Former Vice President Dick Cheney accused President Barack Obama on Tuesday of “trying to pretend we are not at war” with terrorists..That's the setup. Now the snippets:
A senior Democrat said in response: “It’s telling that in attacking the president and the administration, that Vice President Cheney did not condemn the attack against our nation on Christmas Day.”True, but it took Obama 3 days to publicly condemn it. He played golf instead.
..GOP officeholders have eschewed the customary partisan restraint following a terrorist incident and baldly portrayed Democrats as weak on security.Good grief, they're mainly commenting on the lapse, as have some Democrats, as have many in the press, as has the president himself.
President George W. Bush was quieter for much longer about the attack by shoe bomber Richard Reid in December 2001.Yes, but it's not as if Bush was out there after 9/11 downplaying the threat, calling for prisoners to be tried in court and badmouthing Clinton for leaving him a mess. The public was still reeling from 9/11--we knew we were at war then. Besides, the Dems constantly criticized Bush for not jumping on issues as they occurred like Clinton did.
The senior Democrat said: “There are numerous other such public statements that explicitly state we are at war. The difference from the last administration is that we are at war with that which is tangible — Al Qaeda, violent extremists, and terrorists — rather than at war with a tactic, ‘terrorism’.”Yeah, and how's that working out for us? How many people actually think there's much of a difference anyway? The teachable moment here is that words really don't matter with these guys.
“The world will have confidence that I am listening to them, and that our future and our security is tied up with our ability to work with other countries in the world. That will ultimately make us safer. And that’s something that this administration has failed to understand.”Which seems to prove Cheney's point.