Cheney talks torture, thinks Obama will fail. And mostly sucks.

I don't know John King personally. I only know him through his performace as a journalist. He does not do the journalism in the same way I would. For example, Cheney has an idea about what occurs in a "war-time" situation vs. a law enforcement situation--he apparently subscribes to the aphorism that "All's fair" in war. He admits to episods of waterboarding, and allows something may have come of them but "Oh--they're classified." While Mr. King does ask him to "Prove it"--but says "Take as much time as you can."

Really? Why not address whether or not the methods were even right? Were they justified? Do the ends justify the means?

If there was a thwarted attempt at terror that was full-on busted because of some break-through in intelligence-gathering, the info wouldn't be clasified anymore, would it? The network would have been sprung and the trial would be on. So why is Cheney unable to boast of a clear-cut epic win?

He equates closing Guantanamo with giving up the defense of this country. And yet, detainees at Gitmo have been hard to classify, interrogate, hold or even try. I suppose he doesn't see as any particular success the Clinton administration's treatment of, say, Ramzi Yusuf.

What we tend to wink at is: he was the guy who was kind of supposed to sit down with the Department of Defense and National Security and start talking about terrorism. He was supposed to be one of the "grown-ups". They blew it off just as surely as they blew off Sandy Berger's warnings about Al-Qaeda (the final verdict on who was to blame in re: The Cole attack still being out--but really--how many embassies needed to be bombed before the Bush exploratory team looked at Bin Laden as a focal point--not in the 2000 race, apparently). Apparently not in the 2001 transition either. And so they blew off Richard Clarke in August. The Bush administration foreign policy was on a dumb-ass neocon-fueled auto-pilot from then, looking to blame--Iraq?

Hypervigilance doesn't really ever make up for an opportunity lost. And no plot found post 9/11 equals the one he and his lot missed.

People have walked out of our custody free men because of torture. Our illicit means have sullied the chain of evidence. Our lack of restraint at Abu-Ghraib hurt our national prestige. Cheney doesn't know, or want to know about that. He wants to think every tool used was necessary--

And I say--no. Not necessary--harmful.

I think that Barack Obama knows as well as I do, or as well as anybody could, that our potential terrorists are people. He realizes that terrorism is a global concern, but we can't aford to treat the individual malefactors in such a way that abrogates their rights. Fuck no. We need to acknowledge their rights on principle, because we are the USA. We are the the ones who should. That is our thing. If we think we stand for freedom and democracy and due process, we need to practice those things. I don't think that waters down our war on terror one bit. So long as we have our prisoners dead to rights.

I think if we concentrate on what is historically legally permissible, (If Cheney mentions what is Constitutional, I can hear the Constitution cry) we have a better shot at reframing the struggle against us as a mere criminal enterprise--which is what it always should have been--not a Holy War. The Cheney/Bush frame ennobled it into something it didn't need to be. "Crusade" even was said. But never did they understand that things did not have to escalate, that the thugs were just thugs, or that foreign people were just people. And they disrespected human dignity just enough to imprison and humiliate people for their own ends--never cool.

They made such a dumb thing out of the War on Terror. Afghanistan and Iraq are scarcely improved.... Cheney sucks and he has so little insight. I say he mostly talks to cover his ass. I look forward to what the Obama team means to do. I think they will show more sense.

I think their behavior will be more effective, more honorable, and a better fit than Cheney's dissemblings and over-reaching. But time will tell.