May 21 2009

Cheney Vs Obama

Published by at 1:39 pm under All General Discussions,Bin Laden/GWOT

Update: Can’t get a You Tube version to work – here is a copy at Fox

Here are Cheney’s comments today:


 
What happens to President Obama when he looks less informed and off track when compared to the ex-Vice President? A crisis of confidence seems to come to mind …

Addendum: To pre-empt the fever swamps on the left about Vice Presidents challenging the next administration I have to note the mad Al Gore and his rantings on pending doom from all corners, from Iraq to CO2.

Again, the comparison is quite enlightening. One VP calmly and rationally explaining how we protected this nation from a second 9-11, the other raging like a lunatic with his paranoid delusions.

31 responses so far

31 Responses to “Cheney Vs Obama”

  1. Alert1201 says:

    Good to hear from the adults now and then.

  2. gary1son says:

    Obama’s stand on all this is pathetic enough, but like some small-minded insecure high school jock, he attempted to preempt Cheney by belatedly coming up with a big speech event coincidentally on the same topic on the same day at the same time as Cheney’s long-scheduled speech.

    The delicious part is that apparently (just from what I’ve read on the surface, details could be wrong) Obama tried to time it so he had the last word by being late for his own talk. Cheney out-smarted him and waited until Obama was done before giving his speech. (Although Obama may have done some damage to the ability of some to cover Cheney by throwing off the schedule.)

    Actually I think the whole thing backfired on Obama. Cheney otherwise wouldn’t have gotten a fraction of the attention he ended up getting, thanks to Obama’s childish antics.

    Obama obviously doesn’t want the public to hear Dick Cheney. That’s pretty telling in itself.

  3. kathie says:

    I listen to both men speak today. Cheney had been scheduled for weeks, Obama a day or two. So Cheney was not giving a rebuttal, Obama was covering his ass.

    I must say Obama was angry, sarcastic, childish in calling what the Bush administration did, they did in haste, leaving him with a “mess” he would rather not face and “un-American” in that George Bush made decisions that were not constitutional, moral or ethical by our great American standards. Standards that millions have admired and come to America to enjoy. Well 19 didn’t really come to America to enjoy anything but death and mayhem, but that was so long ago only a few fear mongers remember those bad old days. But lets look forward!

    I’m wondering if there is “old school” logic and a new “school logic”.

    I have to ask myself, is this guy believable? Not yet!

  4. kathie says:

    I listen to both men speak today. Cheney had been scheduled for weeks, Obama a day or two. So Cheney was not giving a rebuttal, Obama was covering his ass.

    I must say Obama was angry, sarcastic, childish in calling what the Bush administration did, they did in haste, leaving him with a “mess” he would rather not face and “un-American” in that George Bush made decisions that were not constitutional, moral or ethical by our great American standards. Standards that millions have admired and come to America to enjoy. Well 19 didn’t really come to America to enjoy anything but death and mayhem, but that was so long ago only a few fear mongers remember those bad old days. But lets look forward!

    I’m wondering if there is “old school” logic and a new “school logic”.

    I have to ask myself, is this guy believable? Not yet!

  5. kathie says:

    I listen to both men speak today. Cheney had been scheduled for weeks, Obama a day or two. So Cheney was not giving a rebuttal, Obama was covering his ass.

    I must say Obama was angry, sarcastic, childish in calling what the Bush administration did, they did in haste, leaving him with a “mess” he would rather not face and “un-American” in that George Bush made decisions that were not constitutional, moral or ethical by our great American standards. Standards that millions have admired and come to America to enjoy. Well 19 didn’t really come to America to enjoy anything but death and mayhem, but that was so long ago only a few fear mongers remember those bad old days. But lets look forward!

    I’m wondering if there is “old school” logic and a new “school logic”.

    I have to ask myself, is this guy believable? Not yet!

  6. Neo says:

    “President Obama told human rights advocates at the White House on Wednesday that he was mulling the need for a ‘preventive detention’ system that would establish a legal basis for the United States to incarcerate terrorism suspects who are deemed a threat to national security but cannot be tried,” Sheryl Gay Stolberg writes in The New York Times. “The two participants, outsiders who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the session was intended to be off the record, said they left the meeting dismayed.”
    “Obama was succinct about his reversal, according to one person at the meeting, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the meeting was private: ‘He said, “I was a constitutional law scholar. Now I’m commander in chief,” ’ ” per The Boston Globe’s Joseph Williams. Now he is a goof. Perhaps he forgot about this part of the Constitution (since he gave up being a “constitutional law scholar”) .. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.
    Anybody seen any “rebellion or invasion” ? Thought not.

  7. Alert1201 says:

    Rush was all over the preventive detention stuff. Amazing! If Bush would have attempted anything like this the libs, including the MSM would have taken to the streets.

    Zero does it and everybody yawns.

    I also listened to both speeches and I agree with all three of Kathie’s posts. 0 was angry, snippy and, as always, blaming Bush for his difficulties.

  8. ph2ll says:

    Al Gore is an idiot. In 2002 he called Bush “Un-American”.
    Besides its not like Bush and Cheney were talking about prosecuting former Clinton officials, remember the “new tone”?
    I think if BO is talking about prosecuting former Bush officials then the man should be allowed to defend himself!

  9. marksbbr says:

    Anybody seen any “rebellion or invasion” ? Thought not.

    In my view, 9/11 constituted an invasion. I had always seen it that way. That is why I disregarded the left when they complained about Bush throwing habeas corpus out of the window. Same would apply to Obama.
    What makes me mad more, however, is Obama and the left whining about Bush’s violations of the Constitution. They conveniently leave out that wiretapping was occurring under Clinton. Heck Abraham Lincoln- the president Obama likes to compare himself to- was labeled a “dictator” by Democrats… suspending habeas corpus, shutting down newspapers, arresting anti-war Democrats. Do I fault Lincoln? Of course not… he viewed the War as a “rebellion.”

  10. gary1son says:

    “The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.

    Anybody seen any “rebellion or invasion” ? Thought not.

    I think probably about 88% of Americans considered the attacks of 9/11 to be an invasion. The other 12%, the folks like Jeremiah Wright (and I’m sure Obama, who is too smart to say so) who believe we had it coming and essentially deserved it, did not.

    Whatever flirtations with Habeas Corpus Bush had, they were extraordinarily limited, prudent and measured. By comparison, Obama’s role model FDR locked up Americans of Japanese descent merely on the fear that they might do something. Imagine what he would have done if the Japanese military had executed an attack on the U.S. mainland targeting innocent civilians.

  11. marksbbr says:

    “Imagine what he would have done if the Japanese military had executed an attack on the U.S. mainland targeting innocent civilians.”

    I’m not trying to be fastidious, but I’m just a big history geek. The Japanese did launch attacks on the U.S. mainland. Their subs shelled the west coast a couple of times, and they launched balloon bombs that killed a few people in Oregon, and invaded the Aleutians… but nothing like a full scale attack.
    But yeah, FDR did that and a lot of other “unconstitutional” acts. To be fair, I can’t criticize him too much for them in light of the era.
    Wasn’t it Robert Kennedy, a Democrat, who authorized the FBI to wiretap Martin Luther King Jr?

  12. AJStrata says:

    Is it me or is the audio gone from these? I did not get a chance to listen because I was in meetings.

    AJStrata

  13. owl says:

    Watched both and Cheney won. Did anyone notice that The Voice was late and then did most of his bashing in the first half and then kept talking on and on? Think he was trying to bore everyone to death so that only diehards would listen to Cheney.

    I loved him calling it “phony moralizing”. About time.

    Wish Pug Congressmen (besides Hoekstra,Bond) could understand it is past time to call a spade what it is.

  14. marksbbr says:

    The audio works for me, AJ.

    I never really liked Cheney, but his speech is more dignified than Obama’s… to me it’s nauseating Obama would give his speech in front of the Constitution at the National Archives. But that is symbolic of how his party views the Constitution (and DofI)…as just pieces of paper. But they are not scraps of paper to be exploited for political points like that… they are living, breathing documents that are everywhere.

  15. gary1son says:

    Thanks for the added details, marksbbr. I wasn’t aware of them, and it appears that most Americans back then weren’t either, which of course was a good thing.

    Kind of dilutes my point somewhat, I guess. On the other hand, it adds to the understanding of the rationale for detaining Japanese Americans. Easy to criticize in hindsight, but try being there at the time — Cheney’s basic thesis.

    If one looks back and imagines a casualty/population proportionate to 9/11 attack being carried out in 1941 on our soil aimed at civilians and what our government’s reaction would have been, based on what it actually was, it makes GWB’s actions seem almost inadequate, and thereby the left’s belated whining about them strictly self-serving.

  16. owl says:

    No, not Cheney vs Obama. It is now Cheney vs McCain. Watch Greta on FOX.

    If you watch, you will understand why I dislike McCain. Much. He did not have to put his mug on TV…………….tonight……………..and carry Obama’s water. But of course he did (and yes, he carried Kerry’s, dissed the Swifties and turned the dogs loose on PALIN).

    I can not stand this man and hope Pugs do not run him as dogcatcher.

    Cheney described McCain today accurately. He called it “recklessness cloaked in righteousness”. Yep. It always has to be about McCain. And yes, it is McCain that is your enemy PALIN and don’t you forget it. He has a record of slipping the knife. But he loves your enemies and they NOW love him……….AGAIN.

  17. Frogg says:

    I give McCain a pass on this one because he actually was tortured. If he thinks waterboarding is torture, he can say so.

    I think the details layed out in the released memos clearly show the thought that went into the technique to be sure it did cross the line of torture.

    And, if McCain thinks it is torture, then I suppose he should call for an end to the Navy Seal training program aspect of waterboarding also.

    But, I seem to remember in the distant past when this discussion was made in Congress and the rules were changed to ban waterboarding…..that McCain also said the President could use it; but, he would have to to explain why he used it and take responsibility for it. Anyone else remember that?

  18. Frogg says:

    Thanks for pointing out the comparison between Gore and Cheney. I forgot all about Gore’s temper tantrum.

    About the Obama/cheney battle of the speeches….

    any ideas on why Obama felt he had to get out there and make a speech about it? Does he think he is losing the PR battle?

  19. Frogg says:

    McCain voted against the waterboarding ban
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/13/washington/13cnd-cong.html?hp

    So, I think McCain did not want waterboarding to be the policy. However, he did not want it banned where the President could never use it under any circumstances. Right????

    That position was ok with me.

  20. Frogg says:

    Democratic Rep. Hastings Proposes Creating Gitmo 2.0

    Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-Fla.) said Thursday that he is open to keeping a more transparent Guantanamo facility, complete with more aggressive third party monitors, open beyond the White House January 2010 closure deadline to hold the most dangerous inmates.

    “If we have transparency and accountability, than you can leave Gitmo just like it is,” he said. “The physical plant of Guantanamo is built to hold people. And therefore I argue and will pursue the administration to give a look at legislation that I am developing that will give transparency and accountability and may satisfy our allies as well,” Hastings said, noting that he would enable groups like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the Red Cross to have better access to monitor the facility.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/21/democratic-rep-hastings-proposes-creating-gitmo/