A big double standard for Obama
Bush took a week to talk about the shoe bomber and then tried him in court. So why is Cheney savaging Obama?
Topics: Barack Obama, Terrorism, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, Politics News
President Barack Obama pauses while speaking at the Marine Corps Base Hawaii in Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii Tuesday, Dec. 29, 2009. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)(Credit: AP)(Updated with Cheney statement)
President Obama’s candor Tuesday describing the mosaic of warnings about Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab that were mishandled by U.S. intelligence officials shouldn’t be noteworthy; it should be routine. But let’s be honest, it isn’t, and Obama deserves credit for bringing what he called “human and systemic failures” out into the light shortly after he learned about them. It seems intelligence agencies had enough information, some of it admittedly scattered, to keep Abdulmutallab from boarding a plane to the U.S. on Christmas Day. It’s hard to think of a comparable example of President Bush being so quickly forthcoming about facts that didn’t reflect well on his administration.
So it’s hard to know what to make of the difference between media and political reactions to Obama’s decision to stay on his Christmas vacation and wait three days to make a comment about the bombing attempt, and President Bush’s decision to stay on his Christmas vacation in 2001 — merely three months after the trauma of 9/11 — and wait a surprising six days to even mention Richard Reid’s attempted shoe-bombing (and then he only mentioned it in passing.) Even the New York Times raised an eyebrow at Obama’s delay in addressing the Christmas bomb plot, describing him as “having emerged from Hawaiian seclusion on Monday to reassure the American public and quell gathering criticism.” Republicans like Reps. Pete Hoekstra and Peter King have been nastier (and Hoekstra even had the gall to raise money around the attack).
And hours after this post went up, former Vice President Dick Cheney emerged from his hole and condemned Obama in a statement to his favorite stenographers at Politico: “ [W]e are at war and when President Obama pretends we aren’t, it makes us less safe,” Cheney said. “Why doesn’t he want to admit we’re at war? It doesn’t fit with the view of the world he brought with him to the Oval Office. It doesn’t fit with what seems to be the goal of his presidency — social transformation — the restructuring of American society.” Cheney also seems to be criticizing Obama for trying Abdulmutallab in criminal court — “He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won’t be at war” — even though the Bush administration did the same with Reid and crowed about his conviction.
Joan Walsh is Salon's editor at large and the author of "What's the Matter With White People: Finding Our Way in the Next America." More Joan Walsh.




House Democrats Dismiss Existence Of Obama Scandals
Obama Faces Dogged Heckler At Drone Speech
Comments
260 Comments