RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

Obama Nails it On Guantanamo

By Larry Johnson on May 21, 2009 at 11:10 AM in Current Affairs

Give the boy his due. He acted like a President today in his speech on national security and terrorism at the National Archives and gave one of the most substantive, intelligent speeches of his short tenure in office. I know this may make some of you crazy, but if we are to have any credibility in criticizing Obama we must also be prepared to acknowledge when he does the right thing and does it well.

He is refusing to indulge in the politics of fear. He is pointing out correctly that the Bush Administration had a haphazard, chaotic and ineffective policy when it set up Guantanamo without taking time to figure out what to do with captured Al Qaeda suspects. His speech coincides with a couple of related events. First is a leak that the Pentagon is sitting on a report claiming that upwards of 14% of the prisoners released from Guantanamo have returned to terrorism. Who released those folks? The George Bush/Dick Cheney team. Having seen the intelligence on this I think the report is a gross exaggeration but that is a topic for another day.

And what about treating terrorism as a so-called “criminal” matter? That’s item number two.

I presume you have caught the news that the FBI arrested four aspiring jihadists in New York City who had hatched a plot to attack Jewish targets? Let me repeat that–THE FBI ARRESTED. Note, I did not say Delta Force. I did not say U.S. Navy SEALS. In fact, we took down a terrorist cell without having to use military force. If you go back over the last decade you will find that more often than not, FBI and law enforcement techniques and procedures have been far more effective in identifying and disrupting terrorist plans.

As a child of the cold war I am part of a generation that fought against the tyranny of the Soviet Union and the oppression of communism. The Soviets maintained they had the right to declare a person an enemy of the state and to hold them indefinitely without any judicial remedy. Well, guess what? George Bush adopted Soviet-style techniques at Guantanamo. Barack Obama today correctly reminded us that we, as Americans, are different and ought to be better. We have a higher calling and I agree with him.

I think Obama made an effective case today that we can protect Americans without abandoning the Constitution and the rule of law. I applaud his words, let’s see if the actions follow.

  • J_Gocht

    Thank you Mr. President and thank you Mr. Johnson!

  • Doc99

    Praise for Obama from Karl Rove – HT: Instapundit.

    “Barack Obama inherited a set of national-security policies that he rejected during the campaign but now embraces as president. This is a stunning and welcome about-face.”

    Meet the new boss – same as the old boss.

    • propertius

      As Glenn Greenwald so aptly pointed out today, one of Obama’s peculiar talents is his uncanny ability to sound as though he’s supporting high-minded ideals even while he actively works to subvert them. In the case of today’s speech, he spoke persuasively about Guantanamo, while still advocating the establishment of a system of indefinite preventive detention for those “too dangerous” (according to whom, pray tell?) to stand trial. Closing Guantanamo while planning to set up “Nuevo Guantanamo” or “Guantanamo Lite” somewhere else doesn’t constitute “nailing it”…unless you’re talking about hammering yet another nail into the coffin of civil liberties.

      • fif

        Meanwhile, regardless of what he’s saying now, do we need to pull out all the simplistic and definitive claims he made about closing Guantanamo as soon as he became President & condemning military tribunals that he now supports with “modifications?”

    • cali

      Jon Stewart did another “Who does this sound like” moment and showed clips of Obama and Bush saying practically the same things from soundbites of past Bush speeches.

      Isn’t Obama clever? He just switches the words around.

      New boss is the same as the old boss.

  • dm

    Aspiring to an ideal and grappling with reality are all too often completely different goals. I’m very conflicted about the torture issue. On the one hand, we as average citizens have to trust what information is made available to us. We are never given the full picture, only the negative. 9/11 represented an entity declaring war on us, and in reality was just another strike against us, albeit the biggest. This enemy doesn’t seem like your typical adversary…maybe there are times when typical methodology just doesn’t get the job done.

    As far as giving Barry his due, well…someone else will have to do that. My disdain for the man completely shuts down my ability to praise him…FOR ANYTHING.

    • James Guglielmino

      <>
      Which is totally fitting, since you are just on the edge of endorsing torture.

    • sjc-tx

      This enemy doesn’t seem like your typical adversary…maybe there are times when typical methodology just doesn’t get the job done.

      As far as giving Barry his due, well…someone else will have to do that. My disdain for the man completely shuts down my ability to praise him…FOR ANYTHING.

      I agree 100% dm. It’s naive and ignorant to run around screaming about ~torture~ … This is the REAL world and it would be nice if people would get their simplistic, pc’d heads out of the sand…

  • felizarte

    Somehow, invoking “the Rule of Law” sounds hollow in light of the bullying of GMC and Chrysler bondholders and secured creditors. I believe he invokes the Rule or Law only when it suits him.

    • chris from Chicago

      including not producing his COLB…
      Obama either follows the rule of law or he does not not….
      he cannot cherry pick ..what he wants to use the rule of law..for…to appease his politics
      he has no credibility…
      the incongruence..is inacceptable and therefore untenable!

      • http://ezinearticles.com/?Three-Basic-Parenting-Styles&id=744499 Northwest rain

        So “someone” wrote a speech which Obama READ — if he were quizzed on exactly what he said and the meaning of his words in terms of POLICY — could he answer the questions?

        Doubtful.

        He doesn’t have core moral center — he can read and he can put on different hats — but we still have no idea what he really really believes in.

        When he can start speaking without stumbling and without his teleprompter — then perhaps he might be speaking from his heart.

        Narcissistic con men like 0zero have no heart.

        • Animal Control

          You are tough, but I like it.

        • getfitnow

          I agree Northwest rain. When is he going to be challenged?

        • fif

          Exactly. Either he had no idea what he was talking about during the primaries and/or he was lying. Either way, not commendable. They feed him the lines, and he reads it from the TP. Wow.

          • creeper

            Here’s what he was talking about during the primaries:

            “You can’t say one thing during the campaign trail and then apologize afterward and say it was a mistake.”

            Barack Obama, South Carolina Democratic Primary Debate, February 21, 2008

  • Shainzona

    Hey, our POTUS gets one of the last 100 correct. I guess we should be thrilled about something!

    Maybe by the end of his term in office (4 years…from my keyboard to God’s ears!) he’ll have that up to 2 out 100.

    At least we can hope, can’t we?

    • James Guglielmino

      No. You are wrong. He has done a bunch of things right. He zapped the odious and illegal fiat of shrub Bush’s that gutted Freedom of Information act. He is working across the isle, as he said he would. A startling example is that he is working with the extraordinarily right wing Senator from Oklahoma on the Transparency Act. He has acted strongly in environmental issues and he has taken a very strong position on leading our nation to independence from middle eastern oil. The list of his accomplishments is very long. Having said that, there have been a number of things he has done that do not please me.

      • Shainzona

        Do you prefer orange or grape Kool-aid?

      • Benjamin

        Environmental issues? Are you referring to Obama’s cap and trade deal? Obama himself has admitted that consumers’ energy costs will skyrocket in the short term. Personally, I’m not looking forward to seeing my energy bill double in the middle of the steepest recession since WWII. In fact, I can’t believe he would try and inflict this on the American people at this particular time.

        • Boxer Mum 06

          We received a notice from our utility company that they are offering us to pay in advance for our fuel for the winter and get this.. will pay us 7% interest on it. Is it time to invest in a pellet stove?

      • kgirl

        Sending Obots to annoy sites that oppose him doesn’t qualify as walking across the ailes.

      • sjc-tx

        What planet are you on??!!

  • http://undercoverblackman.blogspot.com Undercover Black Man

    Can’t wait to see your follow-up, Larry, on the Cheney speech. Talk about the politics of fear… he’s soaking in it!

    • Uppity Woman

      Truly, all Dick needed was some emergency siren sounds and flashing lights in the background and his speech would have been complete. I liked him better when he was vice president and hid over in his bunker, hanging upside down like a bat until nightfall. At least I never had to see or hear from him. Now he’s all over the place like horse crap.

      • cali

        Cheney is giving Obama cover by insisting that there’s such a HUGE difference when there is none. Classic kabuki theatre.

  • Retired

    A law enforecement approach is OK in the United States. Overseas in areas where there is no law, or in areas that provide safe haven to terrorists while they train, arm and plot against us, we need an approach that takes into account these and other relevant factors.
    Few would deny that the U.S. has the right to defend itself. It is the manner and method of that defense, especially when it is conducted abroad, that is under debate.

  • Ellen D

    I agree with Larry. That was an excellent speech for which I was amazed. I don’t agree with not releasing the photos because I think they will eventually come out, but his point about the excellent incarceration facilities in the U.S. is something I’ve been saying for years.
    Also, having been on an American jury, I don’t think they would be soft in these cases.

    • Rob G in Chicago

      I believe that those photos may have slipped out despite what Obama wants:

      http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22624.htm

      http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11930.htm

      • chris from Chicago

        Obama said he was not in favor of releasing the pics
        knowing fully well they would make their way to to see the light of day…

        that is known as
        “having your cake and eating it too”

        Obama often embraces dichotomous and diametrically opposed stances…under the guise of bi-partisanship, inclusion, tolerance…
        In reality, Obama is
        manipulative, deceptive, divisive and disingenuous!

        He is a “wolf in sheep’s clothing”..
        I have no use for him or his prevarications!

        • Chris

          Yes he knew they would come out and we all knew he knew. He is always placed above the fray just as he has been doing since he first hit the mainstream 2 years ago. His handlers have planned and managed him well so he can never be blamed for anything. He always has an out. If there is any credit to give them, it is they are well organized in what they are doing. Too bad it’s so evil.

    • hooded sphinx

      If the “excellent” incarceration facilities are available in the US, why was the Administration asking for $80 million to construct new? A modest proposal-change the name of the facility at Guantanamo to Club Med and leave them there! Obama could claim the moral high ground and the taxpayers/NIMBY’s would be satisfied. A win-win.

      • Greyledge Gal

        We have a winner. I suggested a name change for Gitmo to Happy Acres or Sunnybrook Farms several days ago to my husband.

        Since names like Fairness Doctrine and Recovery Act seem to keep everyone in the dark and thinking they are good things, I’m pretty darn sure that most of America would just go back to sleep if we just tweaked that doggone name. :)

    • fif

      excellent incarceration facilities? Are you kidding?

  • http://deleted Betsy Buzz Ross Latte

    While Obama may have appeared presidential and like he’s finally thinking like an American, he has NO track record of trust. None.

    So, he’s going to have to put on a few more genuine performances and follow through, with the will of the people foremost in mind instead of his own agenda, before the trust will develop.

    I agree that he appeared presidential. Appeared being the operative word.

    • Docelder

      Appearing presidential is what got him elected. That and about a billion dollars worth of branding advertising and the endorsement of nearly the entire world media. But appearances can be deceiving. Let us hope, if hope is still a word we can use without digging up painful memories… but let us hope that he is running for the cover of the broad center at this point. It doesn’t look like that broad center is wildly embracing the proposed USSA.

      • getfitnow

        Yeah, appearances–it’s all stagecraft. Where’s the substance.

        • cali

          It’s all about STYLE. Who needs substance?

  • Dutch

    Rather than have Obama talk about our security, I want to see action. That is something that is sorely lacking in this man. Don’t get suckered by his “passionate speeches” – talk is cheap! That, and he is beholden to too many private interests. Watching him with Netanyahu was most embarrassing – if he could have sunk any lower in his chair he would have disappeared. Not my idea of being “presidential”. Netanyahu, however, looked like he was completely in control and in charge.

  • Steve_in_KC

    As much as I dislike this president, I have to agree with you, Larry, that fairness dictates giving credit where it’s due, not just constant fault-finding. There’s plenty of fault to find, mind you, but even someone doing a poor job gets some things right.

    Following Bush’s preposterous policies, it should be easy for any administration to do better on many counts. Since we have to live with the actions and policies of our elected leaders, I hang on to some hope that Obama will occasionally do the right thing. It should be easy to right some of the wrongs Bush/Cheney put in place.

    Whether he governs as well as he bowls remains to be seen. There’ve been plenty of gutter balls already!

  • SoCalDem

    I can’t praise him for any words he uses, because they are just that words without meaning. I never liked Dick Cheney, but I listened to him after Obama was on and he made a lot of sense to me.

  • Doc99

    When it comes to recidivism, beware of the undercount.

  • termo

    “that the Bush Administration had a haphazard, chaotic and ineffective policy when it set up Guantanamo”

    What would you do genius? Bring them into U.S. communities, tried in our courts, sit in our jails, convert countless other prisoners into their belief in Jihad, and then release them into our communities?

    You brought up the arrest yesterday of the Muslim cell that was planning to commit acts of terror in New York. By placing Muslim extremists in U.S. prisons you assure their ability to influence other prisoners and create homegrown Muslim extremists.
    Congress is fine with closing Gitmo as long as they don’t relocate these terrorists in their backyard. Believe me, if my Senators or Congressman allows for that to happen, they will no longer be in that position for very much longer.

    George Bush adopted Soviet-style techniques at Guantanamo.

    This is blatantly ignorant and there is no way of sugar coating that remark. There is a difference between treating citizens as political prisoners as the Soviet Union did and detaining foreign enemies as a prisoner of war – even one not part of the Geneva Convention. Every honest review of Guantanamo was that this was a state of the art detention center and the prisoners were treated well. Waterboarding was used on only three (3) prisoners – one of them was responsible for beheading Daniel Pearl.

    What is analogous is the left wing’s desire to persecute past administration people who made decisions on harsh interrogation methods for political reasons.

    And what about treating terrorism as a so-called “criminal” matter?

    I have no idea what your point is here. Why would you have Delta Force or Navy Seals involved in this case? What is important that tragedy was averted because law enforcement were able to monitor and infiltrate mosques in the United States – something the left wing feels is against people’s rights in this country.

    It is easy for Obama and others to be Monday morning quarterbacks almost 8 years after 9/11 and in retrospect pontificate on how they would have done things differently rather than try to understand what the people who were in charge were up against, what they had to consider in real time, and decisions to prevent any further attacks without having any information.

    As far as Obama speaking about the rule of law, he and other Democrats, should take care of their own laundry. Obama’s overreach on domestic affairs is not in the spirits of the Constitution or the spirit of the founders.

    • IndianaDem

      Obama’s overreach on domestic affairs is not in the spirits of the Constitution or the spirit of the founders.

      He’s certainly keeping more to that than his predecessor. If you have any doubt, read through the George W. Bush’s executive orders and signing statements and consider the level of disregard for constitution principles. Compare them with Obama’s executive orders and policy initiatives. We’re no longer living under a virtual dicatorship.

      There’s nothing in the constitution about unitary executive theory.

      People who don’t full realize all that Bush did and ignored don’t seem to understand there’s a basic philosophical difference. There’s also a fundamentally different moral sensibility.

      • termo

        I’m sorry for your continuing affliction of BDS.
        I hope you get better soon.

        You are clearly clueless about the extent Obama has overreached and not for national security reasons which was the Bush reason.

      • Chris

        You’re right. It’s not virtual, it’s real now. Obama has taken care of that.

        • http://uppitywoman08.wordpress.com Uppity Woman

          Come on. We switched one A Hole for another. Nothing more. Nothing less. That’s not BDS. That’s reality.

    • NomNomNom

      “By placing Muslim extremists in U.S. prisons you assure their ability to influence other prisoners and create homegrown Muslim extremists.”
      you have nailed the problem of keeping them in the facilities we already have. I don’t doubt if we were to house them in the US, we’d have to build something else to house them in.
      My bet: Bagram with the other 600 we’re already holding there.

      • skinny malinky

        The accused terrorists can certainly be segregated from any general prison population. We can’t take people from their home countries and hold them indefinitely just because we think they might be terrorists. If they’re prisoners of war, they need to be treated like that. If they’re criminals, they need to be treated like that. But they can’t be left to rot without any due process. It’s horribly wrong.

        • graywolf

          When you’re done crying over the poor terrorists, I invite you to watch video of people jumping from the heights of the WTC on 9/11.

          • Chris

            Or go to Atlas Shrugs and watch the videos of beheadings that are performed by these poor abused terrorists as part of their day. It is utterly revolting and they do it with complete lack of emotion. They also would do it to you in a heartbeat if they get the chance. Bet on it. You go and talk nice to them. They’ll love you forever while they torture you and cut you and your family’s heads off.

  • Animal Control

    George Bush adopted Soviet-style techniques at Guantanamo. Barack Obama today correctly reminded us that we, as Americans, are different and ought to be better.

    I think Obama made an effective case today that we can protect Americans without abandoning the Constitution and the rule of law. I applaud his words, let’s see if the actions follow.

    I emphatically agree.
    Lets bring back the rule of Law.

    • Hank

      Obama if you don’t abandon the Constitution and the rule of law can you please produce your COLB. Show the American people your transparency policy that you keep bringing up.

  • don’tmesswithmyvote

    0bama is a liar and a thief.

    I have no reason to believe that this day is different
    than any other day.

    • lark

      That’s what I say. 4 ways for 4 so called different problems. Baloney. The idea is to destroy the country by complicating the confusion until nothing is worth whatever and whatever is worth nothing. Destroy by devaluing values. Conquer by promoting inconsistentcy and paradox. Confusion. Whatever.

    • Diana

      I think he did a good job, but I worry these were not his thoughts, or even his words. That it was all written and orchestrated to get the exact reaction it did. His actions speak louder than his words, so I guess we will see. He does seem to have his moments. Tomorrow he may change his mind.

      I do not understand what kind of mind it takes to torture another human being. I don’t want to understand it. It shouldn’t have happened. However, I also do not want it from the other side either. I don’t want terrorist on our soil. I don’t want them in our prisons to spread their message of hate. The warped justification of murdering innnocent people.

  • Lisa

    Larry,

    I too listened to Dick Cheney and believed him more than I believe Obama.

    Why did the Obama camp release secret documents to begin with? This situation stinks. We need to move on.

  • Mandelay

    I think Cheney and Obama are both indulging in the politics of fear — Cheney telling us we’re getting more vulnerable every day and Obama telling us if we don’t let these detainees into the American justice system, we must fear the permanent loss of our reputation, honor, etc. Hence, even if we stop torturing people, we can’t keep them in a perfectly secure, well-run prison at our Naval base in Cuba. We can’t keep these detainees off American soil. Obama and Cheney are just operating from different marketing positions, but they are both using fear to drive this roadshow. Today was another great marketing moment from Mr. Obama, who gets to “stand tall” as he uses this tempestuous debate in a teapot, distracting the public with an issue that has produced many emotional reactions. He has established a new path for future Presidents. Never, never stop campaigning. Now he running against Dick Cheney and as Obama and Cheney slug it out (all in in good fun) over national security, Obama continues to quietly expand his brand of socialism in this country. And we the people are distracted by a handful of detainees while Obama’s executive decisions on major issues will affect millions of citizens for decades to come. Obama learned how to “appear Presidential” the minute he stepped in front of his 8 American flags to lecture us on race during the primary campaign, as he successfully distracted us from the Rev. Wright. Obama has mastered this technique. Even if he ends up being a one-termer, we still won’t know what hit us.

  • Lisabona

    Yes! All of you are right. This is the best speech, I ever hear 0bama to read. I have to recognize, he, 0bama, always say – read – the right think. He read what you and me and the American people want from their President,but, sad, he almost, never follows what he read.I would gladly gave him the highest remarcs, from the bottom of my heart, if, he would do what he is reading.

  • James Guglielmino

    Too DAMN bad I didn’t get to hear the speech. Right now, I need an “Obama is a good guy” fix…Wouldn’t you know, the FIRST time you really give him props, I am so pissed off at him, I could scream….Valarie Plame got screwed without a kiss by the bastards in the last administration. Then, her former company did NOTHING to help her of substance. NOW, Obama sides with shrub in not letting her suit go ahead. In addition, he has taken it a step further: Raw Story reports :The Obama administration has gone one step further, suggesting Mr. Wilson failed to provide any evidence that Mr. Cheney, Mr. Rove or Mr. Libby harmed him,” Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility reported on their blog Wednesday. “This is particularly ironic because the government had moved to have the case dismissed before the Wilsons had the opportunity to uncover the details of how Ms. Wilson’s covert identity was revealed.”
    This sucks and I am damned angry. The only up side is that the morons here who have previously asserted, *stupidly* but predictably, that I and others like me, would never do anything except “kiss the ass of the messiah,” might now understand that while I have defended Obama, it has been thoughtfully. Oh, by the way, I defy you or anyone here to tell me that Hillary wouldn’t have done exactly what Obama is doing….The list seems to be growing longer and longer…Obama is essentially Bill Clinton with a lock on his zipper and I DO NOT LIKE IT.

    • aeguy

      Oh, by the way, I defy you or anyone here to tell me that Hillary wouldn’t have done exactly what Obama is doing

      Who the hell knows dude? Why do you use hypothetical situations as a justification for Obama’s decisions? It’s absurd. This is parallel universe logic.

      • Marge

        Hillary would have, at least, known all about the subject and all the ramifications of her decisions. BO has a teleprompter and a room-full of speech writers, beginning with the groper.

    • Donna “Abigail Adams” Brazile

      And how the heck do you know That One has a lock on his zipper?

      Stop the obsession fest!

    • Ani

      James, Thank you for your honesty in sharing your concerns and anger on this matter. I am not going to characterize what anyone else might have done in his stead, nor am I going to compare him to anyone. My question is, since you know more about this subject, do the Wilsons have any further recourse or are they shut down altogether? Tx, A

  • Doc99

    So Obama’s speech is motivated by his desire for national security? Or is it something else.

    • DefiantOne

      It was probably motivated by his desire to gloss over the mess he’s made of this situation…you know, like all the other speeches he gives when he’s messed up (remember the fraudulent, nonsense, throw-granny-under-the-bus race speech?).

      He’s counting on the fact that we aren’t paying attention and everybody is going to fawn over how he’s so good at giving speeches, despite the fact that he still hasn’t answered the central questions (i.e., why continue Bush’s policies if they’re so awful and what are you going to do with the detainees).

  • blogforce one

    Larry ,why am I blocked from commenting? I apologize for my earlier transgressions. I used no foul lingo in any of my comments. The point I’d like to say here that is worthy of debate is this; If Guantanamo Prisoners are remanded to U.S. detention centers, EG; super-max penitentiaries. What is to stop them from indoctrinating other inmates with their poisonous ideology? And what happens when these other inmates after indoctrination are released back into the general population? a risk to national security? tell me what you think about this. Thanks.

  • shannon

    I’ll have to check but I suspect Jon Favreau lifted that speech from Harrison Ford at the beginning of Air Force One.

    • http://ezinearticles.com/?Three-Basic-Parenting-Styles&id=744499 Northwest rain

      Obama always speaks another person’s words — it wouldn’t surprise me of the mcp Favreau is now lifting speeches made by FICTIONAL characters PLAYING president.

  • babawankenobe

    The point I’d like to say here that is worthy of debate is this; If Guantanamo Prisoners are remanded to U.S. detention centers, EG; super-max penitentiaries. What is to stop them from indoctrinating other inmates with their poisonous ideology? And what happens when these other inmates after indoctrination are released back into the general population? a risk to national security? tell me what you think about this. Thanks.

    • propertius

      Inmates in the Florence ADX (the official name for the Colorado Supermax) are in solitary confinement in their cells 23 hours/day. The remaining hour is a solitary exercise period in an individual, concrete-walled exercise area. They have no contact with other inmates. This is by design, since many of the prisoners sent there have killed either guards or other inmates while in custody.

      It’s pretty hard to indoctrinate someone under those circumstances.

    • Chris

      Why should we pay any more money for these detainees? It’s costing us a fortune no matter what they do if we keep jurisdiction over them. Send them back to their own countries except for the ones we know for sure actually committed violence against our troops or citizens.

      • propertius

        Some of the ones who have been cleared can’t be sent home. See:

        http://articles.latimes.com/2009/feb/18/world/fg-uighurs-gitmo18

        and, due to Chinese government blackmail, can’t be sent anywhere else, either.

        • Chris

          Maybe there are circumstances that prevent certain detainees from being sent back but I don’t think many legit ones. However, if they were committing terrorist activities against the US then why should we worry if their own home country wants to prosecute them? Gosh, I feel bad for them–not. If they really wanted to be Americans, they would have immgrated legally and become citizens here. They obviously were caught doing something serious to be put where they are and they jeopardized all of us in some way. We have no business trying to rehab these people. We can’t afford to. Send them back to their mother country.

  • Yeah Right

    Larry

    I find you to be insightful and intelligent— in saying this, I am very surprised that you are getting all hyped up over Obama’s word!! His WORDS mean very little and from what I have seen, in most cases, his words don’t match his actions!!

    They are JUST WORDS!!

    I am NOT a fan of Cheny but I have to give HIM due credit. He made a compelling case and I found his speech to be more effective and sincere than Obama’s!! I may have to give Cheney a second look! He held no punches and his points has much validity! The sad truth is that right about now, I trust Cheney to keep me safe WAYYYYY more than I do Mr. Obama!

  • Obama: Dubya II Electric Boogaloo

    1. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

    2. I’m no Bush fan, but what’s with this revisionist thing that somehow America was as pure as new fallen snow before George Bush showed up. The GOPers tried to make Bill Clinton the source of all evil in the world and now the Dems are taking a page out of the same playbook and linking the source of all evil in the world to George Bush.

    Nothing new here really….time to stop the blame game and own up to their own responsibilities.

  • Lisabona

    His words was in first place, that we are where we are, today, Just to be fair to those who voted for him.

  • guess who

    Obama reads what some speech writer has written for him.Obama is a great reader not leader.How can anyone look at what he has done to this country in such a short time and trust him.Anyone who has every record of his past sealed and spends tons of money keeping them sealed can’t be trusted. PERIOD.

    • Rob G in Chicago

      Kind of like those Texas Air National Guard and various cocaine and DUI arrest records, right?

      • chris from Chicago

        Rob G…

        The veracity of your statement,

        “Kind of like those Texas Air National Guard and various cocaine and DUI arrest records, right?”

        in no way diminishes or negates the veracity of Guess Who’s statement that
        “Anyone who has every record of his past sealed and spends tons of money keeping them sealed can’t be trusted.
        As a matter of fact…the misdeeds which you allude to George Bush (and I am no fan of his believe me)
        pale in comparison with the possibility that Mr. Obama is in all probability ineligible to be POTUS,
        and may yet thrust this country into a non-pareil Constitutional crisis…let alone the dangerous naivete he is displaying in his policy-making…
        I also live in Chicago..and I am well aware of the southside political bowery Obama hails from…

    • Chris

      Yep. Cheney didn’t use a teleprompter unlike the great and wonderful Oz. Who doesn’t know the first name(mistaken twice in one day) of his defense sec. that he sees everyday? Who’s the more intelligent one again? Who’s actually accomplished some things in his life? Who’s held a real job and worked hard at it?? Who is real and who is the made-up cartoon hero? There’s so much more and I’m not even a big Cheney fan.

  • http://www.missmalevolent.com Miss Malevolent

    He gets no credit from me on this as his speech once again went into self-indulgence territory with him mentioning yet again, his life story.

    And Guantanamo as it is today was not the catalyst for the attack of 9/11. 9/11 resulted in Guantanamo being a housing area for terrorists. So this causation argument that he and others try to make kind of falls apart.

    The reason why terrorists are recruited is the same reason it was before Gitmo…a lack of economic stability in that region and our haphazard policy of engagement in that region which makes us the scapegoat for their lack of economic prosperity.

  • Texas Playwright

    bho the fraud is still bho the fraud, whatever right or good thing he is doing/perceived to be doing. We cannot let the remains of our democracy slip into a fascist, totalitarian state, which is what bho the fraud and his thugs in D.C., media, big money and radical foreigners are creating, just because he might be getting something right.

    Disagree with you on this one, Larry, and thank you for this blog where we can disagaree.

  • DefiantOne

    What? Obama made a mess of a situation and now he gave a speech from a teleprompter and now the Beltway establishment is going to declare how wonderful he is?

    Wow, that’s never happened before.

    Now let’s see if he actually accomplishes anything. Speech or no speech the question remains: what is he going to do with the detainees at Gitmo. We still don’t know. But thank you, Obama, for telling us (again) how the Bush administration messed up. Because, of course, we didn’t know that already.

    This man is full of empty words.

  • cathnealon

    “It’s only words and words are all I have to take your heart away”
    The dueling speeches this A.M. were like Alien(Obama) vs Predator(of course Cheney). Well, BO must have practiced this one a little harder than the others-the pauses, the turning of the head, the ‘presidential look’(?)while Cheney was being Cheney. For authenticity I’ll go with (gulp) Cheney for the P.R. of it all I’ll go with BO–like someone said above almost a billion in marketing to get this fraud elected. Mr. Johnson, didn’t Hemingway say at the end of one of his famous novels when one character was romanticizing a situation and believing in something that was obviously doomed, “Isn’t it pretty to think so?” Well, it’s pretty to think that BO’s words mean something but the last 4 months have already shown us they don’t mean a damn.

    • chris from Chicago

      Bee Gees! great song..great reference!

  • margaret

    Just words

  • Eleven

    Not to mention during his introduction to his big security speech, he gets name of DoD sec wrong, he said William Gates. He reads from his cue card, but still gets it wrong. Amazing!

  • Tom Cat wodie j Jefferson Esq

    I don’t give a rats ass what Obama says. So he read a good speech. Wow, how low expectations are in this country. Thus why he got “selected”.

    • http://noquarter foxyladi14

      actions speak louder then any words.

  • Pingback: BETRAYAL: Obama Sides With Bush, Rove, Libby Against Valerie Plame « DONE (Democrats Over Nominating Elitists)

  • Objective Analysis

    Larry,

    It is called Obama is doing a CYA (Covering his own ass). When you have 1 out of 7 detainees going back and doing terrorism after their stint in Cuba and the BHO does not want to release the Pentagon report, he has to make a speech like this.

    It was a MAJOR DEFEAT. 90 to 6 Senators deny BHO funding to send his friends/relatives back into the world from confinement. He knows he needs to do a CYA.

    As flava flav states, DON’T BELIEVE THE HYPE!

  • trish

    Has Obama ever read the Constitution??
    From day one he has done everything to abuse it with the exception of changing the entire wording of it.

    Obama doesn’t know what he says, he just reads as the words go by on the teleprompter. I could do that, but then again, I’m not qualified either.

    • Chris

      He should have today. He was standing in front of it, the hypocrite. He’s desperately trying to negate the outcry that he is trashing the freedoms granted in it by his policies that have been railroaded thru this first 5 months of his fraudulent administration. He and his backers are doing it on purpose to change America into something never intended by the Constitution or our founders.

    • Greyledge Gal

      Obama is a Constitutional scholar to one end. He has studied The Constitution and picked it down into its separate parts to figure out exactly what he can legally get away with in order to destroy it and our country along with it.

      Obama actually had 2 huge defeats – first the non-funding for Gitmo closure and then the huge vote for allowing concealed carry in Nat’l Parks.

      The gun amendment was actually voted on separately in the House and still passed resoundingly. Both houses of Congress are sending a clear signal that they are not going to pass any gun control laws.

      Hopefully, this is the beginning of Congress standing up to Obama, Pelosi, and Reid.

  • OxyCOn

    Obama looks really bad on his flip flops on national security, so what does he do? He goes for the low hanging fruit and blames Bush.
    All Obama is doing is trying to divert all the criticism he is now rightfully getting and casting it all on Bush.
    Sorry, Obama’s BS doesn’t work for me.

    • TexasMirth

      Sorry, Obama’s BS doesn’t work for me.

      Nor for me. Referencing the Bush Administration repeatedly in his speech is like the pathetic kid in grade school who whines, “HE STARTED IT!” while pointing to another kid. Obama doesn’t know how to give a speech without slamming his predecessor and praising himself.
      It’s going to be a long four years…

  • inconsiderable wretch

    Dear Larry,
    No one has denied that Obummer’s handlers and speechwriters can have him read a nice speech. From past experience, however, we have every right to doubt whether they will have him follow through with substantive action. Your rave review seems premature.

    • TexasMirth

      Your rave review seems premature.

      When a liar says something we like to hear, do we automatically give the liar kudos?

  • http://! stodgie

    one speech is good but does not an effective foreign policy make! with the likes of pelsoi hanging out there you have the same downer effect we had with cheney. we’ll have to see down the road with afghanistan, pakistan, palestine, and israel. too early to tell and too soon to hope!

  • listing starboard

    Do you for ONE MINUTE honestly think that Obama wrote this speech or has written ANY of his teleprompter speeches? Why are you giving him credit for his ability to read off the TOTUS? You have to know that he is just reading the collaboration of his Chicago henchman’s words. Please.

    • justme_kc

      do ANY politicians write their own speeches?

      • listingstarboard

        Probably not entirely, but most of them can deliver a speech without a teleprompter. I would assume that most presidents read through and make changes to speeches, it is obvious that Obama just reads what is in front of him, like it is the first time he has seen it too.

  • mountainaires

    Well, perhaps Obama is not quite that heroic, Larry. He knows full well he sits in the catbird seat on Guananamo prisoners; he gets to argue the morally correct position, knowing that Congress will chicken out based on populist fear-mongering about our “national security.”

    Basically, I’m happy to give Obama credit, if there were a moment that credit were due. Like, if he changes Cuba policy, or if he actually defends and upholds the Constitution. I haven’t seen it yet. Here’s what I see, instead:

    Obama Eyes ‘Preventive Detention’ System
    May 20, 2009

    During a 90 minute meeting with human rights advocates today, President Barack Obama said that he was considering coming up with some sort of “preventive detention” system which would provide him a legal basis to detain suspects as a threat without having to charge them with any crimes.

    http://news.antiwar.com/2009/05/20/obama-eyes-preventive-detention-system/

    Watching Obama Morph Into Dick Cheney

    May 21, 2009

    America has lost her soul, and so has her president.

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article22671.htm

  • Tomcat

    Obama is a liar. We all know that! So who cares what the liar in chief says?!If Big Media would just let people see the real Soetoro that is in this video, Joe Biden would be president the next day!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0&feature

  • Lisabona

    SPEECHWRITERS. They were hired for this job. They doing a good job 0bama, is doing also a good job, reading them so well( sometimes) but from reading a speech to imply it, is a BIG DIFFERENCE. We can say, he backed away, (almost with indulgents) everything he red, until now. Anybody expect any change for the future. Slim chanse.

  • Benjamin

    I’ll give Obama some kudos for at least presenting a pragmatic position on the whole GITMO detainees issue.

    But to have this guy stand up there preaching about transparency, the rule of law, and the dangers of politicizing national security? If he’s so transparent and wants us to have the truth – “even if it makes some uncomfortable,” why won’t he release the memos Dick Cheney requested? That sounds pretty damn partisan and political to me.

    Obama and the democrats, and many on this site, have already trashed these memos as false, so what’s the harm in letting the American people see them so we can decide for ourselves?

  • mel

    Hmmmmmm Obama gave another speech, so that makes how many since 2004 that Obama has given?

    He spoke on FISA, dead against it, will do everything to defeat it…..yea everyone of the rats following the sounds of the pied piper shouted, then the wordsmith ran into the Senate and voted for it!

    Do words matter? Remember that statement Obama rang out? Words mean nothing when it comes to this POTUS, just those who believe his words and ignore his actions!

  • Benjamin

    One part of Obama’s sermon made no sense to me. That was where he explained his release of those interrogation memos. Obama said that since we don’t do that anymore those memos don’t matter, so he released them out of transparency.

    Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but is it wise to tell our enemies what we will do or not do if they are captured? I seems to me that just having the “threat” of what we might do in a suspect’s mind would be an effective interrogation tool. As it stands now, the worse that an al-Qaeda guy could expect is to be asked if he needs another pillow.

    • chris from Chicago

      The Tranparency is strictly for our enemies!…

      because god only knows that there is no and neither has there been any transparency whatsoever
      where this administration and the Americans people are concerned!

  • candymarl

    Thanks for the post Mr. Johnson. I will give Obama his due for being able to articulate the foreign policy of the GWB administration., or lack thereof, when it comes to GITMO.

    I just hope he follows through this time.

  • jbjd

    I know this may make some of you crazy, but if we are to have any credibility in criticizing Obama we must also be prepared to acknowledge when he does the right thing and does it well.

    My credibility derives from the caliber of research and writing I have produced on the issues of this last election cycle. People have disagreed with my tack but never with my scholarship.

    I believe BO is Constitutionally ineligible to be POTUS. This means by definition, nothing he would say or do qua POTUS could appear Presidential to me.

    (Did you stop even for a millisecond before writing the opening salvo to your post, “Give the boy his due”? If you did, I wish you had listened to the better angels of your nature. If you did not, I wish, you had.)

    • Tom Cat “wodiej” Jefferson Esq

      I think you’re right…I believe he was born in Kenya. If he was born on US soil and/or was a legal US citizen, he would have produced the original long form BC. He isn’t showing any other records probably because they will reveal the same thing.

  • EWard

    “He is refusing to indulge in the politics of fear.”

    Larry,

    I have the utmost respect for you. For years, I’ve seen you on news programs talking about security matters. However, I disagree with the above comment.
    Here’s why.

    Put aside everyone’s claims about the election. Since taking power, it seems Obama’s main goal is to pay back the groups that helped him in this election. I’m talking about the unions, Democratic party leaders, the MSM, Soros, and so on.

    Obama has had opportunities to show his leadership style. What does he do? He sets into motion a class warfare system where he is playing one group against another.

    Unions vs. Hedge Funds
    Public Employees Union vs California
    Pelosi/Dems vs CIA
    Govt vs Banks (with Tarp Money)
    Govt vs States (that refuse Tarp money)
    Unions vs Auto Companies
    Obama vs Tea Parties

    People opposing Obama have received death threats and are vilified. Until the media truly investigates Barack Hussein Obama, he is not held accountable. Look at the totality of the man’s life, friends, acquaintances, education, and career to understand his moral compass. Right now, much of it is unavailable to the public and he’s the POTUS.

  • Lisabona

    Thinking about what Benjamin wrote. I remember when 0bama was ask of his presents of 20 years in J.Wright church, he said, he never hear any heatful words toward the white America. Maybe he is telling the truth and the only reason he was part of the church, because his attachment to Farrachan (name correct?) He was the one, who called him a ” messiah” comming to save the world.

    • Tom Cat “wodiej” Jefferson Esq

      How can someone sit in a church for 20 years and not hear what is being said? I am certain Rev. Wright spewed anti American rants on a regular basis.

  • Pingback: Make Them Accountable / Media & Politics

  • Uppity Woman

    I’ll bet Barack’s cardboard humping speech writer got a raise for that speech. I just wonder if Barack remembers any of what he read.

    • I’m a Linda too

      lol

      I can’t watch his speeches, put ones’ self through so much discomfort when you know he doesn’t mean most of what he says. He gives me a head ache.

      I can’t watch this back and forth in reading his teleprompter, side to side, side to side, side to side. My neck hurts.

  • I’m a Linda too

    What? I would say Obama wanting to close Guantanamo is finally a correct position, one he didn’t have early on.

    But, I also agree that considering the problems he’s been having with coming up with plans of closing Guantanamo, I would want to see his plans before just granting money.

    Especially considering Obama’s poor planning on everything else as we are seeing.

    But surely your statement “He is refusing to indulge in the politics of fear” is one of the most odd things I’ve seen, let alone from you. This guys does this all the time. And if you just mean on this one paticular situation he isn’t giving in to one argument, that’s an entirely different matter than claimly so broadly as you did.

  • politicsisdirty

    Rhetoric is different from reality. You should know that Larry.

    On the job trainee is what he is.

    • Hank

      That’s right on the job trainee, that’s why he keeps practicing his town hall meetings that he refused against Hillary and McCain.

  • http://noquarter foxyladi14

    three cheers for totus.

  • SJ

    Larry giving praise to Obama well you sure live and learn, sorry but I don’t buy Obama’s crap he is going to put this country in one scary position with his peace and love nonsense.

    All who felt that Obama was so great why don’t some of you take some of these terrorist and let them live in, spread the hope and cheer of the Obama administration, I see nothing wrong in that, is that not the American way?

    I still have visions of that beheading video that was on the internet, visions of people jumping out of the twin towers, so nope I can’t find a ounce of sympathy for these killers

  • Hank

    He should of read the Bill of Rights and The Constitution after his defensive readings today. Maybe then he would of produced his COLB…

    I hope someone keeps having a speech right after THE READER or TOTUS. Maybe, then Congress will begin to feel threatened and start listening to the people who voted for them to be there and start representing us.

  • lightacandle

    Larry,

    You write that Bush “set up Guantanamo without taking time to figure out what to do with captured Al Qaeda suspects.”

    But that’s exactly what Obama did when he pledged to close down Guantanamo. Obama, also, did not have a plan(and a back-up plan, if Plan A didn’t work out) regarding “what to do with captured Al Qaeda suspects.”

    Obama made that pledge to score points and win votes, but it was just another of Obama’s empty promises — like the one he made in January of 2008 (just before the critically-important Super Tuesday — that he had a plan to get the troops out of Iraq by the end of 2009:

    “I have opposed this war consistently. I have put forward a plan that will get our troops OUT [of Iraq] BY THE END OF 2009.”

    http://tinyurl.com/67nhtg

    Hillary refused to pander so shamelessly, but Obama had no such qualms and won the votes he needed to win on Super Tuesday — because he was willing to promise things he had no plan for and no intention to do.

  • Babs

    Larry, I’m an old lady, have been around the block a few times, and although I usually agree with you on most matters, I need to tell you that my guts and my life experiences make me feel much more unsafe with Obama in the White House than I ever did with Bush and Cheney there. Not long after 9/11 I watched a documentary by some French film makers who were in one of the WTC tower lobbies soon after the planes hit. The sound of the bodies of those who chose to jump rather than burn alive is a sound I will carry with me to my grave, and I decided then and there that I would support any action by my government to ensure that no other mother, father, wife, husband, son or daughter would ever have to live wondering if his or her loved one had been one of those forced to make that unimaginable decision. That’s the meaning of torture to me, Larry, not our enhanced interogation techniques that leave the “victim” alive and well to inhabit this earth another day. If that makes me a Republican, so be it, but they made me feel safe, Obama doesn’t.

    • sjc-tx

      Amen Babs… Amen!

  • gumsnapper

    Larry needs to remember that old cliche–actions speak louder than words. And O speaks out of both sides of his mouth, breaks promise after promise and flip flops like a hooked fish out of water. So what are we supposed to give the O man credit for? Empty words, oratory generated by a speechwriter and a teleprompter? Please.

    Also, should we get attacked again on our soil, his ass is grass, though I suppose he could always blame it on Bush. If I recall, 9/11 happened before Gitmo, n’est pas? What some call fear others call prudence and dealing with reality and human nature.

    Also, I don’t trust his thuggery, the way he and his cohorts attack private citizens, calling them out by name and smearing them, like Joe the Plumber and Carrie Prejean. This is a free country and citizens have every right to have a differing opinion and to question the President. They should not be personally attacked by the White House or by its enablers in the media. A very frightening situation if you ask me. This country is turning into a banana republic and the O is Dear Leader/Big Brother.

  • SJ

    When the POTUS has to resort to having a stage or props to address the nation then you know that his speech is going to be one pile of horse manure.

    Obama is a stage man not a statesman, just look at the backdrop and setting for this speech. Why could it not be delivered from the Oval office or some other place? It is amazing that Americans keep being caught up in this nonsense with Obama, rather that seeing a the fraud that he is pulling on the eyes of this nation.

    Everything is a grand setting, stage manage for impact, just like a Hollywood movie set, and still some of you cannot see beyond all of that which is really sad indeed.

    • Greyledge Gal

      ITA. The White House is always at the ready to handle a press conference. Yet, for effect, Obama closes down the National Archives to the public at the beginning of a holiday weekend (shutting out visitors wanting to see The Constitution and other founding documents made popular by the movie, National Treasure), trucks all of his security, an audience to applaud approvingly, the press, etc., a few blocks to make a speech.

      Again, how much did this cost just so The One could stand in front of the engraved and gilded lettering “Constitution of the United States”?? I thought we were in a Depression??

  • Babs

    He read the names of the people attending, called Secretary of Defense Robert Gates “Willian Gates”, and didn’t even stop to correct himself. That tells me he’s reading “just words”, someone else’s words, and has no real grasp of the meaning of those words. So we have an orator-in-chief, while most of us would prefer a President.

  • Doc99

    Pejman Yousefzadeh: DC Smackdown – Advantage Cheney.

    Judging forensics and rhetoric, it is clear that while President Obama came to make a speech, Vice President Cheney came to have a debate.

    • Docelder

      Obama can’t debate, unless he has the questions beforehand and the debate has restraints on time and on who can interject. Which translates into he can do presentations very well. He should be in sales and marketing… oh wait… he already is.

  • http://www.thecjpoliticalreport.com Halli Casser-Jayne

    Larry,

    You are trying to make this a black and white issue when it isn’t. There are shades of gray you overlook. I think the decisions the Bush Administration made at the time were from the POV of 9/11. Everyone was raw, the country’s nerves seared. The tactics were appropriate to the time.

    Today is another matter. We’ve had the chance to regroup,to think more clearly, and we have the luxury of time having passed and the country settling in. It’s time for new approaches.

    I think we’ve been too hard on the Bush Administration, and we are definitely giving way too much credit to the Obama Administration.

    Hindsight is 20/20.

    Halli Casser-Jayne
    Author, A YEAR IN MY PAJAMAS WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA, The Politics of Strange Bedfellows

    • http://deleted Betsy Buzz Ross Latte

      Perhaps Obama needs to be reminded that the country is still in two wars. Another 9/11 on Obama’s watch (God forbid) would unravel all of his ACLU talking points.

      While I do agree that America should have higher standards, we must be cognizant of who the enemy now is, what they are capable of, and what they are willing to do to strike at America.

  • gianni

    Why did my last comment not post? Is Larry Sinclair now a person non gratis here?

    • gianni

      Let me try again. Cheney’s speech was far superior to Obama’s. Indeed, when it comes to national security, Cheney runs rings around Obama. Obama is a snot-nosed kid who thinks he knows a lot, but he is in fact a wanker who is a complete fraud as POTUS. Where are your college records dude? Why are you still sitting on them? We know why! They would show you were a foreign student!

      Well, at least we have to look forward to Larry Sinclair’s book “Barack Obama and Larry Sinclair: Cocaine, Sex, Lies, and Murder?” to be published next month. It’s going to be great!

    • gianni

      Pick up Sinclair’s book which will be published next month. It’s titled Barack Obama and Larry Sinclair: Cocaine, Sex, Lies, and Murder?

    • gianni

      It looks like the title of Sinclair’s book is being censored here. Let me see if this posts.

      • gianni

        Yep, it sure is. Okay, it’s easy to get around the filter. But this raised really big questions: Why is No Quarter censoring the reporting of the title of Sinclair’s book? The title is B-a-r-a-c-k O-b-a-m-a a-n-d L-a-r-r-y S-i-n-c-l-a-i-r: C-o-c-a-i-n-e, S-e-x, L-i-e-s, a-n-d M-u-r-d-e-r? It is scheduled to be published next month.

  • TeakwoodKite

    There was a line in the speech where BO says;

    Now, over the last several weeks, we have seen a return of the politicization of these issues that have characterized the last several years. I understand that these problems arouse passions and concerns. They should. We are confronting some of the most complicated questions that a democracy can face. But I have no interest in spending our time re-litigating the policies of the last eight years. I want to solve these problems, and I want to solve them together as Americans.

    Anyone want to take a wack at what the bold type comment means?

    I take it that by “re-litigating” he honestly thinks that this is in the court of public opinion and not the courts because not one has been “litgated” that I know of, except for Scooter… Has Karl done the frog march yet for his mis deeds? Nope…and he never will.

    Mr. Johnson, actions …Do you see the irony, in that he gave the speech at the National Archives?

    I am for one am not optimistic about POTUS’s ability to following his TOTUS.
    Retired makes a salient point about “It is the manner and method of that defense, especially when it is conducted abroad, that is under debate.”

  • Babs

    And I think he called waterboarding “brutal torture”. Wow, he really does need to talk to Senator Mccain about brutality.

  • TexasMirth
  • kgirl

    All i heard was Obama’s usually “don’t blame me for not being able to do the right thing blame Bush.”
    Sorry Larry but when you job is to make important decision passing the buck isn’t a brilliant speech it is a long drawn out time consuming excuse. and some how he manages to turn it around and talk about himself, ” my father came here to acheive the american dream of getting married having a child leaving, and only seeing me once in my entire childhood, my mother taught me about America and when it got to be to much for her she dumped me on my grand parents and because of this i want to close down Gitmo, and end torture and I can’t because bush won’t let me? ” all that speach was is the equivalent of obama mashing the present button.” Either you believe in something or you don’t. But trust me, anyone who can give a speech on how giving treatment baby who survives is tramatic on the mummy and shouldn’t be done doesn’t care if you dunk a person underwater and make him think he’s going to drown. I have asthma, fighting for air is fighting for air, and with as prochoice as i am I wouldn’t subject that feeling to the baby or the terrorist. Obama’s a sociopath. he lacks the abilibty to care about anyone but himself that speach was give to placate his democratic base period and doesn’t get applause from me. In fact our jerk off and chief wants to creat a place where you can keep people simply suspected of being terrorist held indefinately. The sick part about it is that obama see’s americans who don’t agree with him more as terrorist than he does the ones that blow things up or crash planes into buildings. Good luck on that one.

  • Greyledge Gal

    Am I the only one who thought Obama acted close to unhinged during the first half of his speech? I tried to read all the comments here and did not see this mentioned anywhere.

    He was in turns defiantly angry, screeching, and berating and I felt as if the speech was directed as much toward Congress members who had just denied the funding to close Gitmo as toward the American public. In fact, maybe more so.

    In other words, he acted like a spoiled, petulant child throwing a temper tantrum because he did not get his way.

    We all saw Obama during the primaries and general election become flustered, angry, and accusatory any time Hillary or McCain would gain ground on him.

    Food for fodder: Do any of you think that Obama’s mental state may be so fragile that if seriously challenged (things start going against him), he might crack?

    • termo

      “Do any of you think that Obama’s mental state may be so fragile that if seriously challenged (things start going against him), he might crack?”

      You are right about Obama’s state of mind.

      He has never been challenged and combined with his amazing lack of experience in any sort management position, he is extremely thin skinned. We saw that before. He can give a punch but can’t take one.

      You will notice that both Obama and Cheney had a prepared speech. Obama read only from a teleprompter and was clearly angry and not incontrol of his emotions. Cheney only used prepared notes (his teleprompter was broken)and looked at the audience very often, and was very calm while being direct.

      Also, Obama never mentioned the arrrest of terrorists in New York who were indoctrinated into the extreme Muslim beliefs while in prison, which would have negated any argument Obama had in bringing the worst Muslim extremists into U.S. prisons and risking the surge in conversions of prison inmates.

      • TexasMirth

        Also, Obama never mentioned the arrest of terrorists in New York who were indoctrinated into the extreme Muslim beliefs while in prison, which would have negated any argument Obama had in bringing the worst Muslim extremists into U.S. prisons and risking the surge in conversions of prison inmates.

        You’re right, termo! That slipped by me, but I’m glad you pointed it out because the omission is really a slap in the face to the FBI agents who had been following these terrorists for months. Praise is reserved for Obama alone, evidently.

    • sjc-tx

      Do any of you think that Obama’s mental state may be so fragile that if seriously challenged (things start going against him), he might crack?

      We can only hope…

    • TexasMirth

      Do any of you think that Obama’s mental state may be so fragile that if seriously challenged (things start going against him), he might crack?

      A glass jaw for sure. There is definitely something unsettling about the way Obama reacts to the slightest criticism. Any observation that is less than cloyingly flattering causes him to tilt his head back, look down his nose, and speak in that now familiar, defensive tone. Yes, Greyledge Gal, I, too worry about his mental stability. Scary.

  • Katmoon

    The problems are at the very least two fold; most of the trouble is based on lack of trust by the American people. First we are screwed royal by Bush and Co., regarding the truth about torture, etc., then we have O doing all kinds of tap dancing around every issue, and being given complete passes on his peccadilloes, each and every one. IMHO, that is one of the major blocks, to see policy regardless of political relationship. We believe in our constitution, and hope that it applies equally, but it seems so long ago it was hacked to death under the Patriot Acts. Add into this the problems of not letting agencies do their work, mix it all with a ton of lies and we have a horribly confusing mess, that appears at first blush to be all political theater and no true attempt to problem solve. I’m trying to look deep[er into this, yet must admit I have a great deal of apathy when it comes to honest action by anyone holding office at this time. (with the exception of SOS Clinton).

  • Katmoon

    Further, I also admit, anyone not seeking to aid Valerie Plame’s story to have an honest day in court,(currently being considered to be heard by the Supreme Court) doesn’t seem to be looking at what events generated a cause and effect we are living through now. Maybe I am foolish, but I still believe there is huge amount of interconnection between all of this, we have yet to know. I understand what Larry is saying, but admit I am from “Missouri” at this point.

  • Matt

    I’m not sure the word “boy” is a tactful one to use when describing a 47 year old black man.

    In fact, I’m sure that it’s completely offensive.

    • sjc-tx

      Get over it

      • jbjd

        In the comment I posted above I, too, alluded to the impropriety of LJ using the word “boy” in the opening salvo of his post. The difficulty with using this word in relation to BO is not whether an author meant this as a racial slur – I am sure LJ did not – but whether readers would be distracted from the author’s message because he introduced his work with this poor choice of words.

    • Chris Vosburg

      Matt writes: I’m not sure the word “boy” is a tactful one to use when describing a 47 year old black man.

      [laughing] Dude’s from Missouri, he don’t know no better, cut him some slack.

      Pay attention to what he says, instead of how he says it, his heart is in the right place on this one.

    • Benjamin Franklin Berfle

      I’m sure HRC wasn’t thrilled by That One’s use of the finger, either, or the brush off. I’m sure she found them completely offensive, too. Strange how I didn’t hear a peep from you obamabots, though. Oh, I forgot–it’s OK to demean HRC but not the Anointed One.

      Not even a marginal try, there, Matt.

  • Chris Vosburg

    Give the boy his due.

    Hey, [laughing]who you calling “boy”?

    Thanks for the piece, Larry, and the commonsense explanation of what can and cannot be done and how long it can take under the frustratingly large wheels of our bureaucacy, uh, government, I mean.

    As I said before, going to bat for Obama is going to tear your commentariat apart, and the evidence is above.

    Oh well, perhaps it’s for the best.

  • Evolve and Learn

    President Obama is a grown man not a boy, Larry. I don’t agree with a lot of President Obama’s policy but he is a man not a boy.

    I have often caught Larry’s not so subtle “i don’t mean it that why” once too often and tried to ignore it BUT no more. You think you are too clever by half but maybe you are just too clever for me but your website has joined the list of website I did not visit anymore:

    Taylor Marsh
    Daily KOs
    Talking poins memon
    NO Quarter.

    Good bye.

  • ziggy

    This is a war and these terrorists are called prisoners of war and countries are entitled to hold prisoners of war until the end of the conflict.

    If they’re POWs they’re protected under the provisions of the Geneva Convention. You’re not allowed to humiliate or torture POWs. Since the U.S. is a signatory, someone would be guilty of a crime. Bush & Co dodged that by taking the position that they’re not POWs.

    You’re making the assumption that all of the prisoners are terrorists. Some undoubtedly are. Others are suspects, never formally charged, held based on some suspicion, accusation, or possibly coerced testimony. If there’s evidence of guilt, present the damn evidence and prosecute them. We can’t simply hold accused people until the war is over, never specifying our accusations, because the war on terrorism as defined by the Bush administration will never be over.