by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright May 21, 2009
All Rights Reserved.

             When Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele had his dustup with conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh Feb. 28, the battle for the GOP began.  Steele insisted that he, not Rush, was the head of the Republican Party, calling the 58-year-old conservative icon an “entertainer,” proclaiming himself the head of the Party.  Vice President Dick Cheney chimed in May 20, urging the GOP to follow Rush.  He was asked whether former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell should be considered head of the new Republican Party.  Cheny quipped sarcastically, “he didn’t know whether Powell was still a member of the Party.”  When Powell endorsed Obama over his Party’s candidate Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) Oct. 20, 2008, he wrote his own obituary.  Attempts now to remake the GOP and jettison former President Ronald Reagan have backfired.

            Cheney continues to hammer away at Presdient Barack Obama’s credibility, defending former President George W. Bush’s record on terror.  Cheney insisted that Barack’s decision to shutter Guantanamo Bay, release former White House “torture” memos and ban “enhanced  interrogation techniques” have made the country less safe.  U.S. Atty. Gen. Eric Holder now considers whether to indict former Bush officials for violating U.S. laws regarding torture.  Cheney insisted that the Bush administration “never tortured,” despite revelations that terror suspects Abu Zubaydah and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed were waterboarded 266 times.  Despite denials by Cheney, most military and human rights groups regard waterboarding as torture.  Coercive methods were banned by the 1949 Geneva Convention, prompting the Bush White House to define prisoners as “enemy combatants.”

            Now that there’s a possibility of Bush White House officials getting prosecuted, Cheney has been exonerating himself and his colleagues in the court of public option.  His attacks on Obama terror policy directly excuse “enhanced interrogation techniques,” claiming they yielded actionable intel.  Cheney’s PR offensive directly relates to the growing possibility that former Bush White officials could face indictments or, at the very least, congressional investigations.  “He is such a wildly unpopular figure trying to defend such discredited policies that Democrats would like to be able to find a way to pay him to give more of these kinds of speeches,” said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).  With the GOP trying to find itself, Cheney has tried to highlight the Bush White House’s biggest accomplishment:  Preventing another Sept. 11-like attack.

            Cheney, like Limbaugh, has cleverly captured headlines from Obama, now acting as a titular GOP spokesman.  Regardless of Cheney’s past approval ratings, Democrats underestimate, at their own peril, the mistake of letting the former VP divert attention away from Democrats.  Cheney speaks with more authority on matters of national security than most the current White House officials.  He’s closely aligned with the GOP’s conservative base, including Rush Limbaugh.  Both Limbaugh and Cheney have ganged up on former Secretary of State Colin Powell, turning the GOP base away from wannabe moderates.  Powell hasn’t yet accepted that the GOP base doesn’t welcome moderates, especially crossover Republicans that voted for Obama.  Whether they liked McCain in the last election or not, supporting Obama was tantamount to treason, disgusting Party loyalists.

            White House or congressional strategists make a big mistake giving Cheney a forum in which to debate national security.  Cheney’s positions play well to the Party’s base, independents and security-minded Democrats that don’t want to close Guantanamo Bay.  Democrats miscalculate the so-called “torture” issue, where most voters accept Obama’s ban on “enhanced interrogation techniques” yet also understand why the Bush administration used these methods to extract intel after Sept. 11.  Cheney knows his talking points and makes a lot of sense.  Giving him access to the press steals the headlines from Obama at a time when the administration needs to control the airwaves. Obama loses the battle of dueling speeches with Cheney because, regardless of his logic, he gives Cheney access to the media.  Like Limbaugh, Barack should ignore Cheney, robbing him of a national spotlight.

            Obama administration officials are destined to lose the national security debate with Cheney.  Cheney makes a logical argument for why the Bush administration was successful in preventing another Sept. 11-like attack.  It’s easy to blame Guantanamo Bay but far more difficult to deal with dangerous terrorists committed to retaliating against the United States.  “The administration asserts that transferring terrorist from a detention facility on an isolated island to a prison inside the U.S. will make America safer . . “ said Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), agreeing with Cheney that closing Guantanamo makes the country less safe.  Obama must convince voters that Guantanamo is public relations disaster for U.S. foreign policy.   He must also convince voters that banning “enhanced interrogation techniques" doesn’t compromise U.S. intelligence.  So far he’s done neither.  Cheney seems to be making more sense.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news.  He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2002 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.