WSJ: Obama may retain Bush interrogation policies, Gates as SecDef

posted at 12:55 pm on November 11, 2008 by Allahpundit

Not so Changey.

President-elect Barack Obama is unlikely to radically overhaul controversial Bush administration intelligence policies, advisers say, an approach that is almost certain to create tension within the Democratic Party…

“He’s going to take a very centrist approach to these issues,” said Roger Cressey, a former counterterrorism official in the Clinton and Bush administrations. “Whenever an administration swings too far on the spectrum left or right, we end up getting ourselves in big trouble.”…

[H]e more recently voted for a White House-backed law to expand eavesdropping powers for the National Security Agency. Mr. Obama said he opposed providing legal immunity to telecommunications companies that aided warrantless surveillance, but ultimately voted for the bill, which included an immunity provision.

The new president could take a similar approach to revising the rules for CIA interrogations, said one current government official familiar with the transition. Upon review, Mr. Obama may decide he wants to keep the road open in certain cases for the CIA to use techniques not approved by the military, but with much greater oversight

Advisers caution that few decisions will be made until the team gets a better picture of how the Bush administration actually goes about gathering intelligence, including covert programs, and there could be a greater shift after a full review.

He and Dubya do have a lot in common, the Wash Times wryly observes. Actually, though, the boldface part most closely reflects the thinking of yet another president — namely, Clinton, who famously (or, rather, not famously) endorsed coercive interrogation two years ago in ticking bomb scenarios provided there’s some oversight mechanism like FISA review. Alan Dershowitz had the same idea, going so far as to propose “torture warrants” for exceptional cases. If The One does in fact load up his cabinet with old Clinton hands like Emanuel and Lawrence Summers at Treasury, and if it’s true that he’s made taking out Bin Laden a top priority, some variation on the Billy Jeff plan would be an obvious way to let him maneuver in extracting info from “difficult” subjects on Osama’s whereabouts or other pressing matters.

That said, does anyone seriously believe he’s going to pick a fight with the left on this, of all subjects? Dubya’s intel policies lie at the core of the nutroots’s Bushitler derangement; The One’s de facto ratification of warrantless wiretapping in his vote for telecom immunity was the one sin for which they really hammered him during the campaign. He needs his base early on, especially if things get hairy with the economy and/or Iran, and this would be the surest way to alienate them. I think Gabe’s right, that we’ll soon be told it’s a case of an “overzealous” aide having spoken “inartfully” about Obama’s plans and that he fully intends to make the CIA a waterboard-free zone — which it’s been since 2003, you may recall, and which it was before 2003 except in three cases.

Elsewhere in the Journal, rumor has it that The One is thinking of keeping Gates on for at least another year. A fine idea, no matter which way he’s leaning on Iraq. But then, you already knew that too.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

The more things changey; the more they say the samey.

lorien1973 on November 11, 2008 at 12:57 PM

he fully intends to make the CIA a waterboard-free zone — which it’s been since 2003, you may recall, and which it was before 2003 except in three cases.

Much ado about nothing.

D0WNT0WN on November 11, 2008 at 12:58 PM

Heh.

Not only is this one of the few good decisions he might make, but it will also result in the Kos Kidz as well as the civil libertarians duped into voting for him to blow a gasket. Double bonus, baby!

thirteen28 on November 11, 2008 at 12:58 PM

Obama new thought process: What would Bush Do?

Firebird on November 11, 2008 at 12:59 PM

Bush’s 3rd term? I thought that was what O’bama was running against?

Del Dolemonte on November 11, 2008 at 12:59 PM

Are you kidding? The guy is from Chicago. He probably knows people who could teach the CIA a thing or two about information extraction.

MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 12:59 PM

I don’t mind. Gates is competent and there’s something to be said for having a little continuity while we’re fighting 2 wars.

crr6 on November 11, 2008 at 12:59 PM

What this is, is the O getting a little dose of reality and figuring out that we aint just preaching slogans anymore. I am going to have to actually lead! OH CRAP!

Haha this is actually going to be a fun couple years to watch in a sick kinda way….

HoosierCon on November 11, 2008 at 1:00 PM

Yeah, right. And he may not, too.

Bruno Strozek on November 11, 2008 at 1:00 PM

sorta reminds me of when Klinton said if elected he’d reverse the Daddy Bush policy of returning Haitian boat aliens to Haiti. Once he took office hundreds of Haitians got in rickity old boats and tried to get to Florida. Many of them sadly drowned in overcrowded boats that sank. Klinton suddenly decided to stay with Bush’s policy. Duh.

Tony737 on November 11, 2008 at 1:01 PM

The Obamites are in for a rude awakening.

flyawaybird on November 11, 2008 at 1:02 PM

Rush was just all over this, he didn’t sound happy. ha

abinitioadinfinitum on November 11, 2008 at 1:02 PM

Hilarious. The buttsniffing left suddenly has a new understanding of national defense. Good for them!

Rush started his show with a riotous series of MSM-sycophant clips, all describing Bush’s conduct toward Obama with one word: graciousness.

They are so pathetic, it’s impossible to parody them. After describing him as Chimpy McBusHitler for eight years, now he’s “gracious”.

Rush cobbled together at least 20 separate newsissies using the exact same word in 24 hours.

Jaibones on November 11, 2008 at 1:02 PM

Kos Kidz as well as the civil libertarians duped into voting for him to blow a gasket. Double bonus, baby!

thirteen28 on November 11, 2008 at 12:58 PM

Cant wait for that. Priceless

MDWNJ on November 11, 2008 at 1:03 PM

Hold the phone! When is Matt Lauer going to the ovaloffice to poke his finger in Obama’s chest and interrogate HIM about this great injustice?

JustTruth101 on November 11, 2008 at 1:03 PM

I guess we’ll see if all that outrage expressed by the left during the Bush years was all for show now. That has been one of the greatest criticisms I’ve heard from rank and file supporters.

EconomicNeocon on November 11, 2008 at 1:04 PM

After voting for McCain, I’m starting to feel some hope here. I’m pretty sure it won’t last, but the HOPE!

DarkCurrent on November 11, 2008 at 1:05 PM

people fail to realize that Obama can pick plenty of fights with the left…hes got a mandate a democrat president hasn’t had in a really really long time…he’s got the top democrat fight picker as chief of staff. he’s got a lot more wiggle room to do the right thing than people give him credit for here. lets watch him in action before we come to any conclusion

ernesto on November 11, 2008 at 1:05 PM

If Gates doesn’t push Obama hard and fast, I’d rather he relinquish the position and force Obama to pick his SecDef.

Christien on November 11, 2008 at 1:05 PM

if he gets rid of this stuff, and then we are attacked he and the Democrats are doomed politically.

maybe he gets rid of it, then re-enacts his own version called the “Hope Act” or something.

Exit Question: Who are the nutroots to question their messiah and redeemer?

pointing out this stuff to the left nuts in the coming years, where Obama does things like Bush, will be alot of fun.

jp on November 11, 2008 at 1:05 PM

Maybe Obama is Rove’s Manchurian Candidate.

Rove you magnificent bastard.

HAHA :)

Lance Murdock on November 11, 2008 at 1:06 PM

Think Obama may have been mugged by reality when he got his first intel briefing the other day?

flipflop on November 11, 2008 at 1:06 PM

I can feel the CHANGE wash over me, giving me HOPE, and I am calm.

Abby Adams on November 11, 2008 at 1:06 PM

I’ll bet his first security briefing was a real wake up call. Hopefully he now realizes that American lives are in his hands, and that he will be responsible for sending troops in harms way to prevent it.

redshirt on November 11, 2008 at 1:06 PM

one thing that people tend to forget, Socialist are usually all for Eavesdropping and “Big Brother” type measures. and into parts of our actual day to day lives, unlike the Patriot Act and common sense national defense measures.

jp on November 11, 2008 at 1:08 PM

big winner here could be the paultards. If Obama completely betrays the nutroots, the last place they can go if this is really what gets them going, will be the Libertarians.

honestly, there could be the first Internet War to break out over this between the nutroots at Kos and the Libertarian wings elsewhere who have been allied on this.

Happy Thought of the day: Kos trying to manage this and all the criticism about to come to his candidate of choice way soon.

jp on November 11, 2008 at 1:12 PM

Funny how those same tools of going after the bad guys can be used in reverse. I do not know why, but I keep seeing shades of FBI files in Clinton colors. Is it not going to be supremely sublime to have FISA applied to those of us who only oppose Obama’s policies? Can anyone say the Conservative blogs and talk radio? Meanwhile, every terrorist sleeper cell with be able to sleep soundly. Wonder if we will have all the legal resources that the terrorist will if any of them are ever arrested?

Gates is okay, and Ralph Peters suggested Obama needed to do this and then get Richard Holbrooke. He said this yesterday in the NY Post.

freeus on November 11, 2008 at 1:13 PM

Maybe Obama is Rove’s Manchurian Candidate. – Lance

Haha. I was asking a Buddy O’Mine the other day “How funny would it be if once in office, Obama governed from the far right? Imagine all the lefty heads exploding all over the world!” hahaha

Tony737 on November 11, 2008 at 1:13 PM

Hmm, Bush interrogation policies..you mean TORTURE!!!!1!
I guess it is only torture when BUSHITLERCHIMPYHALIBURTON is the one using them.

carbon_footprint on November 11, 2008 at 1:14 PM

You mean the reality of fighting terror has rained on Barry’s coronation? Wonder how the drive-by’s (now functioning as a “convoy”) and the far left will receive this news. Probably spin it as he had no choice.

sladenyv on November 11, 2008 at 1:14 PM

Think Obama may have been mugged by reality when he got his first intel briefing the other day?

flipflop on November 11, 2008 at 1:06 PM

Ding!
Nothing like a good dose of intel to make one grow up.

carbon_footprint on November 11, 2008 at 1:15 PM

Nope, this way when we are attacked in Obama’s first year, it can blame it on Bush and have Gates/interrogation policies as his ammo.

carbon_footprint on November 11, 2008 at 1:16 PM

Important Action Alert:

Man the lard umbrellas! Rosie O’ is gonna frakkin’ explode when she hears about this!

hillbillyjim on November 11, 2008 at 1:16 PM

LOL.

I knew it. He is Bill Clinton. He is going to break the lefts heart again, and again, and again. He is running for reelection period. Obama’s most dependable attribute is his ambition period. Now that he is President the only next step is reelection. He is not going to risk that for those far left morons. Where policy falls directly on him he is going to give great rhetoric for the left but not do a darn thing, and the media will help him do it. The media will spin it as a departure from Bush policy while maintain the same efficacy but not changing anything. Presto chango!

His challenge is Democrats. While he is selling us on New Deal policies how does he ensure far left policies do not reach his desk? Will he veto his own parties legislation? Probably not. Especially not in the fiorst days. And Rahm Emmanuel’s rhetoric is hinting at a big policy shift in the economy, healthcare, and defecit spending which I’m all for.

Theworldisnotenough on November 11, 2008 at 1:17 PM

You mean the reality of fighting terror has rained on Barry’s coronation? Wonder how the drive-by’s (now functioning as a “convoy”) and the far left will receive this news. Probably spin it as he had no choice.

sladenyv on November 11, 2008 at 1:14 PM

simple, the nation will now finally be informed by the MSM about the dangers out there and need for this stuff. There are alot of scary stories the MSM could run. They didn’t because it helped Bush to do so.

had Bush been a liberal democrat and done most of what he has done, he would be a very popular president at the moment. He’d be known as a great liberator of millions and strong leader who had completely dismantled Al-Qaeda network and the State Sponsors like the evil Saddam hussein.

we will never have ‘real change’ in this country unless we figure out some way to blunt the Media’s influence

jp on November 11, 2008 at 1:18 PM

maybe the MSM will now play documentaries like Obsession and “Third Jihad”, so the public will better understand the threats we face.

jp on November 11, 2008 at 1:20 PM

SECOND LOOK AT GEORGE W. BUSH!!!!

rockmom on November 11, 2008 at 1:20 PM

Just wait’ll everyone realizes “tax cuts for the middle class” was just a repeated misspelling of “tax hikes for everyone so bend over and prepare yourself for a historic ass coring”.

Chuck Schick on November 11, 2008 at 1:20 PM

I’ll bet his first security briefing was a real wake up call. Hopefully he now realizes that American lives are in his hands, and that he will be responsible for sending troops in harms way to prevent it.

redshirt on November 11, 2008 at 1:06 PM

Brit Hume said last night these are described as hair raising especially when first hearing them. I wouldn’t be surprised if the One was shaken to his core and feels he must spend some political capital to back off this issue. Most of the MSM will fall over themselves to make anything he does justifiable. I read Katrina vanden Heuvel’s laundry list for his center left agenda in the first 100 days. She and her ilk are going to be ticked. Should this be retracted we’ll see how much backbone Obama has with respect to the far left, my guess is not much.

msmveritas on November 11, 2008 at 1:22 PM

Obama won’t give up his base. Don’t watch the hand in sight,…watch the one behind his back. Who does he like best,..Emanuel or Ayers? The former is an instrument to be used, the latter is a soulmate.

a capella on November 11, 2008 at 1:22 PM

Obama will be busting unions and slashing spending next.

lodge on November 11, 2008 at 1:25 PM

If this is true, then GOOD for him. As a conservative who cares about my country more than the club I belong to, if he chooses to do the right thing I will support him, and let him know that he has my support in doing the right thing. (of coure the converse applies as well)

A part of me (eensie weensy hopey-changey part) believes he has the chance to actually be a good president. It is the positive side to him being SO inexperienced is that the enormity of the job may just immobilize him a bit on his march leftward. We can thank Bush for giving Obama the right impression of the job he is about to undertake.

rightallthetime on November 11, 2008 at 1:26 PM

I don’t buy it.

He’s most likely playing “I’m a deep thinker, and intend to think deeply about these matters before I reflexively dismiss many security measures like one of Pavlov’s droooling pooches”

I could be wrong though.

Itchee Dryback on November 11, 2008 at 1:26 PM

don’t underestimate the far-lefts ability to do a 180 on a red meat issue for themselves, to prop up Dear Leader

jp on November 11, 2008 at 1:27 PM

That said, does anyone seriously believe he’s going to pick a fight with the left on this, of all subjects? Dubya’s intel policies lie at the core of the nutroots’s Bushitler derangement;

No, Dubya is the core of nutroots’ derangement. Intel policies were just a convenient hook. I now expect the probama media to whistle past the graveyard on this. We have to focus on the economy, Gitmo & associated items will be buried on page A14.

rbj on November 11, 2008 at 1:27 PM

There will be no need for harshness or interrogation in Otopia…
/d’oh!

max1 on November 11, 2008 at 1:31 PM

The Obama/Oprah Koolaid drinkers will not see this as a betrayal. They MUST worship The ONE and The ONE cannot do the wrong thing even if he tried, so it MUST be the right thing and the only thing The ONE can do to keep us safe. Even though, it LOOKS exactly like what The Evil BusHitler did, The Evil BusHitler was doing it because The Evil BusHitler loves killing people and torturing innocent people… because.. because he’s The Evil BusHitler.

So we’ll not get much indigestion over The ONE’s continuation of The Evil BusHitler’s interrogation and eavesdropping policies.

Cause, he IS The ONE!

And now I musg hurl.

44Magnum on November 11, 2008 at 1:31 PM

Upon review, Mr. Obama may decide he wants to keep the road open in certain cases for the CIA to use techniques not approved by the military, but with much greater oversight…

Upon further review, it doesn’t say he would apply those techniques to people that readers of this site might refer to as “bad guys.” It’s not too much of a stretch, then, to wonder if that civilian force might be empowered to use the retained measures as well.

EconomicNeocon on November 11, 2008 at 1:32 PM

Upon review, Mr. Obama may decide he wants to keep the road open in certain cases for the CIA to use techniques not approved by the military, but with much greater oversight

I think this means Obama will be personally administering the water-boardings.

DarkCurrent on November 11, 2008 at 1:32 PM

I want no I demand all those anti American leftists who write for the Daily Kos to start caling Obama a war criminal for even thinking of keeping the same techniques we use now. I think to be fair they have to demand he is also held for war crimes if he does this just like they want Bush to be. God i wish I could see the look on their worsthless anti American faces should he do this ad I hope he does for the of the country not just to piss them off.

Irvin88 on November 11, 2008 at 1:34 PM

You will now see real abuse of power

tomas on November 11, 2008 at 1:35 PM

The Obama/Oprah Koolaid drinkers will not see this as a betrayal. They MUST worship The ONE and The ONE cannot do the wrong thing even if he tried, so it MUST be the right thing and the only thing The ONE can do to keep us safe. Even though, it LOOKS exactly like what The Evil BusHitler did, The Evil BusHitler was doing it because The Evil BusHitler loves killing people and torturing innocent people… because.. because he’s The Evil BusHitler.

perhaps this is what Joe Biden meant by he will be tested

max1 on November 11, 2008 at 1:35 PM

must

44Magnum on November 11, 2008 at 1:36 PM

I would bet though if he kept waterboarding Kieth Oberman would change his tune and claim it was now tasteful while Mathews would call it effective

Irvin88 on November 11, 2008 at 1:37 PM

No, Dubya is the core of nutroots’ derangement. Intel policies were just a convenient hook.

I’ve pointed this out ad nauseum, but the “Snipers Wanted” incident took place when Bush accepted the GOP’s nomination… before the election, before Florida 2000, before 9/11. before Iraq. All he’d done at that point was be nominated, but that was enough to overlay that “Snipers Wanted” banner on-air.

saint kansas on November 11, 2008 at 1:38 PM

Uh oh. All those concerned and principled civil libertarians will soon be flooding the streets, calling Obama a war criminal and pushing for impeachment.

moxie_neanderthal on November 11, 2008 at 1:42 PM

Now that the Bush Administration’s time in office is down to its last couple of months, it is way too early, in my view, to predict his historical legacy. That will probably take at least a generation and largely depend on how Iraq and Afghanistan play out. I do think it appropriate, however, to contribute a few words on the president who is leaving office.

George Bush, from the moment he was sworn in following the controversial election in Florida, was greeted with hate from the left. Indeed, his motorcade was the target of a few eggs as it proceeded from the Capitol to the White House. The hate has never ceased-though he did enjoy a huge spike in support following 9-11. Except for that, the Democrats have done everything in their power to undermine and demean Bush even though he tried to reach out to them. The media also has spent most of the last 8 years contributing to the demonetization of the President, which he could never overcome.

To be sure, many conservatives have also been disappointed with some of Bush’s policies. His lax stand on illegal immigration and border security-even after 9-11, angered many on the right. The aggressive prosecution of two border agents who shot a Mexican drug smuggler caused many (including myself) to believe that the Bush Administration and its Justice Department was not supportive of the Border Patrol.

In addition, Bush, who came to office proclaiming himself a “compassionate conservative”, did nothing to reduce the size of government and cut government spending. As Congress (Democrat and Republican) was having an orgy of earmarks, Bush set aside his veto pen and let it roll on.

One unfortunate aspect of Bush is his inability to be articulate in front of a microphone in the absence of a prepared text. This hurt in two respects. First, he was unable to articulate his convictions. Secondly, it led to the public image fed by the late night comedians that he was a dolt, which he is not.

One area that Bush has done well in is the appointment of federal judges. In spite of unconscionable Democratic obstruction, he has managed to put two outstanding conservative judges on the Supreme Court (notwithstanding the Harriet Miers fiasco), as well as on the federal bench.

But it was his aggressive response to 9-11 that eventually sent liberals and Democrats over the edge. While Afghanistan was and is mostly supported, his invasion and occupation of Iraq sealed his doom. America has few allies in this endeavor, and the establishment of Gitmo and the NSA intercepts have led to the further demonetization of a president who, in my view, was trying to prevent any further
9-11s. To hear the left describe it, we have all lost our freedoms in the past 8 years.

As far as Iraq is concerned, if Bush was lying about weapons of mass destruction, then so was Clinton. The fact is that everyone believed Saddam was building WMD. The CII believed it. The UN believed it. All the major intelligence agencies in the world believed it. Saddam did everything in his power to make the world believe it. And why shouldn’t we have believed it? Saddam, in fact, used chemical weapons against Iran and against the Kurds in the north after the first Gulf War-in one instance, killing 5,000 Kurds in one village with poison gas.

Yet, whether or not they ever existed in terms or amounts we believed-or were dismantled or taken out of the country prior to the invasion, Saddam’s continued rule of Iraq was a world-wide scandal. As he and his sons terrorized an entire nation, major nations were being secretly bought off with oil vouchers to oppose any invasion. There was nothing principled in their opposition to an invasion. It was all about greed. Meanwhile, innocent Iraqis were being dragged off to torture centers, rape rooms and mass graves-by the tens of thousands-as the world sat by and twiddled their thumbs.

Say what you will, George Bush will go to his grave with two things on his resume that any world leader would envy. He removed two of the worst regimes in recent memory and gave some 50 million people an opportunity to live in some measure of freedom. What do the Jacques Chiracs, Gerhard Schroeders, Kofi Annans or Vladimir Putins have on their resumes?

In terms of fighting the war on terror, Bush has also drawn condemnation for the establishment of Guantanemo Bay as a detention center for captured terrorists-a center that will almost certainly be shut down by President Obama when he takes office. Many argue that the prisoners should be afforded the protections of the Geneva Convention-even though these terrorists represent no nation, wear no uniform, have signed no such accords, have targeted innocents as victims and do not abide themselves with any of the Geneva accords-preferring instead to torture, murder/behead their captives.

Others argue that we should overburden our federal court system with these terrorists even though the courts are not equipped to handle them in large numbers and may require the disclosure of classified material to prosecute them. Have we forgotten the German saboteurs who landed on our shores during World War II intent on wreaking havoc here? They were captured, brought before a military tribunal and most of them were executed as spies.

My point here is that these prisoners do not fit into any neat little category of law-breakers or prisoners of war. If you want to consider them as POWs-then they stay in captivity until the “war” is over. In this case, that will be a long time.

As to the NSA intercepts. I still cannot perceive any rational objection to these intercepts. In the wake of 9-11, these intercepts seem to be a perfectly rational response to the threat of mass murder being carried out here at home. If the NSA abroad has identified a terrorist telephone that they are monitoring and that telephone places a call to the US, what in God’s name is the problem with listening in and setting up a tap on the US phone? True, we have a normal procedure for wiretapping phones being used for criminal purposes using the normal court-authorized process. However, and I am speaking from personal experience (as a retired DEA agent), it is a cumbersome process that takes time and resources. The FISA court process is also available in cases of national security, but in the wake of 9-11, when speed may save thousands of lives, even that process was deemed to be insufficient to deal with the threat.

If George Bush has erred in the case of Gitmo and the NSA intercepts, he has done it for one reason-to prevent any future 9-11s on American soil-to save innocent lives. While much of America has gone back to sleep, Bush has remained vigilant. And to this point, he has succeeded (knock on wood). For that, George W Bush deserves our gratitude.

President Bush will leave office with an abysmally low approval rating, much as did Harry Truman, who today is regarded as one of our finest presidents. Many Republicans will blame him for the dire straits their party finds itself. Some of the criticism will be fair-some unfair. Through it all, however, Bush has withstood the hatred directed toward him with grace, which tells me that he is a good and decent man.

Bush’s final legacy will not be determined for a long time. Perhaps it will be that he foolishly believed that bringing democracy to a region that had never experienced it would remove the terrorist threat in the long term. Much of it will depend on the success or failure of Iraq. After 4-8 years of Obama, perhaps, Bush will look wiser to us. I do feel, however, that in a couple of generations, Bush’s reputation as president will be much higher than when he leaves office.

gary fouse
fousesquawk

gary fouse on November 11, 2008 at 1:42 PM

That said, does anyone seriously believe he’s going to pick a fight with the left on this, of all subjects? Dubya’s intel policies lie at the core of the nutroots’s Bushitler derangement

You’re assuming they actually make any of their political decisions based on principles. They’re pragmatists of the rawest sort. They would do anything at their disposal to gain and maintain power. The ends (a Marxist/socialist State) justify the means, always.

I doubt they’d care much if torture were used against their political enemies any more than they care if the full weight of law enforcement is used against them. Watch that movie. Listen to the cheers from Obama’s zombies when the McCain supporter is carted off to jail.

Not true of all, but I’d say it’s true of most, especially those in mid-to-high positions of power in the hierarchy of the Left.

spmat on November 11, 2008 at 1:44 PM

That said, does anyone seriously believe he’s going to pick a fight with the left on this, of all subjects?

Why not? They already voted.

Jim Treacher on November 11, 2008 at 1:45 PM

Keep Gates?

I guess he needs a fall guy.

Run, Bob, RUN!

drjohn on November 11, 2008 at 1:45 PM

Why not? They already voted.

Jim Treacher on November 11, 2008 at 1:45 PM

Well, there’s 2012! Gotta get ready!

Or maybe he realizes they’re too willingly idiotic to remember.

drjohn on November 11, 2008 at 1:46 PM

In case the moral is lost on lefties, here it is:

Any blowhard can smoke a doobie, invent a utopia, and demonize everyone else who is too stupid to get it.

But once that blowhard has to make a grown-up decision, he’ll put down the doobie and become a conservative.

Suck it up commies.

jeff_from_mpls on November 11, 2008 at 1:52 PM

It looks like a leak to check if anyone important cares. If there’s trouble, Obama can get out and deny that any decision has been taken by him.

the_nile on November 11, 2008 at 1:55 PM

Wait a minute. Since when is torturing suspects a bad thing? If information which can be verified is obtained, what’s the problem? Convoluted ideals of morality are not for nations to wrestle with. Nations do not have consciences. Such matters are only for the individual. Just as adultery may be wrong, we don’t pass laws against it for what offends an individual should have no bearing on what is in the best interests of the people as a whole.

Nations must protect their people and their self-interest. Every other concern is peripheral to that. If you have a problem with torturing terror suspects, all that means is that you have the right, in a free nation, to abstain from taking part. But because stronger men than you must do the dirty work that benefits all, you should be forced to pay a fee. Having a conscience is not free. It can be quite costly in fact. So every objector to this practice, should pay that fee. Heaven forbid the nation pays it.

keep the change on November 11, 2008 at 2:08 PM

Well those protesters are going to be really upset…seeing as they were the only ones “waterboarded” in the past several years.

right2bright on November 11, 2008 at 2:13 PM

Actually, Gates should step down just so I can die laughing at Obambi’s SecDef choice

lodge on November 11, 2008 at 2:19 PM

Obama is going to have to come down to earth a little after he learns more and more about the real world by having access to all information.

Grafted on November 11, 2008 at 2:22 PM

Obama is going to have to come down to earth a little after he learns more and more about the real world by having access to all information.

Grafted on November 11, 2008 at 2:22 PM

As someone stated…The office changes the man, the man doesn’t change the office.

right2bright on November 11, 2008 at 2:33 PM

Yeah, right. And he may not, too.

Bruno Strozek on November 11, 2008 at 1:00 PM

I don’t trust him.

Domino on November 11, 2008 at 3:28 PM

I think Obama might well screw his base. After all, they gave him money and voted for him. Who needs em now?

I also think that if there was anyway to get Osama, Bush would have done it. The idea that Barack Obama is going to come up with something new in the hunt for the terrorist is very unlikely.

Terrye on November 11, 2008 at 3:28 PM

The nutroots will forgive him anything short of being friends with Dick Cheney.

Speedwagon82 on November 11, 2008 at 3:34 PM

It doesn’t matter, the left will forget that they were against this; they are deranged.

Security Mom on November 11, 2008 at 3:49 PM

Think Obama may have been mugged by reality when he got his first intel briefing the other day?

flipflop on November 11, 2008 at 1:06 PM

Yes. Obama has put on his big-boy pants. He can’t play with the children anymore.

nyrofan on November 11, 2008 at 4:12 PM

Wouldn’t be surprised to see The One keep Gates in office.

I reckon his intelligence briefing was a real eye-opener, and the more I think about it the more I realise he simply hasn’t got the backbone to go against the entire military and intelligence community to execute some kind of moonbat fantasy re Iraq and terrorism in general.

Ares on November 11, 2008 at 5:00 PM

This way Obama can still blame Booooosh for everything that goes wrong.

nottakingsides on November 11, 2008 at 6:39 PM