Obama and the Torture Trap - Score A Round For the Republicans

President Obama suffered his first big defeat last week with the Senate voting 90-6 to block funding to close the Guantanamo detention facility, which was a major campaign promise. The House of Representatives also rejected the closure. The vote was mostly symbolic, since it does not really stop Obama from shutting down operations at Gitmo. But the Senate vote sent a strong message to the Obama Administration - with the main concern being that allowing these detainees into the U.S. as prisoners is not the best idea right now, and Americans may not be ready for that move. Some have expressed concern that these prisoners could eventually become folk heroes in Federal prisons and could influence & recruit other inmates. There is some precedent to that…but I think this concern is being overblown for political purposes. Essentially what the Senate was telling Obama is that they (and the American People) want to see the plan.

In addition to the Gitmo defeat in the Senate, Obama also allowed Republicans to set a trap for him not only on torture, but on the wider issues of Terrorism and National Security. Cheney has effectively changed the narrative by taking the focus off of the crimes that he himself took part in while pushing an illegitimate war to focus instead on labeling Obama as weak on terrorism. Now the narrative is - another terrorist attack will be Obama’s fault because of his soft on terror approach and his efforts to change interrogation policy. Of course any new attacks won’t likely be due to a difference in interrogation techniques… but that’s the perception that Republicans are trying to create in the minds of the American public….and with their media advantage, they may succeed in creating that perception. This is why I have always stated that the Republican media machine/Spin machine is so powerful that they will be able to control narratives and get their message out, even while in the minority and while they are politically unpopular. Democrats and progressives don’t yet have a media infrastructure that can match what the Republicans have.

One thing in particular is strange about Cheney’s argument. He is laying the groundwork for Obama to fail on National Security by setting him up to be blamed for any new attacks… but wasn’t it Bush/Cheney & Co. that emphasized in 2001 and the years immediately after that the U.S. would probably be hit again? They focused on that point every chance they got - when they were in office. Of course, they did that to cover their behinds… because it was their negligence that, in part, allowed 9/11 to take place. They knew Americans wouldn’t tolerate 2 big attacks in a row under the "leadership" the same cast of clowns…. They would surely be voted out in 2004 if they allowed that to happen. So they sent the message that any new attacks against the Country would not be because they weren’t working hard to stop it…besides, they had the 'War on Terror' that was going strong at the time (although in reality it actually radicalized more people to harm us than it discouraged)…but any new attacks would be because the enemy hates the U.S. and “freedom” so much and they are plotting day and night against us. They admitted that they may not be able to stop all attacks. Do you recall how they emphasized that so incessantly? But now that they are out of office…. A new terrorist attack (which the Republican Party is praying for) will be the fault of Obama and the Democrats....not because the enemy is so determined to kill Americans. The Republicans are so good at changing the narrative to fit their political aims...and they are often able to get people to believe in the script.

The Republicans see an opening to possibly revitalize their dying Party by putting national security front & center. They are hoping that another terrorist attack will lead to a comeback, but they have to prep. Obama as the Fall guy to make it work. So far so good for the Republicans…with Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh and others on the far Right showing their leadership over the Party.

The Republicans have hit Obama with a one-two punch combination… stunning him… almost knocking him down. How did Obama allow this opening? How did he get so distracted that he let his guard down? Because he allowed far Left elements of the Democratic Party to hijack his agenda & replace the nations top priorities with their own (torture, gay marriage, etc). It’s the same thing that has happened to the Republicans from time to time (and now on a more permanent basis) when they allow far Right single issue groups like the anti-abortion folks, the religious right, the racists, the anti-government crowd and the pro-gun community to hijack the wider Republican agenda. Ohh… wait a second. Hell… that is the Republican agenda. But you get my point. Obama got to this point by taking his eye off the ball… by taking his focus off of the economy, healthcare, and other bread & butter issues… to focus instead on matters that are not among the top concerns of most Americans. Although I blog about torture, it is not even a top 10 issue for me personally...never was. It's an important issue... I have stated as much before.. but i'm not as fired up about it as extreme Left ultra-Liberals are.

Obama has been unable (so far) to regain control of his Presidency since opening this can of worms. His hijacked agenda is now at risk of being driven over a cliff by some of the more fringe elements of his Party. Even Nancy Pelosi, who was dragged into this mess over the last few weeks, is now screaming uncle…and begging for the Obama train to be put back on the tracks to focus on Kitchen table issues. This is why I stated all along that pushing this issue too hard & taking the focus off of the economy was a bad idea. And attempting to close Gitmo without a well thought out detailed plan was boneheaded on the part of the President and his advisers.

Obama has also backtracked in the past few weeks on the issue of military style tribunals for terror suspects, a move that has irritated Progressives. So in the past few weeks, Obama has angered folks on the Right & the Left. But he did it to himself. Who in the World is advising him to make these boneheaded decisions?

I guess I shouldn’t be surprised considering this is an Administration with staff that didn’t understand that flying planes low over Manhattan was probably not a good idea. It’s amazing that these folks are able to have jobs in the White House. I was amazed at how clueless these people were on that issue…and how they didn’t think it was a big deal. Now some of these same folks are showing how clueless they are on other matters.

The issue regarding the detainees is not that hard to fix. Possible solution: Segregate the international terror detainees from other inmates. The issue regarding trials is complex but not something that can’t be dealt with. The Obama Administration could start by trying as many cases as possible in the Federal civilian court system. Those suspects who can’t be tried in the Federal Courts should be retried in a rebuilt and fair tribunal system…and they could be taken through a new interrogation process if necessary (for those who faced harsh or unfair treatment under the old system). Those suspects who can’t be tried under either system should be sent back to their home Countries or held for a defined period for further investigation or charged under more broad anti-terror legislation. Holding suspects indefinitely without attorney’s & without trial is crazy talk which should be out of the question.

Obama has to get back to focusing on the bread & butter issues that matter most to Americans. He does better on the pocket book issues that people are most concerned with…although the stimulus effort from Democrats was not aggressive enough in funneling money towards job creation and creating new industries. I call this the 3rd round of a 12 round fight. Obama scored a knockdown in round 1 (by winning the election)…and won on points for round 2 (his first 100 days). But round 3 goes to the Republicans. By pushing the Torture & Gitmo issues so aggressively… lured by Leftists in his own Party, Obama fell right into a Republican trap. It allowed them an opening to take the media’s focus off of the economy which they destroyed and allowed them to put National Security and fear back on the front page.

With North Korea engaging in irrational behavior, and with Iran testing missiles, you will see Republicans pressuring Obama and even dictating the nations foreign policy, even though they are in the minority. By painting Obama as weak… they will attempt to goat Obama into leaning towards some sort of military solution (when there is no military solution) with North Korea and Iran. Israel has already launched an effort to influence U.S. media and U.S. politics, by attempting to frighten the American public with their leaked intelligence reports on Iran. Israels goal is to push Obama to go to war with Iran (a war that would likely draw in other nations...and a war that wouldn't be in the best interests of the United States...or any other Country). And as I stated, there isn't even a military solution regarding Iran to begin with. The only military solution is a sensible containment policy and defense. The solution in both cases is political, strategic and economic….with some creative out of the box thinking required. But the Republicans would like a war with both Iran and North Korea. The torture issue has now weakened Obama’s hand …in terms of possible solutions and diplomatic approaches. Notice how he has already been forced to engage in tough talk…. Pushing more sanctions for North Korea…among other possible punishments… steps that aren’t likely to work. Obama should instead push harder for direct State to State talks…and getting rid of the Six Party framework… that hasn’t worked…and probably can’t work. The idea of the Six Party framework was flawed from the beginning. A wider, more comprehensive regional Peace Treaty or non-aggression pact is needed… starting with an official end to the Korean War. But Republicans are already working to paint Obama into a corner… (because he opened the door to be attacked on National Security). The Republican media is already calling the North Korea issue "a moment of truth for Obama". As if Bush & Co. didn’t have any moments of truth with North Korea that they completely bungled. For 8 years, the Neo-Conservatives refused to negotiate one on one with North Korea…even when they were willing to give up their program (back when the U.S. had leverage). The U.S. no longer has much leverage with North Korea. That window of optimal leverage closed some time ago… in the years under Clinton and Bush. Now they want Obama to fix it…

I’m hoping that Obama won’t allow Republicans to dictate policy…and will work on a diplomatic, political and economic solution. Americans tolerated 16 consecutive years of pro-war policy under Clinton and Bush…. But Republicans are ready to give up on more sensible alternative approaches after only a few months. It’s amazing. Iran and North Korea aren’t responding to Obama’s overtures after a few weeks (which have not been that friendly) and now all of a sudden it’s time to send in the Carriers and attack.

A Discussion about Dick Cheney and His Efforts to Make Obama The Fall Guy

NPR had a great discussion about Tricky Dick II last week and his efforts to turn the tables in the torture debate. Dick Cheney has been on a media blitz lately on behalf of the Republican Party (and in an effort to cover his own rear end). His aim seems to be to argue that tough interrogation techniques (torture) worked and therefore were justified. He is also attempting to use fear (although I don't think it's working this time) to support his argument. He keeps repeating the argument that getting rid of "enhanced interrogation techniques" will put the U.S. at serious risk of another terrorist attack. Although none of the top experts and national security officials (National Security Adviser Jones, DNI Blair, the CIA Director, nor the Joint Chiefs Chairman) believe that changing the interrogation process will increase the risk of another 9/11. Even if there were another attack...it isn't even remotely likely that it could be tied to the change in interrogation rules. But by using this argument, Cheney's goal seems to be to set Obama up for blame if another terrorist attack takes place under the new Administration. In other words... he is hoping to use another terrorist attack as a way to breathe new life into the Republican Party. Sickening stuff!

Listen to Discussion

A Discussion With Muslim Americans - Now That Election Season Is Over

Thanks Rikyrah for hipping me to this photo a few weeks ago.
NPR's OnPoint offers a great post-election discussion with Muslim Americans. They finally provide their perspective after they were slandered by Politicians and by the American media for the last 18 months. They discuss their disappointment with how Obama handled the fearmongering and the slandering by Republicans. But they also discuss their hopes.

Did Obama do enough to speak out for American Muslims? Could he have done more? Or was he in the best position to speak up? And can Obama help bridge the gap between America's various cultural, ethnic, and religious groups?

____________________________

Related Links

Hear about the experiences of a Muslim family living under the U.S. culture of fear after 9/11.

Colin Powell Endorses Barack Obama

John Lewis Calls Out McCain For Whipping Up Hate

John Lewis tells the truth about the McCain/Palin hate rallies.

McCain shocked and offended? Give me a break!

Lewis's Statement:

"During another period, in the not-too-distant past, there was a governor of the state of Alabama named George Wallace who also became a presidential candidate. George Wallace never threw a bomb. He never fired a gun, but he created the climate and conditions that encouraged vicious attacks against innocent Americans who were simply trying to exercise their constitutional rights.

“Because of this atmosphere of hate, four little girls were killed on Sunday morning when a church was bombed in Birmingham, Alabama.”

Sinbad Slams Hillary Clinton

The vetting of Hillary Clinton continues...

From the Washington Post Blog:

Sinbad, along with singer Sheryl Crow, was on that 1996 trip to Bosnia that Clinton has described as a harrowing international experience that makes her tested and ready to answer a 3 a.m. phone call at the White House on day one, a claim for which she's taking much grief on the campaign trail.

Harrowing? Not that Sinbad recalls. He just remembers it being a USO tour to buck up the troops amid a much worse situation than he had imagined between the Bosnians and Serbs.

In an interview with the Sleuth Monday, he said the "scariest" part of the trip was wondering where he'd eat next. "I think the only 'red-phone' moment was: 'Do we eat here or at the next place.'"

Clinton, during a late December campaign appearance in Iowa, described a hair-raising corkscrew landing in war-torn Bosnia, a trip she took with her then-teenage daughter, Chelsea. "They said there might be sniper fire," Clinton said.
Threat of bullets? Sinbad doesn't remember that, either.
"I never felt that I was in a dangerous position. I never felt being in a sense of peril, or 'Oh, God, I hope I'm going to be OK when I get out of this helicopter or when I get out of his tank.'"

In her Iowa stump speech, Clinton also said, "We used to say in the White House that if a place is too dangerous, too small or too poor, send the First Lady."
Say what? As Sinbad put it: "What kind of president would say, 'Hey, man, I can't go 'cause I might get shot so I'm going to send my wife...oh, and take a guitar player and a comedian with you.'"

About Hillary's 3am Fear Commercial

You can't make this stuff up.

A Roundup of the Weeks Events - Dissecting the Democratic Primary

NPR's On Point Radio program breaks down the Democratic Primary, and takes a look at other events from the past week.

Jack Beatty: "Race (ethnicity) becoming a Factor in Democratic Primary"

.... Beatty goes on to mention the issue of negative images of Black Americans in media and in the Popular Culture....and how that may impact perceptions among the White electorate. He is 110% right. The panel also tells the truth about the race strategy that Clinton has engaged in... to mark Obama as "The Black Candidate" who should be feared by voters.

I just want to grab these pro-Rap people by their necks when they start talking their apologist nonsense about the negative images, the embrace & worship of the street thug Rap culture in so-called "Black America", and the rampant crime that has consumed Black communities.

Those who say that this stuff isn't damaging... that the image of Black Americans in the U.S. and around the World is just fine... must have two sets of blinders on.

Listen Here

A Bloggers Bleak But True Assessment of the Political Situation- I Agree

The blogger sums up much of what I am feeling. See the blog entry from the DailyKos.

McCain Supporter Launches Personal Racist Attack On Obama

McCain Supporter Disparages Obama; McCain Apologizes

By Michael D. Shear

CINCINNATI -- A supporter of Arizona Sen. John McCain repeatedly used Barack Obama's middle name, Hussein, while ridiculing him as a terrorist sympathizer in an introductory speech for McCain at a rally here this morning.

Immediately afterward, former Ohio congressman and former Bush administration official Rob Portman praised the supporter, talk show host Bill Cunningham, as an "extremely important" part of the McCain campaign.

Cunningham, who is known for his right-wing, fiery rhetoric on the radio, challenged the media to "stop taking sides and begin covering Barack Hussein Obama" as they do Republicans.

He used Obama's middle name two more times and referred to him as "a hack, Chicago-style Daley politician who's picturing himself as change. When he gets done with you, all you're going to have in your pocket is change."

He then mocked foreign policy statements of "Barack Hussein Obama," calling him the "fraud from Chicago" and saying that if Obama were to be elected president he would meet with the leaders of enemy nations. He said the "world leaders who want to kill us" will be "singing Kumbaya together around the table with Barack Obama."

Later in his comments, he said there is a big difference between Secretaries of State "Condoleezza Rice and Madeleine Albright, who looks like death warmed over. I think there's a difference between Condi and Madeleine. "

He also referred to retired Gen. Wesley Clark as a "Clintonista."

McCain did not mention Cunningham's comments in his speech to the enthusiastic crowd. But afterward, in comments to reporters, McCain apologized profusely for "any disparaging remarks" made about his Democratic rivals.

"Whatever suggestion was made that was in any way disparaging to the integrity, character, honesty of either Senator Obama or Senator Clinton was wrong, and I condemn it," McCain said. "I will take responsibility and I apologize for it."
Pressed by reporters, McCain said he will "make sure nothing like that ever happens again" and said, "I absolutely repudiate such comments."

A spokesman for Obama, Bill Burton, said: "We appreciate Senator McCain's remarks. It is a sign that if there is a McCain-Obama general election, it can be intensely competitive but the candidates will attempt to keep it respectful and focused on issues."

Portman said after McCain's speech that Cunningham is "often controversial" and that it did not surprise him that Cunningham would have made news with his comments at the rally.

But on stage earlier, Portman was effusive about Cunningham's speech. "Willie, you're out of control again. So, what else is new? But we love him," Portman told the crowd. "But I've got to tell you, Bill Cunningham lending his voice to this campaign is extremely important."

The sarcastic speech by Cunningham followed comments by another supporter, a prosecutor from the Cincinnati area, who mocked Obama's lack of military service and his message of optimism.

Joe Deters called Obama the "presumptive Democratic candidate" and predicted that Obama's success will quickly fade as people see through his rhetoric.

He said that will happen "after the vortex of love for this candidate stops -- and I feel so badly for the Clintons about this, don't you? -- and everybody sobers up and says, what does this guy really stand for?"

Deters whipped up the audience of about 400 by accusing Obama of supporting policies that Republicans hate.

"How about raising your taxes? How about that?" Deters said, prompting loud boos from the crowd.

"How about universal health care?"

More boos.

"How about the Democrats fighting with each other on how quickly they will surrender to the terrorists in Iraq?"

More boos.

Deters then questioned Obama's lack of military experience. He cited McCain's well-known history of having spent five years in a Vietnamese prison cell and having two sons serving "in uniform," and then accused Obama of having never risked anything.

"The only thing he has ever risked was a filing fee for reelection," Deters said. "That's the only thing he ever risked."

Source: The Washington Post Blog

**************************

However, McCain later tried to "distance" himself from the remarks.
I think this will be the beginning of a long trend of McCain "distancing" himself from the attacks launched by his people....knowing full well what they are doing. It looks like this will be a part of McCain's campaign strategy.