I find the present Dick Cheney fascinating. Rarely do you see someone stand up for what he believes as adamantly and as publicly . It should make one wonder how much credibility there may actually be in what he says.
The two main issues are the closing of the prison at Guantanamo; the other the use of "enhanced interrogation". Both go to the issue of keeping America safe from future attacks by Islamic extremists. When you see Obama inching ever closer to Bush policies, one could conclude campaign rhetoric can't always be backed up by fact.
The idea that this has become a political hot potato bothers me. I have to agree with Secretary of Defense Gates and former Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge when they state that
Obama has not done anything to undermine our security.
What I do agree with is that Cheney has been the point man for the Republicans in his criticism, as exaggerated as it may be. According to Bloomberg.com he has taken the fight to Obama because he has no further political ambitions. That indicates other Republicans agree with him but don't have the courage to stand with him.
When John Feehery, a Republican strategist says whats being argued is how far is it necessary to go to protect the country. The Bush administration did everything they could. The Obama administration is asking if "everything" was necessary.
It's an interesting argument. It's also interesting that Dick Cheney is doing better in opinion polls. He's resonating with someone!
Somewhere between the two opinions is probably the best option. The question in my mind is whether or not the Republicans can get beyond their own political ambitions to do what's right for the country? They had help from the Democrats in holding back funding for Gitmo's closure but they're going to have to find their own voice.
If Cheney alone is their voice and there is another attack, he wins. Not the Republicans. And certainly not the country.