The Coming (Cheney v. Obama) Thrilla?
I am supposed to advise you that there is electricity in the Washington swamp air, a ringing tension, a sharp static, a fibrous charge that will explode at any moment. I should compare this moment to Manila, circa 1975, when Muhammed Ali was cavorting about with a rubber gorilla, taunting Joe Frazier into furious focus before the big fight.
Except this time the misbehaving heavyweight champion of the world is played by former Vice President Dick Cheney, an old man with a persistent ticker and a commitment to steamrolling history's judgment like so many pinhead public servants in the broken bureaucracy. His rhetorical weapons are overstatements (we only went harsh on terrorists with techniques we used on our own soldiers; we only used harsh methods when all else failed; we always followed lawyers' instructions; the abuse was carefully controlled) and misdirection (never mind the rest, it worked). His toy gorilla is fear of the unknown, the attacks that never happened and are sure to come.
If Ali had the Nation of Islam to back him up, Cheney has the Nation Of Rebublicans, such as it remains--a cavalcade of aspiring tough guys, Newt Gingrich, John Boehner, the talk radio gabbers. In recent weeks, following Cheney's lead, they have settled on national security as their best card left to play against Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and the bunch. (This, in itself, is an amazing admission, given Obama's dramatic expansion of domestic government.) And so they are hammering hard, trying to disrupt the cool of Mister Cool, President O, who I can now posit as Frazier, the workhorse, his head down, focused on the fight.
Such is the set up that is expected of me, a Washington correspondent, at a moment like this. For there is a showdown scheduled tomorrow--Obama and Cheney both giving separate speeches on national security. All the narrative elements are there to get America to pay attention, a top-billed clash, a battle, a contest of generations, of ideologies, of facts. This is the story line you will likely hear for the next 36 hours on cable and on the web, minus, of course, my strained boxing metaphor, which is imperfect, in part, because history has left far more Ali defenders than Cheney is likely to enjoy.
But instead, I pause. What is this all about anyway? How to distinguish the hype from what is happening? What battle is really being fought?
It is true, for instance, that Obama's foreign policy is all pragmatism all the time, not to mention largely (and ironically) endorsed by his former rival John McCain. For some, like Maureen Dowd today in the New York Times, this is evidence of Obama's weakness, his supplicant disposition in the face of Cheney's growl. But it is also what close observers of Obama always expected, with a few marginal hedges (state secrets, abuse photos, etc.). Throughout the campaign, Obama's condemnations of Bush Administration policy were loud, though his proposals of alternatives were vague and hemmed in by harsh realities. So I'm not sure I'm buying any of it as a victory for the Cheney wing. It seems instead a realization of the Obama's long-standing, academic tendency to calculated caution.
As for the Cheney reclaiming history sideshow, the John Boehner bleats about terrorist prison breaks, and Pete Hoekstra's hollers that Nancy Pelosi might have (gasp!) done what he himself did--I can't quite figure the import, beyond filling the time between ads for Clean Coal on MSNBC. National security is, as Republicans have explained to me, a life preserver of sorts amidst this Democratic tsunami. But it will only matter if Obama does not produce the results he has promised. If anything, Republicans are priming the pump for future failures, future attacks. But if Obama succeeds, all this noise will be for naught. What the American people want, more than anything else, is a leader who can do what he says.
Meanwhile, Obama and his team have yet to get ruffled like Frazier before the fight. The polls, which show continued Republicans flailing, even on issues like national security, offer little concern. "They may see this as their life preserver," David Axelrod, the president's senior adviser, told me yesterday. "But they also may be out in deep water without any assistance." Either way, the bottom line remains. Obama's fortunes will be decided by how well his plans and policies work, not by what he or Cheney say tomorrow.
-
1
Cheney had the floor for 8 long years. The American public has spoken. Twice. As a majority we didn't like the way Mr. Cheney conducted business and wanted a fresh approach. Mr. Cheney needs to read the memo, let it sink in and exit stage left. Quickly.
-
2
This post is just BS. To say anything more would be to engage Scherer on a level far above what he merits.
-
3
"Maureen Dowd today in the New York Times, this is evidence of Obama's weakness"
.
For the gossip columnist all Democrats are womanly and weak. Except the female Democrats.
.
"What the American people want, more than anything else, is a leader who can do what he says."
.
Bush said he was going to war with Iraq, he did it. He said he would relax regulations, he did it. That's why he left office so popular.
.
Cheney speaks for your benefit MS. Pure catnip for the media. -
4
A handful of people will hear Cheney's speech tomorrow. The nation will hear President Obama's. This is not a contest and it isn't even close. Only the sorriest beltway journalists would even try to frame it as such.
-
5
You're not cute enough to pull this off. Cut the crap and report the goddam news for once in your life.
-
6
The Cheney vs. Obama hype is truly pathetic, given that the country thoroughly repudiated Cheneyism in November. Only Dick and a handful of his most rapid supporters are excited about this.
-
7
[...] Klein handicaps the fight: It’s Mohammed Ali agaist Joe Frazier with the current president being the latter. Obama will [...]
-
8
The Drive-By Media, as personified by MS, think everything is a game between the publicists for the Dems and the Repub. Nothing matters except filling airtime and webservers, and cashing their paychecks.
.
Never mind that the inattention of Bush/Cheney led to greatest one-day massacre of American civilians in the history of the Republic. Never mind that the decisions of Bush/Cheney led us into the greatest foreign policy blunder in American history which simultaneously strengthened our enemies while making us weaker. Never mind that Obama seems intent on allowing these criminals to get off unscathed, which implicates him in their crimes.
.
All that matters to people like MS and Jay is that they get to get column inches about of comparing Cheney and Obama to Ali and Frazier. -
9
Seriously, is there something foul in the water back in DC?
1st point: I know when I want a good assessment of national security and foreign policy, I look no further than... Maureen Dowd? Seriously!
2nd point: Dick Cheney is arguably one of our most unpopular political figures in the United States. So is Newt Gingrich. Why is it many villagers love to be their stenographers? There is definitely a disconnect here.
3rd point: Why is it that many people in our elite media have made the political decision - yes it is a political decision - not to use the "T-Word"? Water boarding is Torture! It has always been torture - except when the Bush Administration gave it a pretty new name. I suppose it's the same reason they did not ask many questions when Bush and Cheney launched Operation Iraq Liberation.
Meanwhile, the Republican party continues to dwindle in popularity, our elite corporate media continues to lose credibility. It's not a coincidence.
-
10
The real metaphor I believe you are trying to compare is this...
.
In the Obama world it is all about big government entitlement programs as evidenced by this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYVpizLrxoU
.
Versus a safer, more sane world with Dick Cheney's version...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1HUIAvjOZ8
.
But, it is all really one big cartoon. A calamity of cartoon characters that we have elected into office. This Michael is the joke on the American public with the side-show tactics coming right now from both parties.
.
And, then we have this little video. I think it trumps everything.
-
11
I wish Cheney and his daughter would stop just showing up on talking head sets and yapping away. Oh wait...The talking heads can't wait to invite them on.
-
12
"His rhetorical weapons are overstatements...and misdirection..."
.
Too bad you can't really tell anyone what they deserve to be told about Dick Cheney's "rhetorical weapons" (you're only a beltway journo, after all): Dick Cheney is a f*cking liar. -
13
I swear we just had an election which followed a two year campaign and the people decisively knocked Cheney's crap to the mat.
Cable news is desperate to get me back to watching other channels - and it is working.
Between the Nancy hysteria in the media, Newt (who the hell cares what he thinks???) and the Cheney family cabal on all networks, it looks like the media (as usual) missed the friggin message from the last election.
Oh, well, at least it is little league time and I get to enjoy hours on end at ball-fields instead of this ridiculousness.
-
14
MS,
You seem to be at your best when you throw away pretense of playing it as a straight reporter and just let the absurdity shine through.
.
Of course the premise that there's any equivalence between a speech by the POTUS and that of Mr. Fourth Branch is suspect in the first place. Nice to see your not taking the comparison too seriously.
.
This observation needs to be expanded upon however:
Throughout the campaign, Obama's condemnations of Bush Administration policy were loud, though his proposals of alternatives were vague and hemmed in by harsh realities. So I'm not sure I'm buying any of it as a victory for the Cheney wing. It seems instead a realization of the Obama's long-standing, academic tendency to calculated caution.
.
Now that Obama is President, anyone who thought he was going to save us from BushCo abuses are stuck shaking their heads and anyone who thought that the BushCo abuses are just what the doctor ordered are being pleasantly surprised. But what's being left unexplored is the degree to which the BushCo abuses have totally robbed Obama of room to maneuver. After all, we don't cycle out the entire CIA like we do US attorneys every time the White House changes hands. He's still working hand in hand with the same people who were handed their get-out-of-jail-free cards by Addington and Yoo. -
15
I generally agree with the various incredulities expressed above. I think the question that a journalist would wonder about is why this endless Cheney family tape loop exists at all or exists with the prominence it's been given.
-
16
Who thought that Obama's FP would not be pragmatic? Obama ran as a pragmatist, but was portrayed by the GOP as a radical socialist Marxist Fascist crypto-Muslim mustard-garnishing Weatherman. And now some are surprised that Obama wasn't all that?
.
As usual Glenzilla hits it on the head: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/05/20/guantanamo/
.
"In our political debates, the more frightened one is, the more Serious and Tough one is."
.
And it was largely on account of MoDo that I stopped reading the NYT op-ed page. If the Times doesn't take its own editorial page seriously, I'm certainly not going to. -
17
Dear Mr. Scherer:
"Except this time the misbehaving HEAVYWEIGHT (one word, or, worst-case scenario, HEAVY-WEIGHT) champion of the world is played by former Vice [...]"
.
"[...] trying to disrupt the cool of Mister (capitalized) Cool (capitalized) [...]"
.
You're welcome. -
18
why this endless Cheney family tape loop exists at all or exists with the prominence it's been given.
.
Did you ever try driving past a wreck without slowing down to look? -
19
sgwhite:
I wish it were so. The tools of the Right, and those who substitute "balance" for factual reporting (I'm looking at you, Blitzer) will guarantee millions see Cheney's self-serving, anti-American screed.
-
20
But what's being left unexplored is the degree to which the BushCo abuses have totally robbed Obama of room to maneuver. After all, we don't cycle out the entire CIA like we do US attorneys every time the White House changes hands. He's still working hand in hand with the same people who were handed their get-out-of-jail-free cards by Addington and Yoo.
.
I sincerely hope this is the case.
.
MS: There is nothing worthwhile about your post, save the comments. -
21
Who thought that Obama's FP would not be pragmatic? Obama ran as a pragmatist,
_
someone wasn't paying attention to the primaries, when Obama consistently criticized Clinton for her pragmatic approach to foreign policy/national security. Obama represented himself not merely as a change from the right wing policies of Bush, but as something different from the centrism of Hillary Clinton.
_
MS is right -- Obama's supporters were bamboozled by his rhetoric, which was extremely short on specifics, and designed to imply he would do certain things while being equivocal enough to be meaningless (e.g. his FISA stance.) -
22
Cheney is playing the odds, and no one in the MSM is calling him out. Please do us a favor and be the first, Michael.
.
What odds? The odds that a terrorist attack on US soil will occur within the next 7 months, as happened in 1993 and 2001, during the first year of those incoming administrations.
.
It's a no-lose for Cheney: appear on teevee every Sunday for a year saying that America is less safe, rinse, repeat.
.
If something happens, you're f@#$in' Nostradamus.
If nothing happens, all will be forgotten.
.
Dick Cheney: because he d!cked us. -
-
24
"Obama represented himself not merely as a change from the right wing policies of Bush, but as something different from the centrism of Hillary Clinton.
_
MS is right -- Obama's supporters were bamboozled by his rhetoric, which was extremely short on specifics, and designed to imply he would do certain things while being equivocal enough to be meaningless (e.g. his FISA stance.)"
.
Guilty. Or, to be more precise, I knew what Hillary was: a hawkish (or by nature or political necessity), establishment "centrist", but didn't know about Obama. Still hard to know where Obama's policy leanings end and his political necessities begin but, as in all such compromises, it doesn't really matter very much. -
25
FlownOver
.
You are right. The media driven by a story they made up out of whole cloth is now going to cover Darth Cheney tomorrow. The only thing about it is he will be following President Obama. Somehow I don't think he is going to be able to hold up his end of the bargain in this manufactured "showdown"
- michaelscherer Gibbs says Desiree Rogers will not testify tomorrow before House on WH gatecrashers. - 2 hours ago
- michaelscherer Always a bad sign when you (NBC) have to preface every news report (Salahi) with big disclaimers that the parent company is not a factor. - 6 hours ago
- michaelscherer Ah.... Richard Wolffe. - 19 hours ago
Most Popular »
- "Personal Sins Should Not Require Press Releases"
- False Economy: Think You're Saving Money? Think Again
- The 'Alice' Interview: A Very Different Brand of Wonderland
- Congress's Tepid Reaction to Obama's Afghanistan Plan
- Tiger Speaks
- Gleeks and Shrieks: Fox Unveils Midseason, Glee Gone Until April
- State Dinner, Uh, Fashion
- White House Hypocritical Attack on Politico
- The Dreaded X
- First Look: 'Lovely Bones' and Peter Jackson's Virtuoso Vistas
- Can Attack Dogs Be Rehabilitated?
- Helicopter Parents: The Backlash Against Overparenting
- Rachel Uchitel: Tiger Woods' Alleged Affair Connection
- Italian Town Dreams of a White (No Foreigners) Christmas
- Europe's Secret Nuclear Weapons: What Should NATO Do?
- Why Fritz Henderson Resigned as GM's CEO
- Ireland: Lack of New Catholic Priests Spurs Campaign
- The End of the 2000s: Goodbye to a Decade from Hell
- Study: Loneliness Can Be Contagious
- Could White House Party Crashers the Salahis Go to Jail?
Quotes of the Day »
RSS