Torture with the Stars, Part 1: Obama's "thought police"
News blogs, sports blogs, entertainment blogs, and more from Philly.com, The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News.
Torture with the Stars, Part 1: Obama's "thought police"
I guess if I wanted to get into the sequel of Eric Boehlert's "Bloggers on the Bus," I'd be a little more obsessive and sit in front of two TVs and blog and tweet and Facebook and whatever else what TV, Drudge, and everyone of that ilk is now calling "The Great Debate" (personally, I prefer "Torture With the Stars") between sitting president Barack Obama and recently discovered ex-Vice President Dick Cheney as it happened.
Now, I've had a half a day to digest this rather extraordinary -- if not exactly for the reasons that Charlie Gibson & Co. thought so -- day, and a couple things leap out. Enough that I'm going to take the unusal step of dividing this into two parts.
First, Obama. He sure talks pretty. It was hard to listen to his speech and not be moved by some of condemnations of the atrocities of the Bush years, such as when he said that waterboarding and similar tactics "did not advance our war and counterterrorism efforts -- they undermined them, and that is why I ended them once and for all." The problem, of course, is that while Obama is scoring a 98 on the rhetoric front, he gets a 50 on the policy -- and I stopped dead in my tracks when he started making the case for something called "preventive detention," not so different from what George Orwell called "the Thought Police."
Now, finally, there remains the question of detainees at Guantanamo who cannot be prosecuted yet who pose a clear danger to the American people. And I have to be honest here -- this is the toughest single issue that we will face. We're going to exhaust every avenue that we have to prosecute those at Guantanamo who pose a danger to our country. But even when this process is complete, there may be a number of people who cannot be prosecuted for past crimes, in some cases because evidence may be tainted, but who nonetheless pose a threat to the security of the United States.
Michael Ratner, from the Center for Constitutional Rights, nails it, I think:
Even more troubling for Ratner, however, was the notion of preventive detention -- which he called "the real road to hell," and compared to something from the movie Minority Report. "[Obama] said some people are just too dangerous to let go and that we have to keep them," said Ratner. "Though we'd do it differently then Bush. We will set up rules. Well no matter how you repackage Guantanamo, with all kinds of rules on top of it -- that is what he is doing, he is re-wrapping a preventive detention scheme and giving it some more due process. In the end, it still comes down to holding people -- much like Minority Report or pre-crime stuff -- for being dangerous, and that is not something that I think is constitutional or this country should be engaged in.
No matter how much Obama tries to blame this on the Cheney torture policies (which created that inadmissible evidence), two wrongs don't make a right. What he's proposing is against one of this country's core principles, which is habeas corpus. No matter how many guidelines that Obama and his administration try to impose, there is nothing in the Constitution that would permit the indefinite jailing of people "who cannot be prosecuted for past crimes" but who "nonetheless pose a threat to the security of the United States" -- nor should their be. Not even if we ever do develop the mind-reading powers of a "thought police."
This is why people need to keep the pressure on Obama -- even those inclined to view his presidency favorably. Because while clearly his overall approach to torture and detention issues are "on the right track" as opposed to the very "wrong track" of Cheney and Bush, it is so easy inside the Beltway to start veering off the rails. Making people accountable for the torture and Guantanamo debacles of the Bush years requires the American people constantly holding our new president accountable, too.
Part II, coming up.
Comment removed.
Although he earlier referenced his duty to protect and defend the Constitution, the President said this: "In the midst of all these challenges, however, my single most important responsibility as President is to keep the American people safe. That is the first thing that I think about when I wake up in the morning. It is the last thing that I think about when I go to sleep at night." His most important responsibility is NOT to keep the American people safe; it's to do what he swore to do when he took his oath of office--twice. And that's to protect and defend the Constitution and uphold the laws of the United States. He sounds like he's channeling Bush and Cheney more and more every day. Maybe there's something in the water at the White House that drives normally sensible and law abiding people nuts.— RAMA
It is critically important that we wait until after they commit mass murder before we violate their rights through surveillance or detention. We must not tilt the playing field in our own favor. We must make it a fair fight.— Mr. Smith- Just curious, Will. What would you do with a committed jihadist, but who can't be prosecuted because solid evidence was obtained via the "enhanced interrogation" approved by the Bush administration?— Talking point sleuth
- They will get what they deserve when they go to a supermax.— cwoulfe2000
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- This is all absurd,wars are not fought by civil laws.What ever happened to"all's fair in love and war". Put more gays on the front line and let them kiss the enemy to death.Obama has no experience at all in government,you left wingers elected him,now watch him give the country away.— NOT PC
- Comment removed.
- Well, apparently your Messiah is not what you thought he was. Let's hope he meets a better fate than the last one did.— JingoGuy
- I dont' consider myself a paranoid conspiracy theorists but I don't believe everything we're told either. Cheney is clearly a very intelligent man. In my head we went to war with Iraq because it was a more convenient fight, a fight vs. a nation is something tangible, vs. a fight vs. an idea. And though costly it took the fight to them, and off our soil. And if democracy succeeds there it could end up being integral in stabilizing the region. So lets say you believe in this but there is the awkward problem that it wasn't Iraq that attacked us. Let's say you need to build a connection, or the mirage of a connection. Let's say you have the scum who attacked us who should be punished anyway, and you have a method that will yield false confessions. I think part of this is dirtier than we'll want to admit, but it still was first and foremost to protect us. So you're Obama. your the new cop with the good intentioned but dirty method cop. You condemn and remove the cop, and move on. Its the right course.— dfield
- I am sure just liek American prison, Gitmo is full of innocent people is how I read this article. How much longer are people in this country going to accept Obama constantly blaming others - everytime he gets in a pickle - he blames Bush/Cheney this Bush/Cheney that - he needs to start acting like a leader and not like this is a campaign speech he gives where you promise the world to people. Also Will - when will you write the article detailing how Charles Schumer in June 2004 at a Senate hearing basically stated that if torture keeps us safe and stops acts as a last resort - do it all day and night. Checks the records and give me the article calling him a horrible human and demand he get thrown in jail. This should be easy since I did the investigating part of the reporter job for you.— reddog44
- I think you're a little overblown with this. While evidence obtained through illegal techniques maybe inadmissable, there is (presumably) other admissable evidence against the individuals in question. The president never said he is going to hold them even if we can't convist them. He said we're going to find ways to convict them -- you know, through admissible evidence.— etotheb
- Comment removed.
"It's only a matter of time before these asinine policies blow up in our face, literally." It never ceases to amaze me how scared you people are. Another terrorist attack will most likely happen someday, no matter what the policies are, and all of you will smile and say "I told you so!" But I will not hide under the covers quaking in my boots because of terrorists. I've said it before...Get a dog scaredy cat!— one_eyed_jack
- Andrew Sullivan
- Blinq
- Blogorrhea
- Blonde Sagacity
- Free Republic
- Instapundit
- James Taranto
- ScrappleFace
- The Corner
- Buzzmachine
- Eat the Press
- Editor and Publisher
- Media (Huffington Post)
- Media Bloodhound
- Mickey Kaus
- Pressthink
- Romenesko
- The Inksniffer
- A List of Things Thrown Five Minutes Ago
- Above Average Jane
- BlankBaby
- Citizen Mom
- Keystone Blog
- Metroblogging Philadelphia
- Phawker
- Philadelphia - America's Hometown
- Philadelphia Will Do
- Philebrity
- Philly Future
- Phillyblog
- Phillyist
- The Clog
- The Next Mayor
- Welcome to Phillyville
- Young Philly Politics
- Afro-Netizen
- All-Spin Zone
- Atrios
- Bad Attitudes
- Billmon
- Booman Tribune
- CorrenteWire
- Fables of the Reconstruction
- iFlipFlop
- Kiko's House
- MyDD
- Philly (Dragonballyee)
- Rowhouse Logic
- Slacktivist
- Suburban Guerilla
- Tattered Coat
- upyernoz
- AmericaBlog
- Andy Borowitz
- BuzzFlash
- Crooks and Liars
- Cursor
- Daily Kos
- David Sirota
- Drudge Report
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Fire Dog Lake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Hullabaloo
- Jesus' General
- Jon Swift
- Josh Marshall
- Juan Cole
- Kevin Drum
- Mad Kane
- Majikthise
- Matthew Yglesias
- Oliver Willis
- Raw Story
- Swing State Project
- Talk Left
- Taylor Marsh
- TBogg
- The Carpetbagger Report
- Think Progress
- War and Piece
- Wonkette
- A Citizen's Blog
- Balls, Sticks and Stuff
- Beer Leaguer
- Dick Polman
- Phillies Nation
- Philling Station
- Shallow Center
- The 700 Level
- The Good Phight
