Print

 Email

Former Vice President, Richard Cheney, (R) Wyoming

As I’ve watched the events of the last few days it is clear once again that President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war. He seems to think if he has a low-key response to an attempt to blow up an airliner and kill hundreds of people, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if we bring the mastermind of Sept. 11 to New York, give him a lawyer and trial in civilian court, we won’t be at war.
He seems to think if he closes Guantanamo and releases the hard-core Al Qaeda-trained terrorists still there, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gets rid of the words, ‘war on terror,’ we won’t be at war. But we are at war and when President Obama pretends we aren’t, it makes us less safe. Why doesn’t he want to admit we’re at war? It doesn’t fit with the view of the world he brought with him to the Oval Office. It doesn’t fit with what seems to be the goal of his presidency — social transformation — the restructuring of American society. President Obama’s first object and his highest responsibility must be to defend us against an enemy that knows we are at war.

Hon. Richard Cheney
Former Vice President, United States Of America
December 30, 2009

Washington

Citizenship, Ideas And Utterances

On May 21, 2009 Newsroom Magazine featured a Publisher’s Essay lauding former Republican Vice President Richard Cheney for exercising his rights of citizenship. In that essay, I supported Mr. Cheney’s right, and his obligation as a private citizen, to voice his views on whether the Obama administration was adequately defending the nation against terrorists. I did so knowing that being a free citizen rests on knowledge and ideas beyond our everyday lives. Being a citizen of a constitutional democracy demands that important issues and challenges to those in power be part of our national dialog — for issues and ideas are central to the checks and balances by which our nation is governed.

In that essay I stated that all citizens are responsible for knowing what’s going on in their communities and nation. Only by knowing what’s being discussed and debated by those in power can we Americans fully participate in our constitutional democracy. It is we ordinary citizens who decide who shall govern us, what we stand for as a nation, and how we relate to the world in which we live. Making the best choices demands that we hear all views, discover all options, consider the risks — thereupon to enjoy the benefits or suffer the consequences.

Rights Confer Responsibilities

Our supporting essay was roundly criticized by readers. None of those who communicated their views supported either Mr. Cheney’s statement, or this publication’s endorsement of his right, and his responsibility as a citizen, to voice them.

Nor was the publisher’s essay universally supported by all Newsroom Magazine contributors — who held wide, but largely negative views about both Mr. Cheney and his criticisms of the new president.

What prompted that day’s Essay was Mr. Cheney’s unwavering support for the means and methods employed by the Bush-Cheney administration — issues with which I did not agree or endorse, but issues I understand someone else of equally good faith might believe in or actively promote.

Citizen Responsibilities To Think For Themselves

What I liked was Mr. Cheney’s rationale for doing what former President George Bush chose not to do, that is speak out as a private citizen. Every citizen is free to do so,  and obligated to know something credible about the issues that matter most. While criticizing the ensuing administration, as did Mr. Cheney, is not in the American tradition for former presidents and vice presidents, our nation is in peril as much by waning public engagement in rational discourse, as it is by terrorist threat.

American politics, the vile, distorted, and polarized style that has turned our great national political parties into ideological automatons, irrational adversaries and irresponsible public officials, have also turned off most Americans. Few seem willing to speak out on issues of immense importance. We think Mr. Cheney’s May  2nd remarks were demonstrative of what it means to be a citizen, to exercise our rights of political free-speech, and to engage in useful and constructive dialog.

Cheney Speaking As Citizen

What Mr. Cheney said in his response to press inquiries last May were his views as a private citizen — as made clear in his remarks.

“The reason I’ve been speaking, and in effect what I’ve been doing is responding to press queries such as yours, is because I think the issues that are at stake here are so important. And, in effect, what we’ve seen happen with respect to the Obama administration as they came to power is they have moved to take down a lot of those policies we put in place that kept the nation safe for nearly eight years from a follow-on terrorist attack like 9/11. Dealing with prisoner interrogation, for example, or the terrorist surveillance program.They campaigned against these policies across the country, and then they came in now, and they have tried, very hard, to undertake actions that I just fundamentally disagree with.”

Dick Cheney, May 2, 2009

On this, I wrote,

“There’s a long standing tradition in American politics intended to reinforce the reality that while administrations come and go, there is only one president of the United States. Those previously in office are expected to go away and remain silent. They are no longer in power, their opinions no longer have the imprimatur of office. Now it is the new guy who takes the heat, garners support or adulation, sets government policy, and maneuvers the ship of state.

Some former presidents, especially Jimmy Carter, and Ronald Reagan, went out of their way to  avoid criticizing or complicating their successors. As this is written, former president George W. Bush, like his father, George Herbert Walker Bush, have also chosen to largely keep out of the political limelight. But now comes forward the former Vice President, Dick Cheney, to admonish, criticize and accuse the new Obama administration for it’s attitudes and policies on one specific area: The safety of the American nation from attack by terrorists. On this subject, Dick Cheney is overtly and intentionally outspoken.”

Cheney Speaking On Public Policy

Part of what Mr. Cheney said that day was supportive of the Bush-Cheney administration’s handling of enemy combatants — including those detained at Guantanamo Bay.

“What it shows is that overwhelmingly, the process we had in place produced from certain key individuals, such as Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and Abu Zubaydah, two of the three who were waterboarded, and Khalid Shaikh Mohammed is the man who killed 3,000 Americans on 9/11, blew up the World Trade Center, attacked the Pentagon, tried to blow up the White House or the Capitol building. An evil, evil man that’s been in our custody since March of ’03. He did not cooperate fully in terms of interrogations until after waterboarding. Once we went through that process, he produced vast quantities of invaluable information about Al Quida.”

Dick Cheney, May 2, 2009

Cheney Speaking As Polarizing Politician

Then, on December 30, 2009, Dick Cheney again spoke about his concerns — not on the issues, not on the merits, and not as an engaged citizen. Instead he attacked the opposition, demeaned both the patriotism and motives of our new president, and impugned the integrity of those who hold dissimilar, or opposing views.

Our rights of free speech do not demand that we be rational, truthful, relevant or even clear. Only that we add our thoughts to the public dialogue in the belief that good ideas and probative thinking will eventually reveal  clarity and shed sufficient light for our nation to find our way in the darkness of ignorance and misrepresentation.

Non-combatants in the political process may find little clarity or light in Mr. Cheney’s ad-homonym attack on President Obama while others may be inspired by his views. Whether anyone else agrees with Cheney’s views is of far less consequence to our nation that his right, and his obligation, to share them. His ideas, views and comments stand on their own. It’s up to the hearer or reader to form his or her own opinion on their probative value, credibility and relevancy to an immensely important area of political debate.

“As I’ve watched the events of the last few days it is clear once again that President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war. He seems to think if he has a low-key response to an attempt to blow up an airliner and kill hundreds of people, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if we bring the mastermind of Sept. 11 to New York, give him a lawyer and trial in civilian court, we won’t be at war.

He seems to think if he closes Guantanamo and releases the hard-core Al Qaeda-trained terrorists still there, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gets rid of the words, ‘war on terror,’ we won’t be at war. But we are at war and when President Obama pretends we aren’t, it makes us less safe. Why doesn’t he want to admit we’re at war? It doesn’t fit with the view of the world he brought with him to the Oval Office. It doesn’t fit with what seems to be the goal of his presidency — social transformation — the restructuring of American society. President Obama’s first object and his highest responsibility must be to defend us against an enemy that knows we are at war.”

Dick Cheney, December 30, 2009

Critical Thinking

We are not a weak or frivolous nation. We have paid dearly in blood and treasure to secure the right to speak freely. Freedom of speech has no qualifications as to the accuracy of one’s views or the quality of one’s thinking. Assessing what is credible, useful, probative and relevant is thus left to each citizen to decide for himself.

If our nation is in deep trouble today, which it surely is, that trouble has not come by way of too much freedom of speech, but too little. We are a largely ignorant nation starved for credible, probative, relevant and useful information on which to make critical choices and decisions.

We believe that Dick Cheney is right to speak out on issues he believes important to his nation. Whether his views, utterances and statements are probative, or logical, or political in the eyes of others matters not, for they are his views and he is exercising his rights to express them.

You may not agree with his views on the risks of closing Guantanamo, or his notions that President Obama is pretending that our nation is not at war. Newsroom Magazine stands in support of all Americans speaking their views. What’s worthy, useful, relevant, probative and credible is best decided when all ideas are are part of the public debate.

Free Speech Demands Listening To Other Views

• We are not required, as Americans, to agree with any of Mr. Cheney’s views, but we are required, everyone one of us, to respect the former Vice President for exercising his right to speak to matters and issues of his choice.
• We honor Mr. Cheney’s right to utter views with which some, or many, of of his countrymen might not agree.
• We support Mr. Cheney’s right to speak about issues he feels ought to be discussed in the public debate.
• We support Mr. Cheney’s right to make of himself a demagogue by attacking President Obama personally when it is Mr. Obama’s ideas with which he disagrees. While we do not agree with demagoguery, we well know that the Democrats behaved as boorishly toward he and Mr. Bush.

No matter that we do not agree with Mr. Cheney’s comments, ad-homonym attacks, or political views, we enthusiastically support his right — and his obligation — to offer them for consideration by all.