Cheney gives us the debate we never got during 2008 campaign

Washington Post:

Unrepentant and newly unbridled, former vice president Richard B. Cheney has embraced two missions in his political retirement: to forcefully defend the Bush administration's anti-terrorism policies and to publicly condemn those who would unravel them.

He did both yesterday, using the drama of a televised feud with President Obama to deliver the blistering accusation that more Americans are likely to die because the president has turned away from George W. Bush's post-Sept. 11, 2001, national security agenda. Cheney seemed eager to fan the flames of the debates raging through Washington.

Spoken in his droll monotone, Cheney's words were razor-sharp. He accused the president of "contrived indignation and phony moralizing" over the issue of detainee interrogations and called the decision to ban harsh methods "recklessness cloaked in righteousness" that threatens Americans.

Cheney's speech was on the calendar long before Obama's, but the former vice president did not back down when the two schedules collided. He called the zeal for prosecutions of those who conducted interrogations "utterly misplaced." He accused House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) of treating the CIA with "suspicion, outright hostility and second-guessing." He said Obama would "regret" bringing detainees into the country.

To those who question what he and Bush did to combat terrorism, Cheney held nothing back, offering a comprehensive -- if familiar -- justification for the government's past use of wiretapping, detention and harsh interrogation of terrorism suspects.

"For all the partisan anger that still lingers, our administration will stand up well in history -- not despite our actions after 9/11, but because of them," he told the American Enterprise Institute shortly after Obama's own national security address at the National Archives.

It has been evident for weeks that the relative seclusion Cheney kept as vice president was ending. In his speech yesterday, Cheney made it clear that he views himself as the principal keeper of the Bush legacy and a key player in making sure Obama does not mischaracterize the past eight years.

Bush confidants said Cheney is not explicitly channeling his former boss. Bush is neither asking him to make the appearances nor discouraging him from doing so, said former Bush press secretary Dana Perino, who remains close to the 43rd president. But Perino applauded Cheney's decision to offer what she said is a "full accounting" of the Bush presidency.

"Why shouldn't the vice president defend the Bush administration policies?" Perino said yesterday by e-mail. "I am pretty sure we still have free speech in our country -- and he should exercise his right as he sees fit, just as every American should."

...

One of the reasons Obama and the left are so unbalanced by Cheney's charge is that they have never had to deal with a response to their insulting and ignorant charges. McCain certainly did not defend very defensible actions by the Bush administration so Obama got a free ride during the campaign with his moral preening and nonsense about Gitmo.

One of President Bushes weaknesses was a refusal to respond to charges of Democrats whether they were baseless or not. His "new tone" made the administration something of a stoic punching bag for Democrat hysterical attacks. Cheney's return fire is something that many of Bush's supporters would have like to seen during the eight years he was in office.

The voters are much closer to Cheney's views on these issues than the are to the terrorist rights stance of Obama, and Obama's speech looked like a weak answer.

Alessandra Stanley at the NY Times says the speech was like a scene from 2008. Perhaps it was in the media trappings, but it was a debate we never got in 2008, and it is high time we did get to here a response to Obama's moral preening. His world view on these issues is dead wrong and could get a lot of innocent people killed. If it does not, it want be because his policies are superior, but because of the effectiveness of the policies Cheney supported. We have gravely weakened a wicked enemy, and we have a new President who is arguing that it was wicked to do so.