Posted on 05/22/2009 7:14:35 AM PDT by lewisglad
For the first time in his presidency, Americans are getting a glimpse of Barack Obama on the defensive.
Over the past few weeks, Obama has been back on his heels over torture and terror, issues on which he surely thought he had the upper hand.
And he spent Thursday battling charges from a man he surely thought he had vanquished in November, former Vice President Dick Cheney.
It took some worried calls from Capitol Hill Democrats, congressional aides said, to convince him otherwise – that he needed to give a speech defending his plan for closing the terror prison at Guantanamo Bay, and rebutting Republican claims that the move would endanger Americans where they live.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and others made clear “that we’re going to need a lot more cover if we’re going to be able to deal with this issue,” said one Democratic leadership aide.
So on a day when Obama would have rather been anywhere else – remaking the auto industry or cheerleading an economic recovery – he was sharing TV screens with Cheney, the two men equals, at least for one hour.
“The White House didn’t want to do it — they want to drive the agenda, they want to be focused on health care right now,” said Heather Hurlburt, the executive director of the National Security Network, a Democratic think tank. “The Hill asked him to do this and he did it.”
That forcing of Obama's hand marks a remarkable turnabout for a president who holds the most commanding position in American politics in two decades.
The most popular politician in the country found himself pushed up against a wall by one of the least popular in Cheney – the leading voice in a budding Republican attack on Obama over national defense, one of the GOP’s oldest (and most successful) cudgels against Democrats.
With some Democrats worried that Cheney is building a case to blame Obama if the United States is attacked again, the new president argued on Thursday that the former vice president's ideas for harsh interrogations and holding prisoners indefinitely made the nation less safe, not more.
White House officials deny that they felt any pressure from Cheney’s prior attacks to give a speech like the one he delivered on Thursday, but they did concede that Obama’s stance has been distorted in the debate over terrorism.
Congressional Democrats, however, tell a different story. Aides to top Senate and House Democrats say congressional leaders dragged the White House into delivering a speech Obama was reluctant to give, pleading directly with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.
They warned of the revolt that finally materialized Wednesday when a solid Democratic majority in the Senate was stampeded into a landslide 90-6 vote against the president on funding the closure of Gitmo.
“He was responding to signals coming from the Hill in recent weeks that intensified in recent days,” said the Democratic leadership aide. “I’m not quite sure how we got into this situation, and I’m not sure what the hesitancy was on the part of the administration.”
>> “national defense, one of the GOP’s oldest (and most successful) cudgels against Democrats.”
Ironically, the most important and pressing responsibility government is assigned, but unfortunately, one that is lost in the mire of politics.
Zero has no ......... Gravitas.
How soon before Obama tells GM and Chrysler to cut their support for NASCAR?
Barf.
Give him hell VP Cheney. It is about time someone had the guts to do it.
Good question. Stopping NASCAR seems like a natural for liberals, doesn’t it? It represents all sorts of things they despise. Of course, it would open a few people’s eyes as to the real character of the poser in the White House.
I’ve been thinking this for some time. NASCAR is a sizable group of participants and fans. Most lean to the right and races are place for the exchange of opinions and ideas. Today, it’s all dependent on sponsorship. If Obama tells GM and Chrysler to eliminate their advertising budget specifically in support of NASCAR, what happens? Does that kill off NASCAR because it now has to turn to foreign sponsorship? Will we see Honda, Fiat, Kia, etc jump in to fill the gap? And who will go to a race if there’s no good natured Ford vs Chevy vs Dodge banter? I’m willing to bet Emanuel and Axelrod would love to bust up the NASCAR voting block...
I’m headed to Dover weekend after next for my one race this year. I’ll throw out the question about what if Obama yanks sponsorship by GM and Chrysler.
Too many votes...they won’t do it ./...at least not now.
We need to do more to get the Democrats concerned about 2010.
Looking at some notes on the bond vigilantes.
Who knows where nascar is headed? For the museum at this rate. Have a good one!
How about an after race report? :-)
Thanks for the Ping , EatB!
We need to do more to get the Democrats concerned about 2010.Hey, they're already terrified; maybe we need to lull them into a false sense of security. ;') I know -- let's all bitch about how every Pubbie is really a RINO, then in a brilliant nonsequitur complain how the Pubbie party isn't conservative anyway, and tell them all we're never voting ever again unless it's for some obscure minor party.
Vice President Cheney may have done more good for the long run then we at first may have envisioned. Zero will slowly go to pieces as his cronies screw everything up, to a point the L/MSM will not be able to protect this clowns.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.