Before examining the commentary and analysis on the two speeches yesterday (Obama’s here and Cheney’s here), we need to revisit Obama’s 2001 comments about the Constitution’s negative liberties, as he lamented it “Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf.”
Contrast that view of the Constitution with what Obama said yesterday:
But I believe with every fiber of my being that in the long run we also cannot keep this country safe unless we enlist the power of our most fundamental values. The documents that we hold in this very hall – the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights -are not simply words written into aging parchment. They are the foundation of liberty and justice in this country, and a light that shines for all who seek freedom, fairness, equality and dignity in the world.
I stand here today as someone whose own life was made possible by these documents. My father came to our shores in search of the promise that they offered. My mother made me rise before dawn to learn of their truth when I lived as a child in a foreign land. My own American journey was paved by generations of citizens who gave meaning to those simple words – “to form a more perfect union.” I have studied the Constitution as a student; I have taught it as a teacher; I have been bound by it as a lawyer and legislator. I took an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution as Commander-in-Chief, and as a citizen, I know that we must never – ever – turn our back on its enduring principles for expedience sake.
Except the parts that we don’t agree with (like the Constitution not mandating the redistribution of wealth), because political expedience is what this is all about. Obama, in the same speech, expressed the need to have due process and then implied that some detainees might need to be held indefinitely because they cannot be tried. “Just words” is exactly right.
Now that that point has been made, let’s review some commentary on the speeches and the debate.
Jack Goldsmith has been saying that Obama has largely adopted Bush’s policies, and is doing a better job at branding them. Paul Mirengoff at Power Line considers Goldsmith’s opinion, and what effect Cheney is having on Obama’s decisions. Scott Johnson of Power Line comments here.
There is much discussion on the issue at the NRO Corner, including several posts by Andy McCarthy.
Hugh Hewitt hosted a discussion about Guantanamo on his radio show this week, and that debate is worth reading or listening to.
Allahpundit of Hot Air comments on Obama’s speech here, and Cheney’s here.
Karl Rove examines Obama’s change of heart, and calls them a “stunning and welcome about face.”
Jennifer Rubin at Contentions examines Obama’s triangulation as an attempt to please everyone, challenges the idea that Gitmo “created more terrorists around the world than it ever detained” (Jim Geraghty at Campaign Spot wonders about that claim as well), and she responds to John Podhoretz’s post about making decisions motivated by fear.
I’ll hold off further commentary until I’ve had more time to examine the speeches and events.
UPDATE: Peter Wehner puts Obama’s speech into historical context. His post is a must-read, as is Charles Krauthammer’s column.
0 Responses to “Obama vs. Cheney Roundup, and Defending the Constitution”