Obama to GOP: ‘Let’s talk about 9/11’

June 19, 2008

It’s possible John McCain and the Republican establishment sincerely believe that they will “own” national security during the presidential campaign, and that exploiting the attacks of 9/11 for partisan gain will make Dems recoil and/or furiously try to change the subject.

The GOP is, therefore, very likely to be disappointed. Barack Obama isn’t going to cede an inch and will not be “lectured on national security by people who are responsible for the most disastrous set of foreign policy decisions in the recent history of the United States.”

“The other side likes to use 9/11 as a political bludgeon,” Obama said. “Well, let’s talk about 9/11.

“The people who were responsible for murdering 3,000 Americans on 9/11 have not been brought to justice. They are Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda and their sponsors — the Taliban. They were in Afghanistan. And yet George Bush and John McCain decided in 2002 that we should take our eye off of Afghanistan so that we could invade and occupy a country that had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. The case for war in Iraq was so thin that George Bush and John McCain had to hype the threat of Saddam Hussein, and make false promises that we’d be greeted as liberators. They misled the American people, and took us into a misguided war.

“Here are the results of their policy. Osama bin Laden and his top leadership — the people who murdered 3000 Americans — have a safe-haven in northwest Pakistan, where they operate with such freedom of action that they can still put out hate-filled audiotapes to the outside world. That’s the result of the Bush-McCain approach to the war on terrorism.”

Note to McCain: Obama isn’t backing down.

Greg Sargent added:

The key line there is “let’s talk about 9/11.” Keep in mind that this latest GOP assault is not so much about the substance of the argument as it is about trying to project a sense that the McCain campaign is the one on offense. Obama isn’t playing along.

Only two years ago, some Dems were still saying, “please, please, PLEASE, let’s NOT talk about 9/11.” Now Obama is inviting an argument about it — and more important, he’s saying it’s an argument he will win. That’s the key here.

Quite right. The conventional wisdom in Democratic circles was that the party is better off shifting the national debate to issues where Dems enjoy an advantage (healthcare, education, the environment) and steering clear of Republican attacks on national security and foreign policy. This isn’t an especially bad strategy when national security and foreign policy are second-tier issues, but after 9/11 and in the midst of two wars, it’s hardly a recipe for success. In fact, we’ve already seen it fail.

Obama and his campaign seem well aware of the futility of this strategy — especially given the inconvenient reality that Republicans happen to be truly awful on national security and foreign policy. Obama seems to think there’s some value in letting people know this.

The irony is the flap on counter-terrorism this week came as a result of Obama saying he believes we can keep America safe, defeat our enemies, and honor the rule of law. As Rosa Brooks noted today, McCain used to believe the same thing.

Here’s the saddest thing about this week’s dust-up. Not too long ago — before he decided that becoming the Republican presidential nominee required him to cozy up to his party’s most demagogic extremists and play politics with 9/11 — McCain was the champion of a common-sense, values-based approach to terrorism.

It was McCain who refused to sanction torture. It was McCain who said Guantanamo detainees “have rights under various human rights declarations. And one of them is the right not to be detained indefinitely.” It was McCain who advocated moving Guantanamo detainees to Kansas’ Ft. Leavenworth, where they would come under the certain jurisdiction of federal courts. It was McCain who insisted that we respect the basic rights even of enemies who “don’t deserve our sympathy” because “this isn’t about who they are. This is about who we are.”

John McCain, who are you now?

Good question.

There can be no topic that is ceded to Repubs or state for that matter.

The harder they have to work rhetorically and in strongly “red” states, the better chance Dems have to put our ideas out there and give people a real alternative.

  • Imagine what might have happened if Democrats had grown spines and stood up to Bush on national security in 2004 and 2006. Instead, Democratic “leaders” hid under their desks and soiled themselves at the mere threat of having a Republican talking point aimed in their direction.

    At least I’m no longer worried about an “October Surprise” terrorist attack. Obama won’t let Bush, McCain and the corporate-controlled media blame the Democrats for what happened on Bush’s watch.

  • “Let’s talk about 9/11.”

    Jeez, I’ve been waiting years for a Democratic presidential nominee to say that. Push back and push hard! The Republicans have portrayed Democrats as wimps for a long time. Part of the effectiveness of the portrayal has been that Democrats have, in fact, been wimps. We need to stand tall for our beliefs and avoid equivocation, double-talk and changing the subject. Thank goodness we selected a candidate that can and will fight this fight.

  • This is what he meant by bringing a gun to a knife fight.

    Between this and the DNC’s utter bitchslapping of Guiliani the other day, it’s looking like this is going to be a whole new ballgame.

  • I cannot wait until they have this discussion at a Town Hall. How long until McCain loses his temper and falls back to a Queeg moment?

  • Pre-9/11 thinking. Before 9/11 the Bushites thought the most important threat to National Security was a rogue state with nuclear weapon tipped ICBMs.

    This is after they were TOLD that the most important threat was al Qaeda.

    What did they do, they demoted the White House terrorism ‘czar’ (Richard Clarke) to the Deputies Meeting and ignored warnings about an impending al Qaeda attack during the summer of 2001.

    Pre-9/11 thinking only existed from January 21, 2001 to September 11, 2001. Thus only Republican’ts (especially Bushites) ever thought that way.

    Oh, but the wingnuts will say, liberals only believe in a ‘law enforcement solution’ to terrorism, and that’s the real pre-9/11 thinking.

    First, Clinton actually used military force after the embassy bombings. Know who complained that it was inappropriate, that we had no ‘evidence’ that al Qaeda and their ‘hosts’ the Taliban were involved?

    Tom Delay, Republican’t of Texas (where the Oil Mafia whores was kissing Taliban ass to try to get a oil pipeline deal).

    Second, law enforcement can actually WORK. We caught the terrorist trying to attack us before the Millenium through good law enforcement (not by torture).

    And if we’d applied that same level of focus during the summer of 2001 we would have caught the 9/11 terrorists and saved ourselves a lot of trouble.

    So, yes, let’s have that discussion about 9/11.

    p.s., when a Texan (BGII say) says “Don’t Mess with Texas”, I remember all those Texan ‘gentlemen’ allowing a Taliban emmisary to abuse an American woman at a press conference and I say “Why the F**K not mess with Texas”?

  • This is a new ballgame, and Obama is ready to play. I’m sure the Dimocratic “leadership” has some qualms, as their usual strategy is to cower and beg for scraps.

  • I’m sorry, I have nothing to add here. I’m just waiting for some thundertard like Black Hole Mary to “explain” to us how Obama aggressivly exposing the gross incompetence of the Bush Adminisration – and McCain’s transformation into a torture-loving Iraq-war loving whatever-Bush-did-let’s-keep-doing-it convert – is somehow bad for Obama, and how Hillary Clinton would’ve handled it SO much better.

  • Micheline @ 10—

    Of course he’s intensified the search — with his legacy in the toilet and our penchant these days in the media to have a long-term memory loss, capturing OBL will be the other bookend to his administration. Look he was here on 9/11 and caught Osama Bin Laden — nevermind about the stuff in the middle!!

    Shiny thing, shiny thing–over here!

    How many more days????

  • Bush may have intensified the search for Bin Laden to get’em before he leaves office. This is a given.

    But remember Bush is incompetent. Just saying…..

  • If Bush captures OBL it will be an obvious political ploy, rather than a true pursuit of justice- how many times has this admin had him cornered, and then the decider in charge’s toadies dropped the ball? Tora Bora ring a bell?
    “OBL is not important right now,”… sliding in the charts from Public Enemy #1?”

    OBL made Bush’s presidency- and not in a good way.

  • I’m with Danimal @ 3. I’ve waited a long time to hear a Democratic leader speak forcefully and convincingly on defense and foreign policy. I thought that was the whole point of nominating Kerry in 2004. Then look what happened. As for Bush renewing his efforts to capture Bin Laden, that can’t have gotten in easier given Musharaf’s weakened position.

  • Lance, you are right on! All these facts have been laid out before the American public and common sense just seems to walk right out the door. I don’t know why or how but let us consider a great statement made by a late, great Texas lady, Molly Ivins in 2004 (not ALL Texans are as idiotic as our current Prez) and hope she will be right on too!! Molly, may you rest in peace….

    “Some people think you cannot break a dog that has got in the habit of killin’ chickens, but my friend John Henry always claimed you could. He said the way to do it is to take one of the chickens the dog has killed and wire the thing around the dog’s neck, good and strong. And leave it there until that dead chicken stinks so bad that no other dog or person will even go near that poor beast. Thing’ll smell so bad the dog won’t be able to stand himself. You leave it on there until the last little bit of flesh rots and falls off, and that dog won’t kill chickens again.

    The Bush administration is going to be wired around the neck of the American people for four more years, long enough for the stench to sicken everybody. It should cure the country of electing Republicans.”

  • …it is reported that Bush has intensified the hunt for Bin Laden so he can be captured before he leaves office… -Micheline

    I’m less worried about the ignorant one finding him and more worried about Bin Laden giving himself up.

    Look at it this way:

    1. OBL knows he’s going to die. Dialysis won’t work forever.
    2. GOP rule is good for Al Queda.
    3. OBL knows Bush will execute him, possibly even without a mock trial in an effort to deliver the November elections for the GOP.
    4. OBL knows Obama would do whatever he could to prevent him from becoming a martyr.
    5. OBL wants to be martyred.

    Given these assumptions, what’s to stop OBL, who has purposefully influenced our elections in the past, from making the ultimate power play and giving himself up?

  • The primary reason the Bush narrative regarding the GWOT has begun to unravel is because its core rationale is corrupt and untrue. All Mr. Obama has to do is put the untruths to the light so every American who has already questioned the wisdom of sending over 4000 American service personnel to die in a country that was not affiliated with the murderers of just under 3000 American and other national civilians can discern who will actually be the better of the two current candidates for president of the US.

    Quite frankly, the Bush/McCain narrative regarding Iraq is in shambles and their insistance on bringing it to bear is shear folly to us all by now.

    Tragically, Iraq is a debacle and our continued presence there will give us no gain – except of course, as seemingly always, our corporate citizens known as big oil will profit and we will see $7.00 at the pump!

    Barack is on to something – a clear perspective on why this current president has failed us miserably, and his ability to stand up to the trite and overplayed fantasy that the GOP has kept us protected these past 7 years.

    It seems McCain and his advisors are at the bus stop waiting for the bus when it has already departed a good 10 minutes earlier. It’s going to be a long campaign for McCain walking down that road! -Kevo

  • Let’s really talk about 9/11 then. I’m waiting for Obama and the Democrats to lay the disaster of 9/11 right at the feet of the Republicans. It was on their watch that it happened. They dismissed, ignored, didn’t bother to pay attention to the warnings. If they’re so concerned about national security and they’re the only ones we should entrust our safety to then why did they shrug off all of the warnings? Their follow up has been one of the greatest foreign policy/security disasters in this country’s history. Talk about it…REALLY talk about it.

    As far as catching OBL before the election, don’t bet on it. If that was going to happen, OBL would have been displayed like King Kong before the 2004 elections. Bush is history. He’s checked out. I don’t see him expending any energy from now until he leaves to do anything. Plus to really catch OBL before the election would mean getting into some pretty nasty business in Pakistan. Another conflict igniting is not what the Republicans can afford now.

  • I will echo the sentiments of others. I have been waiting YEARS to finally hear a major Democratic leader talk forcibly about foreign policy and the war on terror. At long last we have a candidate who refuses to buy into the Republican defined narrative (as Kerry did in 2004).

    For the past four years poll after poll shows the majority of American’s DO NOT believe in the policies the Republicans have been pushing but the Democrats never gave those people (again the majority) a voice.

    It sounds like Obama might actually do it.

    Although the current FISA ‘compromise’ does dampen my enthusiam a bit. Hopefully when Obama becomes President he will revisit the issue and corrent his mistake.

  • “George Bush and John McCain are weak on terrorism.”

    Ouch. That speech singed the eyebrows. I loved it!

    🙂

  • It’s good to see that Obama is weilding that big maple stick he got a few weeks back… whoop ’em Obama!

    Now, after he finishes that particular can of whoop ass, he needs to take that stick to Congress and start whoopin’ Reid, pelosi, Conyers, and the rest of the spineless democrats that wet their pants everytime a republican challenges them.

  • SHI said: “Lance, you are right on!”

    Thank you.

    And let that be a lesson to the rest of you about how to reply to one of my posts 😉

  • “…McCain was the champion of a common-sense, values-based approach to terrorism….”

    This is nonsense. McCain was grandstanding while knowing full well nothing would change as a result of his rhetoric. He even allowed the MAC to pass saying he was against torture but saying absolutely nothing when Bush issued signing statements to ignore any anti-torture legislation. He knew his actions would do nothing to stop the use of torture. Like making sure a bill has more than enough votes to pass then voting against it knowing his stance would actually be meaningless.

    Just go to McCainsource.com and read all about this maverick in name only.

    I hope Obama means what he says about not giving up our freedoms for security but I wonder why he is strangely silent while congress is doing exactly that in the most blatantly obvious blow against our rights and our freedom.

    Republicans like these neocons don’t have a leg to stand on when it comes to national security and foreign policy but to those of us already convinced that Obama is strong in these areas we don’t want a display of toughness but one of intelligence and so far Obama passes with flying colors. He needs to address this FISA horror before it passes just to distance himself from these Bush enabling dems we are trying to get rid of…Hoyer, Pelosi, Reid, Rockefellar, Baar and many more dems charging that those dems who oppose Bush are cut and run cowards. (see GG’s site at salon.com)

    • Comments are closed.