Obama KO'S Cheney

Dick Cheney decided to leave the safety of his secret bunker and declare war against President Obama. That was a very big mistake for Cheney, because he got his ass kicked more thoroughly than any politician in history.

Obama was precise, honest, serious, and thoughtful. Cheney was petty, vindictive, sneering, and utterly dishonest - just another Lying Sack of Dog Mess (LSDM).

Obama struggled to find the difficult balance between the Constitution and fighting terrorism. In response, Cheney repeated 8 years worth of lies.

He offered an aggressive defense of Torture, while insisting it was not Torture. He once again insisted it "prevented the violent death of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of innocent people," even though there is absolutely no evidence Torture prevented a single attack.

And he studiously avoided the centerpiece of the Iraq-Torture Scandal - that the main purpose of the torture was not to prevent future attacks but to manufacture lies to justify the invasion of Iraq. In fact Cheney studiously avoided Iraq, except to once again falsely link Iraq to Al Qaeda! 

We had the training camps of Afghanistan, and dictators like Saddam Hussein with known ties to Mideast terrorists.

Other reactions:

Josh Marshall: "I think the truest read on Cheney is his cutting and snide anger contrasted with his history of personal cowardice, ducking service in the Vietnam war he himself vociferously supported. Fear and anger are his defining emotions."

Glenn Greenwald: "The speech was fairly representative of what Obama typically does:  effectively defend some important ideals in a uniquely persuasive way and advocating some policies that promote those ideals (closing Guantanamo, banning torture tactics, limiting the state secrets privilege) while committing to many which plainly violate them (indefinite preventive detention schemes, military commissions, denial of habeas rights to Bagram abductees, concealing torture evidence, blocking judicial review on secrecy grounds).  Like all political officials, Obama should be judged based on his actions and decisions, not his words and alleged intentions and motives.  Those actions in the civil liberties realm, with some exceptions, have been profoundly at odds with his claimed principles, and this speech hasn't changed that.  Only actions will."

David Swanson: "being better than Dick Cheney is just not good enough. I demand an end to
detention without charge and rendition and foreign occupations. And I demand that instead of talking about laws our government enforce them."

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI): "The two speeches offered a stark and revealing contrast - the president wants to protect the country while upholding and strengthening our time-tested constitutional principles, while the former vice president offered the same misleading scare tactics and flawed approach to national security that Americans repudiated in the last election. I welcome the president's emphasis on congressional oversight and the need for collaboration with Congress, for which the Bush Administration held such contempt. The president's remark on reforming the way the state secrets privilege is used also seems to indicate he is moving in the right direction. And I am also pleased that the president echoed the same point I recently made regarding claims by the former vice president: that I had seen nothing to indicate that the torture techniques authorized by the last administration were necessary or the most effective way to get information from detainees."