Former US Vice President Dick Cheney speaks at the American Enterprise Institute on US national security in Washington, DC, May 21, 2009. Cheney said Thursday that bringing the "worst terrorists" from Guantanamo Bay onto US soil would be "cause for great danger" as he stood by tough interrogation tactics. "I think the president will find upon reflection that to bring the worst of the worst terrorists inside the United States would be cause for great danger and regret in the years to come," Cheney said in a speech on national security.*
Selling fear. Cheney mentioned 9/11 only 27 times in his recent speech, flatly declaring that Obama was making America "less safe." But a poll taken after the speech showed 51 percent of Americans disagreed with his wild charge (38 percent agreed). President Obama has a 64-to-31 percent approve-disapprove rating on national security, and the same two-to-one margin on fighting terrorism.
The numbers are good, but if it's one thing Republicans are good at it's making Democrats look weak on national defense. Consciously or not, Cheney is attempting to make terrorism the communism of the 21st century.
In 1946, the GOP won control of Congress by painting Democrats as "soft on Communism." And they've been attacking Democrats ever since. Democrats supposedly let the communists take over China, lost Cuba to Fidel Castro, lost Vietnam, and refused to win the arms race against the Soviet Union - which, we've since learned, couldn't even make a toaster.
Seven years ago, Howard Witt of the Chicago Tribune declared, "Terrorism has become the new communism." Whether it's the Red Menace or Islamic Jihadists, they represent fear of "the other." Fighting them leads us into alliances with governments we'd rather not be involved with, like Pakistan. It produces bloated military budgets that take money from American domestic needs. It causes us to forget the lessons of history, such as the French failures in Vietnam or the 15,000 Soviet soldiers who died fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Putting the Constitution on hold. To Cheney, the acid test for an administration is how much of the Constitution and world opinion it is willing to jettison to demonstrate its national security muscle against Islamic terrorists. Obama, Cheney said, wants to make us "more like France."
Do as I say, not as I do. Cheney, 68 (doesn't he seem about 80?), never served a day in the military. In fact, he got five deferments during the Vietnam War. Apparently he didn't feel America needed him to fight the terrorists of his day.
Not in my state. In a way, what's worrying congressional Democrats over where to house suspected terrorists at Guantanamo isn't just NIMBY. It's also that Democrats don't want to look "soft" on terror by letting those who would destroy America live in a prison in their home state.
Where to put the Gitmo detainees. Accused terrorists accustomed to blazing hot weather in the Middle East might find winters tough in, say . . . Alaska! Fortunately, there's a spunky Republican governor up there who could keep an eye on terrorists while lookin' out for an invasion from Russia, which she can see from her porch.
No proof. Cheney declared, without backup, that the Bush administration "prevented attacks and saved lives through the Terrorist Surveillance Program [TSP], which let us intercept calls and track contacts between Al Qaeda and persons inside the United States."
The TSP sounds like the illegal wiretaps by former FBI chief J. Edgar Hoover, who eavesdropped on the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., among others, on Hoover's personal belief that they were communists.
Maybe he didn't get the memo. Cheney conveniently forgets that 9/11 happened on his watch. The Bush administration even got a memo one month before the attacks entitled "Bin Laden likely to strike in US."
Proving a negative. Cheney is challenging Democrats to prove a negative - that since we haven't been attacked since 2001, the Bush policies must be responsible. I'd give him that if he's willing to take responsibility for the evil doers on Wall Street.
Courting Gitmo. The Supreme Court has ruled that Guantanamo detainees have the right to a federal trial to challenge the charges against them. What do you want to bet this will be part of the hearings for Judge Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the high court?
Dan Payne is a Boston-area media consultant who has worked for Democratic candidates around the country.
Friday, May 29, 2009
DTN News: Terrorism - The New Communism
DTN News: Terrorism - The New Communism
*Source: By Dan Payne - The Boston Globe
(NSI News Source Info) May 29, 2009: DICK CHENEY, who didn't say eight words publicly in eight years as vice president, suddenly won't shut up. Every day it seems he's doing interviews and giving speeches on national security, 9/11, and torture.
Torture defined. Torture is having to listen to Cheney sneer his way through a speech on why he and his president were right about everything and President Obama is wrong.
Former US Vice President Dick Cheney speaks at the American Enterprise Institute on US national security in Washington, DC, May 21, 2009. Cheney said Thursday that bringing the "worst terrorists" from Guantanamo Bay onto US soil would be "cause for great danger" as he stood by tough interrogation tactics. "I think the president will find upon reflection that to bring the worst of the worst terrorists inside the United States would be cause for great danger and regret in the years to come," Cheney said in a speech on national security.*
Selling fear. Cheney mentioned 9/11 only 27 times in his recent speech, flatly declaring that Obama was making America "less safe." But a poll taken after the speech showed 51 percent of Americans disagreed with his wild charge (38 percent agreed). President Obama has a 64-to-31 percent approve-disapprove rating on national security, and the same two-to-one margin on fighting terrorism.
The numbers are good, but if it's one thing Republicans are good at it's making Democrats look weak on national defense. Consciously or not, Cheney is attempting to make terrorism the communism of the 21st century.
In 1946, the GOP won control of Congress by painting Democrats as "soft on Communism." And they've been attacking Democrats ever since. Democrats supposedly let the communists take over China, lost Cuba to Fidel Castro, lost Vietnam, and refused to win the arms race against the Soviet Union - which, we've since learned, couldn't even make a toaster.
Seven years ago, Howard Witt of the Chicago Tribune declared, "Terrorism has become the new communism." Whether it's the Red Menace or Islamic Jihadists, they represent fear of "the other." Fighting them leads us into alliances with governments we'd rather not be involved with, like Pakistan. It produces bloated military budgets that take money from American domestic needs. It causes us to forget the lessons of history, such as the French failures in Vietnam or the 15,000 Soviet soldiers who died fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Putting the Constitution on hold. To Cheney, the acid test for an administration is how much of the Constitution and world opinion it is willing to jettison to demonstrate its national security muscle against Islamic terrorists. Obama, Cheney said, wants to make us "more like France."
Do as I say, not as I do. Cheney, 68 (doesn't he seem about 80?), never served a day in the military. In fact, he got five deferments during the Vietnam War. Apparently he didn't feel America needed him to fight the terrorists of his day.
Not in my state. In a way, what's worrying congressional Democrats over where to house suspected terrorists at Guantanamo isn't just NIMBY. It's also that Democrats don't want to look "soft" on terror by letting those who would destroy America live in a prison in their home state.
Where to put the Gitmo detainees. Accused terrorists accustomed to blazing hot weather in the Middle East might find winters tough in, say . . . Alaska! Fortunately, there's a spunky Republican governor up there who could keep an eye on terrorists while lookin' out for an invasion from Russia, which she can see from her porch.
No proof. Cheney declared, without backup, that the Bush administration "prevented attacks and saved lives through the Terrorist Surveillance Program [TSP], which let us intercept calls and track contacts between Al Qaeda and persons inside the United States."
The TSP sounds like the illegal wiretaps by former FBI chief J. Edgar Hoover, who eavesdropped on the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., among others, on Hoover's personal belief that they were communists.
Maybe he didn't get the memo. Cheney conveniently forgets that 9/11 happened on his watch. The Bush administration even got a memo one month before the attacks entitled "Bin Laden likely to strike in US."
Proving a negative. Cheney is challenging Democrats to prove a negative - that since we haven't been attacked since 2001, the Bush policies must be responsible. I'd give him that if he's willing to take responsibility for the evil doers on Wall Street.
Courting Gitmo. The Supreme Court has ruled that Guantanamo detainees have the right to a federal trial to challenge the charges against them. What do you want to bet this will be part of the hearings for Judge Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the high court?
Dan Payne is a Boston-area media consultant who has worked for Democratic candidates around the country.
Former US Vice President Dick Cheney speaks at the American Enterprise Institute on US national security in Washington, DC, May 21, 2009. Cheney said Thursday that bringing the "worst terrorists" from Guantanamo Bay onto US soil would be "cause for great danger" as he stood by tough interrogation tactics. "I think the president will find upon reflection that to bring the worst of the worst terrorists inside the United States would be cause for great danger and regret in the years to come," Cheney said in a speech on national security.*
Selling fear. Cheney mentioned 9/11 only 27 times in his recent speech, flatly declaring that Obama was making America "less safe." But a poll taken after the speech showed 51 percent of Americans disagreed with his wild charge (38 percent agreed). President Obama has a 64-to-31 percent approve-disapprove rating on national security, and the same two-to-one margin on fighting terrorism.
The numbers are good, but if it's one thing Republicans are good at it's making Democrats look weak on national defense. Consciously or not, Cheney is attempting to make terrorism the communism of the 21st century.
In 1946, the GOP won control of Congress by painting Democrats as "soft on Communism." And they've been attacking Democrats ever since. Democrats supposedly let the communists take over China, lost Cuba to Fidel Castro, lost Vietnam, and refused to win the arms race against the Soviet Union - which, we've since learned, couldn't even make a toaster.
Seven years ago, Howard Witt of the Chicago Tribune declared, "Terrorism has become the new communism." Whether it's the Red Menace or Islamic Jihadists, they represent fear of "the other." Fighting them leads us into alliances with governments we'd rather not be involved with, like Pakistan. It produces bloated military budgets that take money from American domestic needs. It causes us to forget the lessons of history, such as the French failures in Vietnam or the 15,000 Soviet soldiers who died fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Putting the Constitution on hold. To Cheney, the acid test for an administration is how much of the Constitution and world opinion it is willing to jettison to demonstrate its national security muscle against Islamic terrorists. Obama, Cheney said, wants to make us "more like France."
Do as I say, not as I do. Cheney, 68 (doesn't he seem about 80?), never served a day in the military. In fact, he got five deferments during the Vietnam War. Apparently he didn't feel America needed him to fight the terrorists of his day.
Not in my state. In a way, what's worrying congressional Democrats over where to house suspected terrorists at Guantanamo isn't just NIMBY. It's also that Democrats don't want to look "soft" on terror by letting those who would destroy America live in a prison in their home state.
Where to put the Gitmo detainees. Accused terrorists accustomed to blazing hot weather in the Middle East might find winters tough in, say . . . Alaska! Fortunately, there's a spunky Republican governor up there who could keep an eye on terrorists while lookin' out for an invasion from Russia, which she can see from her porch.
No proof. Cheney declared, without backup, that the Bush administration "prevented attacks and saved lives through the Terrorist Surveillance Program [TSP], which let us intercept calls and track contacts between Al Qaeda and persons inside the United States."
The TSP sounds like the illegal wiretaps by former FBI chief J. Edgar Hoover, who eavesdropped on the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., among others, on Hoover's personal belief that they were communists.
Maybe he didn't get the memo. Cheney conveniently forgets that 9/11 happened on his watch. The Bush administration even got a memo one month before the attacks entitled "Bin Laden likely to strike in US."
Proving a negative. Cheney is challenging Democrats to prove a negative - that since we haven't been attacked since 2001, the Bush policies must be responsible. I'd give him that if he's willing to take responsibility for the evil doers on Wall Street.
Courting Gitmo. The Supreme Court has ruled that Guantanamo detainees have the right to a federal trial to challenge the charges against them. What do you want to bet this will be part of the hearings for Judge Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the high court?
Dan Payne is a Boston-area media consultant who has worked for Democratic candidates around the country.
No comments:
Post a Comment