Time for Thorns

Bill Kristol blogs his take on the speeches, here.

FOX News has mentioned that VP Cheney mentioned 9/11 some 20 times in his speech.    I find that understandable because he was talking about the events which precipitated the decisions which follows.    Major Garrett also noted that,  after Obama’s usual false claim about it being time to end partisan finger-pointing,  he proceeded to point the finger at the Bush Administration 28 times.

Andy McCarthy weighs in as well, and Jim Geraghty gets further into the specific flaws of what he correctly calls a campaign speech.

The best line of all was from Cheney :   “To completely rule out enhanced interrogation in the future is unwise in the extreme;  it is recklessness clothed in righteousness”.

First thing —  Cheney’s speech has been booked for weeks, while His Oneness only scheduled his in the last few days, which should tell you that Obama is nervous abut the competition.

Politico’s take is here .  Note that Obama repeated a line he has used often of late:  “Let me begin by disposing of one argument as plainly as I can:  we are not going to release anyone if it would endanger our national security,  nor will we release detainees within the United States who endanger the American people.”     No mention of the fact that placing large groups of terrorists at any facility other than Gitmo will make it worthwhile for their fellow jihadists’  to mount an attack on the local populace.    Just picture a schoolbus full of children being hacked to pieces one by one until the detainees are released.

He also trotted out a favorite straw man:  “I know some have argued that brutal methods like water-boarding were necessary to keep us safe.  I could not disagree more,” Obama continued. “As commander-in-chief,  I see the intelligence,  I bear responsibility for keeping this country safe,  and I reject the assertion that these are the most effective means of interrogation.”

Rush Limbaugh made the observation to Glenn Beck that Obama’s speech was like the party response to a presidential speech,  even though Obama spoke first.    I think this was because His Oneness was very defensive, perhaps because he’s accustomed to affirmation, not challenge.   Cheney came off as a statesman, sober and clear-eyed.   Obama was a disingenuous campaigner, repeating the same sound-bytes he has used for over 2 years —  Gitmo is a mess,  it’s a recruiting tool,  etc.    There is a vast chasm between what our president says and what he does.    Unfortunately for him,  while I appreciate words,   I always judge by actions.

What Politico didn’t tell you was that the press wasn’t allowed to report at the National Archives, with the White House saying it would handle everything,  and handing them a nice, complete news package to run.    A good way to rate media’s honesty is by whether those facts are revealed to you.    So far, only FOX News has allowed it to be known.

The Weekly Standard has a copy of Cheney’s speech,  which should be close to what he actually said.    If I find an updated copy,  I’ll post it.

Here’s Obama’s speech.

I was going to post this interview by Sheryl Gay Stolberg of Dick Cheney without comment,  but I couldn’t do it.    She clearly doesn’t like her subject, but because he is anything but “unrestrained”,  he gave her scant ammunition.

I suppose she just forgot that Jimmy Carter has never shut up, and neither has Al Gore.    Ah,  even when it tries to report,  the Gray Lady can’t help but editorialize!    Does Stolberg have any clue that the former Vice President is totally immune to her opinion?    I doubt it.

It has been quite a week, with His Oneness, having released  the “torture” memos,  speechifying to the CIA to say its operatives are safe.   His own top intelligence official is now trying to walk back having  said the system worked.   The CIA has  confirmed that waterboarding  led to information that stopped the 9/11-Style attack on Los Angeles.

Andy McCarthy at National Review opines that the release of the memos is  what should shock the conscience.  Rich Lowry says that, properly considered, the memos should be a source of pride.  The National Review editors weigh  in, here.  And the Wall Street Journal points out that  not even His Oneness can placate the Left and keep America safe.

Anyone who believed Eric Holder and his boss  wouldn’t go after the Bush Administration was stupid.  What is the genesis of this kerfluffle?    I suspect Dick Cheney has something to do with it, especially since MSM is now claiming Cheney wants the other CIA memos for his memoir and is no champion of transparency.  What is biting Obama’s thin skin is that Cheney has said plainly that the President is politicizing intelligence by releasing only certain items, and excluding all those which reveal the attacks thwarted by the intelligence gathered under harsh interrogation methods.   Even the notoriously  right-wing extremist Washington Post knows the methods did work.

Cheney also hasn’t hesitated to say what he thinks about Obama’s approach to policy, and he hasn’t been complimentary.  His Oneness much prefers W’s mode of not responding to attacks.    The  man who ran the US Army Missile Defense System for many years told me once that Cheney was one of the very few honest people he had ever met in DC, and he has known him for decades.

Cheney has forgotten more about how the world works than Obama will ever know.   He has also stared death in the face for nearly 2 decades, and I can’t fathom why Obama believes that going after the former vice president will end  happily for him.    Substance, not style, impresses Cheney, and His Oneness  has  little of it.    There are probably fewer than 100 people on the planet whose opinions actually matter to Cheney, and I can promise you our current President is not among them.

I rather hope  Obama and Holder stay on course, encouraging Waxman and Conyers and Leahy to hold their hearings and conduct their probes.  I just pray Republicans are smart enough to have the first question they ask every single witness be:  “Were Democrats briefed on the  enhanced interrogation techniques?”  and the second question:  “Did any Democrats object to these techniques at the time of briefing?”

It will make for interesting viewing.  In the meantime, this from Politico.com makes for interesting reading.

Who was Obama talking to in the video?  He says he was talking to the Iranian people, just as Pres. Bush did in his video to them at about the same time in his presidency.

Bush mentioned “freedom” and “democracy” and the rights of people.  The first 2 words never passed Obama’s lips, and the only “right” he mentioned was his desire for Iran to  take its “rightful place” in the world.

Mr. President,  tyranny has NO rightful place in the world.

All His Oneness has done is signal to the mullahs that he is weak, because in that world, you offer to negotiate only when you are beaten.  And the proof of that can be seen in the Iranian response, which was to tell Obama to apologize for his country’s past sins and end any relationship with Israel.

Dick Cheney was quite correct last week when he said in an interview that Obama’s policies were making us less safe.  How much so we shall, unfortunately,  find out in only one way.

UPDATE:  The Obama response to Iran’s contempt?  Have Hillary! invite them to a meeting with Afghanistan.

The WaPo happily reports the end of Bush’s  ‘war’ on terror:

http://www.washingtonpost.com.nyud.net:8090/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/22/AR2009012203929.html?hpid=topnews

If you’ll recall, a week ago VP Dick Cheney advised Obama to study carefully before acting, and  Obama said on ABC’s This Week:  “I think that was pretty good advice, which is I should know what’s going on before we make judgments and that we shouldn’t be making judgments on the basis of incomplete information or campaign rhetoric.”

In 48 hours His Oneness has dismantled key components which have kept us safe.  Apparently to avoid mentioning the likely consequences , the Post ends with words from Obama’s inaugural speech, presumably because the editors believe what His Oneness says matters more than what he does.  Terrorists harbor no such illusions.