Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
DonViejo
DonViejo's Journal
DonViejo's Journal
September 4, 2015
HEATHER DIGBY PARTON
From the moment Michelle Obama burst on to the national scene back in 2008, she inspired a level of right wing loathing only slightly less intense than that visited on her husband. Indeed, there have been times it has seemed as though they hated her even more. Recall that in the 2008 campaign, she was excoriated for saying,”for the first time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country, because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback.” Conservative commentators such as the Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol tut-tutted her comments and offered sage advice:
“You have to be careful not to let that slide into a kind of indictment of America. Because I don’t think the American people think on the whole that the last 25 years of American history is a narrative of despair and nothing to be proud of.”
What a difference seven years makes. The current GOP front runner, Donald Trump’s, entire campaign is based upon a “narrative of despair” in which America has become a dystopian hellscape led by fools and idiots. He says, “they’re up here, we’re down there. Our leaders are babies…our country is falling apart,” and it’s all good. But then he isn’t Michelle Obama.
Obama has been an exemplary first lady and is extremely popular with the public, having shown good humor and style throughout her tenure; so it’s been very difficult for the right to find anything to criticize.That hasn’t stopped them, of course. There is nothing even remotely controversial about her work with military families, a constituency they feel belongs to them, so anything they might pounce on there is an unlikely target for GOP ire. But this mother of two daughters having the temerity to initiate a program to encourage kids to eat healthy foods and exercise has sent them into fits of hysteria.
Think about that: Something adults have been doing since the beginning of time — telling kids to eat their vegetables and go outside to play — is a Marxist plot to destroy the fabric of our civilization. Here’s an example from Media Matters of the commentary from noted health and fitness expert Rush Limbaugh:
LIMBAUGH: Michelle My Belle, minus the husband, took the kids out to Vail on a ski vacation, and they were spotted eating and they were feasting on ribs, ribs that were 1,575 calories per serving with 141 grams of fat per serving. Now I’m sure some of you members of the new castrati: “This is typical of what you do Mr. Limbaugh, you take an isolated, once in a lifetime experience, and try to say that she’s a hypocrite.” She is a hypocrite. Leaders are supposed to be leaders. If we’re supposed to go out and eat nothing — if we’re supposed to eat roots, and berries and tree bark and so show us how. And if it’s supposed to make us fit, if it’s supposed to make us healthier, show us how.
more
http://www.salon.com/2015/09/03/the_right_wings_hideous_crusade_against_michelle_obama_has_completely_fallen_apart/
The right wing’s hideous crusade against Michelle Obama has completely fallen apart
For years, the likes of Rush Limbaugh have lobbed racist, sexist invective at the First Lady. But it didn't matterHEATHER DIGBY PARTON
From the moment Michelle Obama burst on to the national scene back in 2008, she inspired a level of right wing loathing only slightly less intense than that visited on her husband. Indeed, there have been times it has seemed as though they hated her even more. Recall that in the 2008 campaign, she was excoriated for saying,”for the first time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country, because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback.” Conservative commentators such as the Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol tut-tutted her comments and offered sage advice:
“You have to be careful not to let that slide into a kind of indictment of America. Because I don’t think the American people think on the whole that the last 25 years of American history is a narrative of despair and nothing to be proud of.”
What a difference seven years makes. The current GOP front runner, Donald Trump’s, entire campaign is based upon a “narrative of despair” in which America has become a dystopian hellscape led by fools and idiots. He says, “they’re up here, we’re down there. Our leaders are babies…our country is falling apart,” and it’s all good. But then he isn’t Michelle Obama.
Obama has been an exemplary first lady and is extremely popular with the public, having shown good humor and style throughout her tenure; so it’s been very difficult for the right to find anything to criticize.That hasn’t stopped them, of course. There is nothing even remotely controversial about her work with military families, a constituency they feel belongs to them, so anything they might pounce on there is an unlikely target for GOP ire. But this mother of two daughters having the temerity to initiate a program to encourage kids to eat healthy foods and exercise has sent them into fits of hysteria.
Think about that: Something adults have been doing since the beginning of time — telling kids to eat their vegetables and go outside to play — is a Marxist plot to destroy the fabric of our civilization. Here’s an example from Media Matters of the commentary from noted health and fitness expert Rush Limbaugh:
LIMBAUGH: Michelle My Belle, minus the husband, took the kids out to Vail on a ski vacation, and they were spotted eating and they were feasting on ribs, ribs that were 1,575 calories per serving with 141 grams of fat per serving. Now I’m sure some of you members of the new castrati: “This is typical of what you do Mr. Limbaugh, you take an isolated, once in a lifetime experience, and try to say that she’s a hypocrite.” She is a hypocrite. Leaders are supposed to be leaders. If we’re supposed to go out and eat nothing — if we’re supposed to eat roots, and berries and tree bark and so show us how. And if it’s supposed to make us fit, if it’s supposed to make us healthier, show us how.
more
http://www.salon.com/2015/09/03/the_right_wings_hideous_crusade_against_michelle_obama_has_completely_fallen_apart/
September 4, 2015
By Jonathan H. Adler September 2
-snip-
Now Scalia has not, to my knowledge, said anything directly about Davis’s actions, but he has addressed the question of what public officials should do when their official obligations conflict with their religious conscience. Writing in “First Things” in 2002, Scalia explained that if he were to conclude that the death penalty is fundamentally immoral, he should no longer serve on the bench.
Davis is in a similar position. Her official position obligates her to take part in the state’s licensing and recognition of marriages. Insofar as the state’s definition of an acceptable marriage differs from her own, Davis is obligated to follow the state’s rule so long as she maintains her current office.
Think of it this way. Someone who objects to war due to his religious conscience has a right to be a conscientious objector and not serve in the military, even were there to be a draft. But he does not have the right to serve as a military officer, draw a paycheck from the military and then substitute his own personal views of when war is justified for that of the government. The same applies here.
-snip-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/09/02/justice-scalia-explains-why-kim-davis-should-issue-marriage-licenses-to-same-sex-couples-or-find-a-new-job/?tid=pm_opinions_pop_b
Scalia explained why Kim Davis should issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples or find a new job
Justice Scalia explained why Kim Davis should issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples or find a new jobBy Jonathan H. Adler September 2
-snip-
Now Scalia has not, to my knowledge, said anything directly about Davis’s actions, but he has addressed the question of what public officials should do when their official obligations conflict with their religious conscience. Writing in “First Things” in 2002, Scalia explained that if he were to conclude that the death penalty is fundamentally immoral, he should no longer serve on the bench.
While my views on the morality of the death penalty have nothing to do with how I vote as a judge, they have a lot to do with whether I can or should be a judge at all. To put the point in the blunt terms employed by Justice Harold Blackmun towards the end of his career on the bench, when he announced that he would henceforth vote (as Justices William Brennan and Thurgood Marshall had previously done) to overturn all death sentences, when I sit on a Court that reviews and affirms capital convictions, I am part of “the machinery of death.” My vote, when joined with at least four others, is, in most cases, the last step that permits an execution to proceed. I could not take part in that process if I believed what was being done to be immoral. . . .
In my view the choice for the judge who believes the death penalty to be immoral is resignation, rather than simply ignoring duly enacted, constitutional laws and sabotaging death penalty cases. He has, after all, taken an oath to apply the laws and has been given no power to supplant them with rules of his own. Of course if he feels strongly enough he can go beyond mere resignation and lead a political campaign to abolish the death penalty” and if that fails, lead a revolution. But rewrite the laws he cannot do.
In my view the choice for the judge who believes the death penalty to be immoral is resignation, rather than simply ignoring duly enacted, constitutional laws and sabotaging death penalty cases. He has, after all, taken an oath to apply the laws and has been given no power to supplant them with rules of his own. Of course if he feels strongly enough he can go beyond mere resignation and lead a political campaign to abolish the death penalty” and if that fails, lead a revolution. But rewrite the laws he cannot do.
Davis is in a similar position. Her official position obligates her to take part in the state’s licensing and recognition of marriages. Insofar as the state’s definition of an acceptable marriage differs from her own, Davis is obligated to follow the state’s rule so long as she maintains her current office.
Think of it this way. Someone who objects to war due to his religious conscience has a right to be a conscientious objector and not serve in the military, even were there to be a draft. But he does not have the right to serve as a military officer, draw a paycheck from the military and then substitute his own personal views of when war is justified for that of the government. The same applies here.
-snip-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/09/02/justice-scalia-explains-why-kim-davis-should-issue-marriage-licenses-to-same-sex-couples-or-find-a-new-job/?tid=pm_opinions_pop_b
September 4, 2015
Hillary Clinton To Give Sit-Down Interview To NBC's Andrea Mitchell
Source: TPM
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton will sit down with NBC's Andrea Mitchell for an interview Friday in New York, according to a news release.
Mitchell will ask the former secretary of state about her campaign, the GOP field, and her emails. The interview falls near the 20th anniversary of Clinton's speech on women's rights, which she gave Sept. 5, 1995 in Beijing, according to the news release.
The interview will air on "Andrea Mitchell Reports" Friday at 12 p.m. ET, with clips of the conversation running on later NBC news programs, according to the release.
###
Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/hillary-clinton-nbc-andrea-mitchell-interview
September 4, 2015
Kim Davis, a clerk in Rowan County, has stopped issuing marriage licenses to all couples after the Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage.
###
Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/hillary-clinton-kim-davis
Hillary Clinton On Jailed KY Clerk: 'Officials Should Be Held To Their Duty'
Source: TPM
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton joined her 2016 rivals in weighing in on the decision by a federal judge to hold a Kentucky clerk in contempt of court for not issuing gay marriage licenses.
Hillary Clinton ✔
@HillaryClinton
Marriage equality is the law of the land. Officials should be held to their duty to uphold the law—end of story. https://twitter.com/ap/status/639484985162993664 …
2:17 PM - 3 Sep 2015
2,055 2,055 Retweets 3,226 3,226 favorites
Kim Davis, a clerk in Rowan County, has stopped issuing marriage licenses to all couples after the Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage.
###
Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/hillary-clinton-kim-davis
September 4, 2015
-snip-
Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/mike-huckabee-kim-davis-jailing
Huckabee: I Can't Believe Kentucky Clerk Is In Jail And Hillary Isn't!
Source: TPM
Republican presidential candidate and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee said on Thursday it was a wonder that an anti-gay Kentucky county clerk was in jail and Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton wasn't.
He also described the clerk, Kim Davis, who was taken into federal custody earlier in the day for refusing to issue same-sex marriage licenses, as a victim of the "criminalization of Christianity." A day earlier, Huckabee described Davis as a "person of great conviction."
Gov. Mike Huckabee ✔
@GovMikeHuckabee
What a world, where Hillary Clinton isn't in jail but #KimDavis is. #ImWithKim
3:23 PM - 3 Sep 2015
616 616 Retweets 697 697 favorites
-snip-
Gov. Mike Huckabee ✔
@GovMikeHuckabee
Kim Davis in federal custody removes all doubts about the criminalization of Christianity in this country. We must defend #ReligiousLiberty!
1:20 PM - 3 Sep 2015
747 747 Retweets 623 623 favorites
Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/mike-huckabee-kim-davis-jailing
September 4, 2015
Ted Cruz: 'I Stand With Kim Davis'
Source: TPM
“Today, judicial lawlessness crossed into judicial tyranny. Today, for the first time ever, the government arrested a Christian woman for living according to her faith. This is wrong. This is not America.
“I stand with Kim Davis. Unequivocally. I stand with every American that the Obama Administration is trying to force to chose between honoring his or her faith or complying with a lawless court decision.
“In dissent, Chief Justice Roberts rightly observed that the Court’s marriage decision has nothing to do with the Constitution. Justice Scalia observed that the Court’s decision was so contrary to law that state and local officials would choose to defy it.
“For every politician — Democrat and Republican — who is tut-tutting that Davis must resign, they are defending a hypocritical standard. Where is the call for the mayor of San Francisco to resign for creating a sanctuary city — resulting in the murder of American citizens by criminal illegal aliens welcomed by his lawlessness?
“Where is the call for President Obama to resign for ignoring and defying our immigration laws, our welfare reform laws, and even his own Obamacare?
“When the mayor of San Francisco and President Obama resign, then we can talk about Kim Davis.
“Those who are persecuting Kim Davis believe that Christians should not serve in public office. That is the consequence of their position. Or, if Christians do serve in pubic office, they must disregard their religious faith–or be sent to jail.
“Kim Davis should not be in jail. We are a country founded on Judeo-Christian values, founded by those fleeing religious oppression and seeking a land where we could worship God and live according to our faith, without being imprisoned for doing so.
“I call upon every Believer, every Constitutionalist, every lover of liberty to stand with Kim Davis. Stop the persecution now.”
Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/ted-cruz-kim-davis-contempt
September 4, 2015
The statement continued:
-snip-
Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/anti-defamation-league-kim-davis
Full statement of the ADL:
Public Officials: If Your Religion Prevents You From Doing Your Job, Step Aside
Many of us make important decisions in our daily lives grounded in our religious values and beliefs. That should be respected, even perhaps, applauded. However when one chooses to take an oath of office or accepts a position as a public official in a secular constitutional democracy like ours, she has a responsibility to do the job she was hired to do. Rowan County Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis’s job requires her to issue marriage licenses to anyone who may legally get married.
On June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court formally recognized the dignity of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people when it extended the freedom to marry to same-sex couples nationwide. The Court ruled that the Constitution forbids states to ban marriage for same-sex couples. Since the decision, a small minority of public officials, most notably Ms. Davis, have argued that they should be exempt from having to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, citing their sincerely held religious beliefs. The Supreme Court disagrees, and yet Davis continues to defy the Court by denying same-sex couples marriage licenses. Now, she and, at her directive, her staff, are refusing to issue marriage licenses making it impossible for anyone to obtain a marriage license in that county.
No one should question or challenge Ms. Davis’s religious beliefs. The fact that some news articles and commentators have criticized Davis’s beliefs as inconsistent or hypocritical is beside the point. The bottom line is that she has no right, constitutional or otherwise, to refuse to do the job the state of Kentucky pays her to do.
The reality, as ADL’s amicus brief argued, is that overturning marriage bans ensures that religious considerations do not improperly influence which marriages the state can recognize, but still allows religious groups to decide the definition of marriage for themselves. That remains true. Rabbis, priests, ministers cannot be compelled to participate in marriages of which they do not approve. Religions are not required to solemnize any kind of marriage they don’t want to recognize. However, that does not mean that government employees may abandon their duties nor may they seek to impose their religious beliefs on others by interfering with their constitutional right to marry.
If Ms. Davis or others feel that they cannot fulfill the duties they were selected to perform, they should step aside and allow others to serve the community.
A 501©(3) nonprofit organization, ADL neither supports nor opposes any candidate for political office.
http://blog.adl.org/civil-rights/public-officials-if-your-religion-prevents-you-from-doing-your-job-step-aside
Anti-Defamation League: Step Aside If Religious Values Keep You From Doing Your Job
Source: TPM
The Anti-Defamation League released a statement Thursday that argued public officials should step aside if their religious beliefs prevent them from performing their job's duties.
-snip-
The statement said that Davis' religious beliefs shouldn't be questioned or challenged, but that she should perform the duties assigned to her.
The bottom line is that she has no right, constitutional or otherwise, to refuse to do the job the state of Kentucky pays her to do.
The statement continued:
If Ms. Davis or others feel that they cannot fulfill the duties they were selected to perform, they should step aside and allow others to serve the community.
-snip-
Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/anti-defamation-league-kim-davis
Full statement of the ADL:
Public Officials: If Your Religion Prevents You From Doing Your Job, Step Aside
Many of us make important decisions in our daily lives grounded in our religious values and beliefs. That should be respected, even perhaps, applauded. However when one chooses to take an oath of office or accepts a position as a public official in a secular constitutional democracy like ours, she has a responsibility to do the job she was hired to do. Rowan County Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis’s job requires her to issue marriage licenses to anyone who may legally get married.
On June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court formally recognized the dignity of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people when it extended the freedom to marry to same-sex couples nationwide. The Court ruled that the Constitution forbids states to ban marriage for same-sex couples. Since the decision, a small minority of public officials, most notably Ms. Davis, have argued that they should be exempt from having to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, citing their sincerely held religious beliefs. The Supreme Court disagrees, and yet Davis continues to defy the Court by denying same-sex couples marriage licenses. Now, she and, at her directive, her staff, are refusing to issue marriage licenses making it impossible for anyone to obtain a marriage license in that county.
No one should question or challenge Ms. Davis’s religious beliefs. The fact that some news articles and commentators have criticized Davis’s beliefs as inconsistent or hypocritical is beside the point. The bottom line is that she has no right, constitutional or otherwise, to refuse to do the job the state of Kentucky pays her to do.
The reality, as ADL’s amicus brief argued, is that overturning marriage bans ensures that religious considerations do not improperly influence which marriages the state can recognize, but still allows religious groups to decide the definition of marriage for themselves. That remains true. Rabbis, priests, ministers cannot be compelled to participate in marriages of which they do not approve. Religions are not required to solemnize any kind of marriage they don’t want to recognize. However, that does not mean that government employees may abandon their duties nor may they seek to impose their religious beliefs on others by interfering with their constitutional right to marry.
If Ms. Davis or others feel that they cannot fulfill the duties they were selected to perform, they should step aside and allow others to serve the community.
A 501©(3) nonprofit organization, ADL neither supports nor opposes any candidate for political office.
http://blog.adl.org/civil-rights/public-officials-if-your-religion-prevents-you-from-doing-your-job-step-aside
September 3, 2015
A local judge contends the U.S. Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage has derailed Tennessee's ability to determine what constitutes divorce — leaving one Signal Mountain couple married against their will.
Hamilton County Chancellor Jeffrey Atherton denied the divorce petition last week after hearing from seven witnesses and going through 77 exhibits. Among several reasons he cited in rejecting the couple's divorce, one was the Supreme Court's June ruling. Atherton said the Supreme Court must clarify "when a marriage is no longer a marriage." Otherwise, he contended, state courts are impaired from addressing marriage and divorce litigation altogether.
"The conclusion reached by this Court is that Tennesseans have been deemed by the U.S. Supreme Court to be incompetent to define and address such keystone/central institutions such as marriage, and, thereby, at minimum, contested divorces," Atherton wrote.
The couple — Thomas Bumgardner, 65, and his wife, Pamela, 61 — were married in November 2002, records show. They had no children together and filed for divorce in September 2014, citing irreconcilable differences. After four days of testimony, Atherton decided their marriage was not "irretrievably broken," and said it could be salvaged.
-snip-
Read more: http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/local/story/2015/sep/03/judge-declines-divorce-case-citing-gay-marria/323201/
Document: Chancellor Atherton's full order:
http://media-cdn.timesfreepress.com//news/documents/2015/09/03/orderdismissingcomplaintcountercomplaint915036392.pdf
Judge declines divorce case, citing gay marriage ruling
Source: Chattanooga Times Free Press
September 3rd, 2015 by Kendi Anderso and Zack Peterson
Tennessee County Chancery Judge Jeffrey Atherton
A local judge contends the U.S. Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage has derailed Tennessee's ability to determine what constitutes divorce — leaving one Signal Mountain couple married against their will.
Hamilton County Chancellor Jeffrey Atherton denied the divorce petition last week after hearing from seven witnesses and going through 77 exhibits. Among several reasons he cited in rejecting the couple's divorce, one was the Supreme Court's June ruling. Atherton said the Supreme Court must clarify "when a marriage is no longer a marriage." Otherwise, he contended, state courts are impaired from addressing marriage and divorce litigation altogether.
"The conclusion reached by this Court is that Tennesseans have been deemed by the U.S. Supreme Court to be incompetent to define and address such keystone/central institutions such as marriage, and, thereby, at minimum, contested divorces," Atherton wrote.
The couple — Thomas Bumgardner, 65, and his wife, Pamela, 61 — were married in November 2002, records show. They had no children together and filed for divorce in September 2014, citing irreconcilable differences. After four days of testimony, Atherton decided their marriage was not "irretrievably broken," and said it could be salvaged.
-snip-
Read more: http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/local/story/2015/sep/03/judge-declines-divorce-case-citing-gay-marria/323201/
Document: Chancellor Atherton's full order:
http://media-cdn.timesfreepress.com//news/documents/2015/09/03/orderdismissingcomplaintcountercomplaint915036392.pdf
September 3, 2015
The father of the 3-year-old Syrian drowning victim whose photograph made headlines around the world Wednesday has identified the bodies of the boy, the boy's sister, and his mother at a Turkish morgue, Reuters reports. The man's name is Abdullah Kurdi; his 3-year-old son Aylan*, his 5-year-old son Galip, and his 35-year-old wife Rehan died along with nine others while trying to row to Greece from Turkey. From the AP:
As Slate's Joshua Keating wrote Wednesday, "the death toll resulting from thousands of refugees making the dangerous journey from the Middle East and North Africa into Europe has been swelling for months, and so far, help is not on the way." The Kurdi family's application for legal asylum in Canada was rejected before their attempt to reach Greece. Abdullah Kurdi says he plans to take his family's bodies home to Syria to be buried in the war-torn city of Kobani.
Said Kurdi to reporters at the morgue: "The things that happened to us here, in the country where we took refuge to escape war in our homeland, we want the whole world to see this. We want the world’s attention on us, so that they can prevent the same from happening to others. Let this be the last."
###
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/09/03/father_of_syrian_migrant_drowning_victim_speaks_in_turkey.html?sid=5388f1c6dd52b8e4110003de&wpsrc=slatest_newsletter
Father of Drowned Syrian Boy Describes Son’s Death
By Ben Mathis-Lilley
Abdullah Kurdi leaving a morgue in Turkey on Thursday.
The father of the 3-year-old Syrian drowning victim whose photograph made headlines around the world Wednesday has identified the bodies of the boy, the boy's sister, and his mother at a Turkish morgue, Reuters reports. The man's name is Abdullah Kurdi; his 3-year-old son Aylan*, his 5-year-old son Galip, and his 35-year-old wife Rehan died along with nine others while trying to row to Greece from Turkey. From the AP:
Abdullah Kurdi said Thursday that the boat's captain panicked due to high waves and jumped into the sea, leaving him in control of the small craft with his family and other migrants aboard. "I took over and started steering. The waves were so high and the boat flipped. I took my wife and my kids in my arms and I realized they were all dead," he said. The distraught father added: "All I want is to be with my children at the moment."
As Slate's Joshua Keating wrote Wednesday, "the death toll resulting from thousands of refugees making the dangerous journey from the Middle East and North Africa into Europe has been swelling for months, and so far, help is not on the way." The Kurdi family's application for legal asylum in Canada was rejected before their attempt to reach Greece. Abdullah Kurdi says he plans to take his family's bodies home to Syria to be buried in the war-torn city of Kobani.
Said Kurdi to reporters at the morgue: "The things that happened to us here, in the country where we took refuge to escape war in our homeland, we want the whole world to see this. We want the world’s attention on us, so that they can prevent the same from happening to others. Let this be the last."
###
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/09/03/father_of_syrian_migrant_drowning_victim_speaks_in_turkey.html?sid=5388f1c6dd52b8e4110003de&wpsrc=slatest_newsletter
September 3, 2015
Review of "Exceptional: Why the World Needs a Powerful America," by Dick Cheney and Liz Cheney
By Carlos Lozada September 3 at 12:47 PM
EXCEPTIONAL: Why the World Needs a Powerful America
By Dick Cheney and Liz Cheney
Threshold Editions. 324 pp. $28.
It was a classic Washington split-screen moment.
On May 21, 2009, minutes apart and just a mile and a half away from each other, President Obama and former vice president Dick Cheney offered dueling visions of America’s war on terrorism — of Guantanamo and torture, of surveillance and civil liberties. Speaking at the National Archives, Obama decried the previous administration’s “hasty decisions” and said essential American values had been discarded “as luxuries that we could no longer afford.” Cheney, holding court at the hawkish American Enterprise Institute, defended “enhanced interrogations” as legal and valuable, and warned that “in the fight against terrorism, there is no middle ground, and half-measures keep you half-exposed.”
I was in the second row at Cheney’s speech, and I recall the energy in the room as the former vice president approached the lectern. Only recently out of office, Cheney still mattered. He embodied a worldview that carried sway. In 2009, Obama v. Cheney was a heavyweight prizefight.
Six years later, Cheney is out with a new book on national security and is once again scheduled to deliver a speech at AEI, with Obama again as his foil. But it’s hard to muster the same excitement. It is far from clear that Cheney’s arguments, calcified in the intervening years, wield much influence anymore, even within his own party, or that they should. Rather than a slugfest, this feels like a swan song.
And it is a song he performs, in perfect Cheney pitch, with “Exceptional.” Co-written with his daughter Liz Cheney, the book is part history of America’s role in the world since World War II, part assault on Obama’s record on foreign and defense policy, and part relentlessly militaristic to-do list for the next commander in chief. “Our next president must be committed to restoring America’s power and strength,” the Cheneys write. “Our security and the survival of freedom depend on it.”
In the authors’ telling, America’s influence over world events has been almost entirely benevolent, as leaders from Roosevelt and Truman to Reagan and George W. Bush stared down tyrants and dispensed freedom and security. “We are, as a matter of empirical fact and undeniable history,” the Cheneys explain, “the greatest force for good the world has ever known.” From D-Day through the Cold War and into the age of terror, “security and freedom for millions of people around the globe have depended on America’s military, economic, political, and diplomatic might.”
more
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/book-party/wp/2015/09/03/the-last-throes-of-dick-cheney/?wpmm=1&wpisrc=nl_popns
Review of "Exceptional: Why the World Needs a Powerful America," by Dick Cheney and Liz Cheney
The last throes of Dick CheneyReview of "Exceptional: Why the World Needs a Powerful America," by Dick Cheney and Liz Cheney
By Carlos Lozada September 3 at 12:47 PM
EXCEPTIONAL: Why the World Needs a Powerful America
By Dick Cheney and Liz Cheney
Threshold Editions. 324 pp. $28.
It was a classic Washington split-screen moment.
On May 21, 2009, minutes apart and just a mile and a half away from each other, President Obama and former vice president Dick Cheney offered dueling visions of America’s war on terrorism — of Guantanamo and torture, of surveillance and civil liberties. Speaking at the National Archives, Obama decried the previous administration’s “hasty decisions” and said essential American values had been discarded “as luxuries that we could no longer afford.” Cheney, holding court at the hawkish American Enterprise Institute, defended “enhanced interrogations” as legal and valuable, and warned that “in the fight against terrorism, there is no middle ground, and half-measures keep you half-exposed.”
I was in the second row at Cheney’s speech, and I recall the energy in the room as the former vice president approached the lectern. Only recently out of office, Cheney still mattered. He embodied a worldview that carried sway. In 2009, Obama v. Cheney was a heavyweight prizefight.
Six years later, Cheney is out with a new book on national security and is once again scheduled to deliver a speech at AEI, with Obama again as his foil. But it’s hard to muster the same excitement. It is far from clear that Cheney’s arguments, calcified in the intervening years, wield much influence anymore, even within his own party, or that they should. Rather than a slugfest, this feels like a swan song.
And it is a song he performs, in perfect Cheney pitch, with “Exceptional.” Co-written with his daughter Liz Cheney, the book is part history of America’s role in the world since World War II, part assault on Obama’s record on foreign and defense policy, and part relentlessly militaristic to-do list for the next commander in chief. “Our next president must be committed to restoring America’s power and strength,” the Cheneys write. “Our security and the survival of freedom depend on it.”
In the authors’ telling, America’s influence over world events has been almost entirely benevolent, as leaders from Roosevelt and Truman to Reagan and George W. Bush stared down tyrants and dispensed freedom and security. “We are, as a matter of empirical fact and undeniable history,” the Cheneys explain, “the greatest force for good the world has ever known.” From D-Day through the Cold War and into the age of terror, “security and freedom for millions of people around the globe have depended on America’s military, economic, political, and diplomatic might.”
more
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/book-party/wp/2015/09/03/the-last-throes-of-dick-cheney/?wpmm=1&wpisrc=nl_popns
Profile Information
Name: DonGender: Male
Hometown: Massachusetts
Home country: United States
Member since: Sat Sep 1, 2012, 03:28 PM
Number of posts: 60,536
