McCain using Bush's hypocritical "September 10th Mindset" against Obama

[ProSense]

McCain Campaign Accuses Obama Of Having "A September 10th Mindset"

By Greg Sargent - June 17, 2008, 10:36AM

Aggressively moving to shift the debate away from domestic issues to national security, the McCain campaign hit Obama with some of the most incendiary language of the campaign, accusing Obama on a conference call with reporters moments ago of having a "September 10th mindset."

The latest attack, which has strong echoes of the tactics Bush used against John Kerry four years ago and that Republicans used against Dems in 2006, comes in response to comments Obama made yesterday to ABC News about the attackers of the World Trade Center in 1993.

In the interview, Obama suggested that the failure to try Guantanamo detainees was harming American credibility in the Muslim world, adding that the 1993 attackers had been dealt with in accordance with the Constitution and that "they are currently in U.S. prisons, incapacitated."

The McCain camp is seizing on the comments as evidence that Obama doesn't understand that such an approach is inadequate to the current war on terror -- even though Obama has repeatedly outlined an aggressive approach to hunting down terrorists.

more

Bush ducks question about taking issue with Kerry's views on fighting terrorism as a "crime"

<...>

PRESIDENT BUSH: Yes, Jim.

Q Mr. President, the Prime Minister has referred to terrorism as "a crime," and he's referred to it in part as a law enforcement issue. So for you, I'm wondering, does that underscore any sort of philosophical difference when your 2004 campaign took issue with somewhat similar descriptions from John Kerry?

And Mr. Prime Minister, I've heard a lot about how your approach to the United States will be the same as that of your predecessor, but how will it differ?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Look, people who kill innocent men, women and children to achieve political objectives are evil, that's what I think. I don't think there's any need to negotiate with them. I don't think there's any need to hope that they'll change. They are cold-blooded killers, and we better be clear-eyed when we're dealing with them.

And this Prime Minister, right in the beginning of his office, got a taste of what it means to be in a world with these people that would come and attempt to kill innocent civilians of his country, and he handled it well.

But we're dealing with a variety of methodologies to deal with them: one is intelligence, one is law enforcement, and one is military. We got to use all assets at disposal to find them and bring them to justice before they hurt our people again.

In the long run, the way to defeat these people is through a competing ideology, see. And what's interesting about this struggle -- and this is what I was paying very careful attention to when Gordon was speaking -- is, does he understand it's an ideological struggle? And he does.

As he said to me, it's akin to the Cold War, and it is, except the difference this time is we have an enemy using asymmetrical warfare to try to affect our vision, to try to shake our will. They'll kill innocent women and children so it gets on the TV screens, so that we say it's not worth it -- let's just back off. The death they cause makes it -- maybe we just ought to let them have their way. And that's the great danger facing the world in which we live, and he gets it.

He can answer his own -- your question. What's the second half? I talked too long for --

link

Bush's hypocrisy:

"No, the president does not have a pre-9/11 mind-set"

The president defined "success" in Iraq Wednesday as "a level of violence where the people feel comfortable about living their daily lives." At today's White House press briefing, reporters asked Tony Snow to go a little further and describe an "acceptable" level of violence in Iraq. That's where the fun began:

Snow: You know, I think what you've managed to do is to try to -- we're now playing the adjective game. The fact is when you talk about an acceptable level, it is something that allows the government to exist independently. The problem is, everybody says, "Oh, so you accept violence. You like -- violence is OK." No, it's not OK. And so in abstract terms, zero violence is acceptable.

On the other hand, we know and the president has said many times that it is going to be a tactic of people who want to bring this government down to commit acts of violence. And violence, unfortunately, at least for a while, is going to be a fact of Iraqi life. What we're really talking about is trying to create conditions of security so that you can have a functional democracy in Iraq where people can go about their daily lives, where they have confidence in the rule of law and the people who are responsible for protecting them, that you have a legislative system that is protecting rights and at the same time getting on with the business -- economic reconstruction and so on. So that's really what we're talking about. What you're trying to do is to address the kinds of violence that are designed to destroy Iraq; for instance, al-Qaida recent attacks that are designed not only to create a lot of bloodshed and to weaken the government but also to reignite sectarian violence ... And so those are the issues, those that jeopardize the very existence of the government. Those are the things that we want to address.

Reporter: Minimize violence to a nuisance?

Snow: What you want to do is to be able to have the government in a position where it can stand by itself. And I think trying to get into definitional matters at this point is ...

Reporter: In October of 2004 John Kerry said, "We have to get to the place where we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance." The president said he couldn't disagree more. Cheney called this naive and dangerous, and part of the pre-9/11 mind-set. So does the president now have a pre-9/11 mind-set?

Snow: No, the president does not have a pre-9/11 mind-set. And the fact is -- I'll have to go back and take a look, but my recollection is that there was an attempt to, kind of, minimize some of the security challenges. But I don't want to put words in Senator Kerry's mouth without looking back at the 2004 debate. It is important to realize that you're going to have to use military force, and especially in conjunction with the Iraqis, to address violence that comes from a whole series of factors, whether they be old members of the Baath Party, whether they be Iraqi rejectionists or whether they be foreign fighters coming in and trying to destroy the government.

Think Progress video: Tony Snow challenged on Bush hypocrisy.

[liberal N proud]

1. Fearmongering

Will America fall for it?

[ProSense]

3. Depends on how they sell it and how it's countered.

Put nothing past the media and their ability to play on the ignorance of people who really don't pay attention. Expect them to sell Iraq as a victory and find a way to promote McBush's POV.

[Swede]

2. I've forgotten what happened on September 11th.

Happens all the time to us lefties.

[Occam Bandage]

4. McCain has a Sept. 12th, 1901 mindset.

[annabanana]

9. Naw.. It's a July 3rd 1776 mindset...

Regent of King George the Shit

[Oregone]

5. Obama should use this!

Why should a single event change the way man thinks after centuries of human history? Why should a tradegy belittle our need to help people, educate citizens, aid the world? Is it no longer important that we have starving children in the streets, that we have entire families losing their homes? Is it no longer important......

[flpoljunkie]

6. The Real September 10th Mind Set: Ignoring PDB titled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack the U. S."

That is, ignoring obvious warnings because they do not fit with an ideological mind set that Saddam Hussein is the great threat to the United States.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/10/august6.memo/

[ProSense]

8. Bush's mindset. n/t

[ProSense]

7. Obama Camp Hits Back on Terrorism

Obama Camp Hits Back on Terrorism

By Matthew DeLong 06/17/2008 03:41PM

Terrorism remained the campaign issue of the day, as Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Richard Clarke, former counterterrorism adviser to Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, wasted no time in responding to attacks from the McCain campaign this morning about statements Sen. Barack Obama made yesterday regarding his strategy for fighting terrorism. Kerry began by linking Sen. John McCain to what he called the "indefensible" policies of the Bush administration. From a conference call hosted by the Obama campaign:

"Afghanistan is more challenging today than it was yesterday, or a month ago, or a year ago, or certainly in the immediate aftermath of 2001. It is sliding into chaos. The Taliban is launching an offensive in the south. Al Qaeda, by our own intelligence community’s estimates, has enjoying a recruiting boon because of the misguided war in Iraq and because of the missteps we’ve made with respect to Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Our military is overstretched in Iraq, according to every single military expert who has testified before the Congress. We’ve spent nearly $1 trillion, lost 4,092 lives, fighting a war of choice that had nothing to do with the attacks that were launched against the United States. The United States is less safe, less respected, less able to lead in the world. That is the record that John McCain has chosen to embrace...

John McCain is Washington’s biggest supporter for the worst foreign-policy decision of our generation. He’s failed to learn the lessons of Sept. 11. We are paying for that failure today, and he is the candidate of the Iraq war mindset, a mindset that completely misunderstands and dangerously underestimates the threats of the 21st century."

Clarke accused the McCain campaign of using "Karl Rove" tactics and praised Obama's counterterrorism strategy for being far more comprehensive than McCain's.

The fact is, where you put the emphasis within that strategy does matter. What McCain is doing, at least in his statements is putting the emphasis on military means. Clearly, military means are appropriate as part of a comprehensive strategy. But 99 percent of the time they’re not, and they are in fact counterproductive. By continuing the war in Iraq, a military measure, we’re actually being very counterproductive in the war on terror...

We have a comprehensive strategy, top to bottom: adding capability to foreign governments, police forces and militaries; strengthening the U.S. military; going after the ideological dimension; eliminating sanctuary. It’s a very comprehensive approach."

<...>

The McCain campaign was quick to reaffirm its message that Obama will only pursue a legal strategy against terrorists. Former GOP presidential candidate and New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who made his leadership following the Sept. 11 attacks the centerpiece of his primary campaign, issued this statement on behalf of McCain:

"Throughout this campaign, I have been very concerned that the Democrats want to take a step back to the failed policies that treated terrorism solely as a law enforcement matter rather than a clear and present danger. Barack Obama appears to believe that terrorists should be treated like criminals -- a belief that underscores his fundamental lack of judgment regarding our national security. In a post 9/11 world, we need to remain on offense against the terrorist threat which seeks to destroy our very way of life. We need a leader like John McCain who has the experience and judgment necessary to protect the American people."

It is worth noting that the McCain campaign, in releasing this statement, did not address the specific points raised by Kerry and Clarke on the other elements of Obama's counterterrorism strategy.

(Emphasis added)

[unblock]

10. that is SO 2001.

[ProSense]

11. Kerry: McCain Bin Laden Argument 'Phony'

Kerry: McCain Bin Laden Argument 'Phony'

June 17, 2008 3:53 PM

ABC News' Teddy Davis, Gregory Wallace, and James Gerber Report: Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., suggested Tuesday that Osama Bin Laden would be entitled to Habeas Corpus rights under a recent Supreme Court decision should he be detained by the United States at Guantanamo Bay.

Kerry argued, however, that it is wrong for the McCain campaign to ascribe this reading of the al Qaeda leader's rights to Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., since any president would be bound by last week's 5-4 ruling on the rights of Guantanamo detainees to access federal courts.

"The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that they have those rights," said Kerry, referring to all terror suspects held at Guantanamo Bay. "This is not Barack Obama. This is the Supreme Court of the United States. If John McCain were president, he would have to give them those rights. This is a phony argument."

Kerry, who made his remarks on an Obama campaign conference call with the media, was responding to comments made by McCain adviser Randy Schuenemann on an earlier conference call. The McCain foreign policy adviser urged reporters to ask Obama "if he believes that if Osama Bin Laden were captured and taken to Guantanamo whether he should have Habeas rights."

more