iran, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia they want the power of money and the weapons to bargain. They care less what we do to the terrorists.Ohhhh wait, wait…Because of the Guantanamo jihadists are using it as a tool for recruiting…Hmmmmm, really? .How do you know that ? because Obama said so ?? Or because Pelosi said so ? So what was the reason they attack us on first place, more that once ?? I don’t know but many of you are easy to persuade with hear says….shame on you.
ohhhh..wait !!! No, I don’t listen to Rush or Chenney or Obama or Pelosi..I just have a mind of my own and I question those who speak and their motives…
Posted by: Frank | May 22, 2009, 12:15 pm 12:15 pm
phillysmart, those home grown terrorists were caught, but some of your “facts” are off. Check them. They have a long criminal record and no apparent connection to any terrorist group.
Four “wannabes” claiming to be muslim—in there “home” was found a Bible and a Koran and sabres—they were brought down by the good work of the FBI and NYPD.
As Mayor Bloomberg said, vigilance is warrented. Vigilance does not mean giving up our values as Americans.
Posted by: George | May 22, 2009, 12:17 pm 12:17 pm
Did anyone catch AG Holder’s testimony about waterboarding? He did not and would not say waterboarding is torture. He never will say it is torture because it does not fit the definition. Just because the Democrats say it is torture does not mean it is. Their own AG will not say it is torture. Perceived torture and real torture are 2 different things.
Posted by: dsimms | May 22, 2009, 1:05 pm 1:05 pm
Whenever I click “next comment” the computer just stalls.
Posted by: Amy B Maine | May 22, 2009, 1:27 pm 1:27 pm
The public IS ready to have the conersation however obama wants only a one way dialogue. He is a coward and a bully which does not fit well with what the US or world needs.
Posted by: Bob | May 22, 2009, 1:43 pm 1:43 pm
The difference between detaining enemy combatants at GITMO as opposed to prisons on US soil is that at GITMO, they are guarded by trained military personnel. At at a prison in the US, they would be guarded by prison guards who work for just above minimum wage and have no experience guarding enemy combatants.
Anyone who has toured (or visited) one of America’s super-max prisons would not be advocating moving prisoners from a highly specialized prison, like GITMO, to a prison on US soil — fear has nothing to do with it. It’s just good old fashioned common sense.
Posted by: Just thinking | May 22, 2009, 1:57 pm 1:57 pm
“Did anyone catch AG Holder’s testimony about waterboarding? He did not and would not say waterboarding is torture. He never will say it is torture because it does not fit the definition. Just because the Democraps say it is torture does not mean it is. Their own AG will not say it is torture. Perceived torture and real torture are 2 different things.”
Posted by: dsimms | May 22, 2009 1:05:20 PM
__________________
Republican John McCain believes the waterboarding and other means of unconstitutional violations that have come out of late, are indeed torture. and he ought to know – he’s suffered torture first hand.
Posted by: gus amaral | May 22, 2009, 1:57 pm 1:57 pm
Moving GITMO detainees to US prisons might not be a bad idea — why not bring these suspected terrorists to our prisons, where they can be housed with the worst our society has to offer? The problem of what to do with the terrorists next would most likely be taken care of by the prison population.
Posted by: On the other hand | May 22, 2009, 2:01 pm 2:01 pm
“The public IS ready to have the conersation however obama wants only a one way dialogue. He is a coward and a bully which does not fit well with what the US or world needs.”
Posted by: Bob | May 22, 2009 1:43:47 PM
________________________
apparently the majority of the country and at least the western hemisphere feel differently than you. Maybe as the majority, we’re on to something you’re missing.
Posted by: gus amaral | May 22, 2009, 2:02 pm 2:02 pm
I rather like the idea of treating suspected terrorists just like any other crime suspect in our country. No more special treatment for these guys. Drop them in with suspected murderers, rapists, etc. and let them fend for themselves.
Posted by: A word from me | May 22, 2009, 2:16 pm 2:16 pm
Cheney is doing a fine job of distracting the public from the failed Bush policies which included starting a war that has drained our economy. Obama should place all his attention on correcting the mistakes make by the previous administration.
Posted by: johnnylee | May 22, 2009, 2:17 pm 2:17 pm
Americans have extremly short memories. Well let me refresh your memories. 911 happened on Bush/Cheney watch. Two wars started on Bush/Cheney watch. The economic meltdown started on Bush/Cheney watch. Disregarding the constitution which safe guards all of our rights started on Bush/Cheney watch. Now we have to turn the tv on and listen to Chaney tell us about what’s wrong with the current administration. Give me a friggin break. I cant figure out why this man is not behind bars for the war crimes he committed.
Posted by: johnnylee | May 22, 2009, 2:37 pm 2:37 pm
Did anyone catch AG Holder’s testimony about waterboarding? He did not and would not say waterboarding is torture. He never will say it is torture because it does not fit the definition. Just because the Democrats say it is torture does not mean it is. Their own AG will not say it is torture. Perceived torture and real torture are 2 different things.
Posted by: dsimms | May 22, 2009 1:05:20 PM
—————————————
The testimony to which you refer was made in reference to the training some of our military go through. In that case it is not “torture” in the legal sense. It is for training purposes to give our military an idea of what they may be subjected to. BTW: conducted by Lungren (R-CA) and Gohmert (R-TX) who twisted the testimony around the word “intent”. Sean Hannity reported this as “Holder tongue tied”—
This is the same Hannity, who together with Laura Ingraham, was incensed that President Obama would order a cheeseburger with spicy mustard and no ketchup. Something they called “elitist”.
Eric Holder has said in earlier interviews that waterboarding is torture. “We prosecuted our own soldiers for using it in Vietnam . . . waterboarding is torture.”
Chicago Tribune, January 16, 2009
BTW: Eric Holder is the AG of the United States, not “their” AG—our AG.
Our AG says unequivocally that waterboarding is torture.
Posted by: George | May 22, 2009, 2:37 pm 2:37 pm
cheney is a disgrace to America. How do you justify water torture?!
Posted by: aussie | May 22, 2009, 2:53 pm 2:53 pm
It is very plain and very simple: Obama and his leftist cohorts are soft on terror. They’d rather be applauded in Paris than ensure that Americans in, say, Philadelphia are safe from jihadists’ attacks.
His ridiculous policie, which as Cheney rightly said, are recklessness cloaked in purported righteousness, i.e., they’re really quite stupid and, worse, ineffective.
What will likely be Obama’s undoing is another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. It’s going to happen, and when it does, that will be all she wrote for Obama, Pelosi, and Reid.
Hopefully, that will shake the American people from their stupor of political correctness and their bizarre desire to have people like us, no matter what the cost.
Posted by: Scott | May 22, 2009, 3:19 pm 3:19 pm
this country has not “been safe” since 9/11 because (or in spite) of anything the bushies did. first of all, no one in the human race is “safe” from death; it can strike any of us down at any time. second, the only reason al qaeda terrorists haven’t attacked us again is that they’re giving us time to forget the last outrage. in case you haven’t noticed, they like to catch us with our pants down. these people are only too happy to bide their time, believing as they do that a glorious eternity awaits them for being good little jihadists. this has ZIPPO to do w/ bush, cheney and the rest of their criminal henchmen. that said, it’s high time someone got around to presenting all the evidence of law-breaking on behalf of bush administration big shots to a grand jury, so they can get an indictment and proceed with the trial for their war crimes and treason.
Posted by: moiraregis | May 22, 2009, 3:42 pm 3:42 pm
Well, this country has not been attacked since 9/11 either, has it?
What factual basis can you identify to support your rather outrageous statement that al-Queada has waited almost 8 years to hit us again because . . . wait, let me make sure I get this right . . . they want us to forget?
Wow!! That is naive to the point of being in some kind of left-wing politically correct stupor.
And treason? Do you have any idea what treason actually is?
Let me tell you. One of the things treason is: Giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States, which is exactly what Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and the rest of the leftie fools are doing.
Why don’t you and they just offer the jihadists some tea and humus, and then, profusely apologize for our being free.
Unbelievable.
Posted by: Scott | May 22, 2009, 3:57 pm 3:57 pm
If there were ANY attacks stopped as a result of their unlawful “techniques” we would have heard about them over and over again.
Sorry boys, that dog don’t hunt.
Posted by: Darryl the Contractor | May 22, 2009, 4:09 pm 4:09 pm
Well, Mr. Darryl the Contractor, you’ve the reason that “dog won’t hunt” is this: While Obama has declassified parts of top secret memos talking about enhanced interrogation methods, the little hand-wringer has NOT declassified other memos detailing what information waterboarding, etc., produced and how that information was used to stop attacks.
Or haven’t you been listening?
Again, another example of the left’s total disregard for the facts, making up their own facts, and then acting as if their little fantasy construct is true.
Posted by: Scott | May 22, 2009, 4:09 pm 4:09 pm
johnnylee: Do you people plan on ever taking ownership of anything, or do you plan to spend the next three plus years blaming everything on someone else?
Good grief.
I really do believe and fear that it will take a catastrophic attack on U.S. soil to really awake you and yours from the stupor in which the left seems trapped.
Posted by: Scott | May 22, 2009, 4:13 pm 4:13 pm
Scott. The events that occured before Obama became president that i listed above are going to be recorded in the history books. Obama should and i believe that he will take responsibility for events that occur on his watch which began on january 20th, 2009. Please explain to me why he should be held responsible for the two wars that were being waged before he became president, 911, the economy meltdown, and the fact that the previous administration short circuited the constitution. He merely inherited most of the above mess. If he had a hand in creating the mess that we’re in today, please educate me…
Posted by: johnnylee | May 22, 2009, 4:28 pm 4:28 pm
phillysmart | May 22, 2009 11:53:46 AM
…”some intellectuals just don’t get it”…
_____________
Just Curious,what’s the OPPOSITE of an intellectual?
Posted by: bobj72 | May 22, 2009, 4:42 pm 4:42 pm
Johnnylee – You are perfectly right when you say that Obama inherited a recession and two wars. Only problem is that his plan for recovery is a historically failed plan. During the campaign, Obama criticized Bush for overspending, yet he had no problem spending more money than all 43 presidents before him! The most transparent administration didn’t allow ONE Congressman to read the biggest stimulus bill in history ($1 Trillion). No one read the entire bill. Obama states that he will have a review commission for GITMO and the next day he announced the closing before the review was done!! He releases classified info on waterboarding, yet doesn’t declassify the effects. Kinda makes him look awfully full of it. He then spends his time turning to Rush Limbaugh! Huh? A president talking about a radio host? Imagine if Bush had done that about a t.v reporter or a newspaper journalist? President George Bush inherited a recession from Clinton and according to public file, a notion on how dangerous Saddam Hussein was. He also inherited the problem of al Queda. Even Gore during the 2000 campaign, chastised Bush for not considering Iraq as being dangerous. If you love what past progressive presidents have done (Teddy Roosevelt, FDR,Johnson,Carter, and Clinton), then you are going to love Obama……at your own peril.
Posted by: justrighttoo | May 22, 2009, 5:01 pm 5:01 pm
This is a reply to Angie in Pa: Criminals in our supermax prisons do not belong to groups who would consider an assault on that prison to free their comrades.
Posted by: mike klotz | May 22, 2009, 5:06 pm 5:06 pm
Cheney is a prefect example of a terrorist victory on 9/11. He feels that America’s laws are nothing but an obstacle, the Constitution is “just a piece of paper” to be ignored, ANY illegal action is justified by the means and that our country’s following democracy is a show of weakness to our enemies. If al-queda was attempting to destroy America on 9/11, then they succeeded with Cheney.
Posted by: JR | May 22, 2009, 5:32 pm 5:32 pm
Justrighttoo. If you look around the world today, you’re gonna discover many countries out there with leaders that we dont approve of but should we start a war with them? Sadaam Hussein was a problem long before senior Bush became president but he had been pretty much contained after the first gulf war. War kill many innocent people and should be fought as a last resort. During the campaign, Obama justifiably criticized Bush for many of his policies as did many other Americans. If you look at the current mess we’re in, you would have to conclude that the criticism was justified. The Congress signed the trillion dollar stimulus bill because you have to assume they (Congress) believed that it would help to stimulate the economy. No one forced them to sign it. It’s their responsibility to read documents before they sign them. It’s just so interesting to me how Bush was given eight long years without any complaints to get us into the mess we’re in and those same people are just so willing to sign off on Obama before his policies really have a chance to make a difference. He was duly elected by the people of this country and i believe that he should be given the same chance that Bush was given.
Posted by: johnnylee | May 22, 2009, 6:02 pm 6:02 pm
On 9/11 Bin Laden’s goal was to show the US to be weak, corrupt and immoral. I think Cheney’s actions since then have made many think he was right. If the only way to win a fight is to become worst than your opponent, then what have you gained. And don’t feed me the old 3,000 dead at the WTC crap, we have 40,000 die on our highways each year. If we are so overwhelmed by a few people killed, why don’t we outlaw cars.
Posted by: JR | May 22, 2009, 7:12 pm 7:12 pm
I hung a hazel stick over my door for the last eight years and have not been attacked that whole time. Thank goodness the mumbojumbo kept me safe.
It’s a bogus argument that Bush et al. kept us safe for eight years. How many have died in Iraq again?
Posted by: False argument | May 22, 2009, 8:10 pm 8:10 pm
To run this country the right way I think we need 4 or 5 men, men who are honorable and honest. One man is not capable of doing that. The only problem is…where do you find 4 or 5 honorable and honest men in this country? Especially in Washington. Perhaps one man for the financial part, (Warren Buffet) I th ink he would be a good man there. Mitt Romney for another, Huckabee? Colin Powell or Schwartkoft for the Military part?
Posted by: artinthewild | May 22, 2009, 8:41 pm 8:41 pm
any one seen polosi ? cant believe she isnt spewing republican hate any more. she must be hiding in the top secret bunker oops used to be top secret bunker under bidens residence , i miss her coming out and saying im outraged
Posted by: i_dream_of_a_jeannie | May 22, 2009, 11:29 pm 11:29 pm
Why is Cheney making such great headway against Obama’s moral authority with his unsubstantiated assertions about the effectiveness of torture? Oh, wait, I know. It’s because ABC News and other news outlets totally ignore Cheney’s past unsubstantiated assertions about Iraq’s links to Al Qaida and a host of other matters. Instead Cheney’s words are portrayed as just as credible as Obama’s. There’s a pronouced distortion in “fair and balanced” newscasting when it means holding back well-deserved criticism and skepticism. Bernie Madoff, not to mention Joe the “Plumber”, would come off as a strong debater if given the same deference accorded this serial liar.
Posted by: Charles Hughes | May 23, 2009, 12:00 am 12:00 am
Krystal finds Cheney “sober” most interesting comment…I am happy to hear cheney is finally on the wagon..along with his partner in crime GWB..we were run into the ground by a drunk and an ex drunk…
Posted by: cowgirl | May 23, 2009, 3:36 am 3:36 am
All US Citizens should understand extremist Muslim terrorist groups hated and wanted to harm dearly American peoples before Gitmo and Abu Ghraib scandal. Before 9/11, there is no Guantánamo Bay Prison Campand and Abu Ghraib Prison for US. The closing of Gitmo make no difference action from American enemy. However, Al-Qaeda and Taliban want to see American peoples are becoming Muslim. After that, Al-Qaeda and Taliban will say our brother American Allah love you.
Do not buy what Politicians and Medias lie to you. You have to research yourself. They all do not have 1% of moral themselves. American will have big mess later if Obama brought Al-Qaeda terrorist prisoners from Gitmo or somewhere to US. It’s not about escaping but it’s about legal matter, law and unforeseen other problems on US land. You will need to continue operate Gitmo with new rule and tight discipline. It’ll change some viewer mind from out side US.
Obama is good talker but not wise. He must take time to solve out importance issue rather than rush in. He will make more mistake decision than right decision for American. My conclusion is closed Gitmo or still operate Gitmo is nothing difference from side of American enemy. However, mess convert to Muslim religion may be better option than closing Gitmo if Obama want to feel safe from Islamic terrorists.
Posted by: 90yearsoldman | May 23, 2009, 4:13 am 4:13 am