The Slim Line Between Cheney And Obama.
Jon Meacham's column on why Dick Cheney should run for president is about as well thought out as it sounds:
But I think we should be taking the possibility of a Dick Cheney bid for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012 more seriously, for a run would be good for the Republicans and good for the country. (The sound you just heard in the background was liberal readers spitting out their lattes.)
A contest between Obama and Cheney, Meacham says would be definitive. "Whatever the result," Meacham writes, "there could be no ambiguity about the will of the people." This is of a piece with the far-right philosophy that elections only count when Republicans win them, despite Meacham's insistence that this hypothetical election would "adjudicate the George W. Bush years in a direct way." All of this already happened during the 2008 election. It's just that, sensing voter dissatisfaction with the president, Meacham and conservatives would like a do-over, as though they could simply erase the 2008 rejection of of the GOP by the American electorate.
I excerpted the quote where Meacham uses "latte" as a cultural shorthand for liberal effeteness because I think it explains basically everything that's wrong with Meacham's column. Cheney of course, is a huge fan of skim lattes, the kind of trivial fact that might be well known if it fit the kind of political shorthand lazy journalists employ in the absence of actual, well, journalism.
The idea Meacham is trying to convey is that Cheney, unlike the latte-sipping "girlie men" who make up the Democratic Party, is "tough on terror," while the drone assassination–happy, secret prison–running, state secrets doctrine–abusing, unreformed PATRIOT Act–supporting, torture photo–blocking, military commissions–convening, racial profiling Obama administration is made up of weaklings who just happen to have constructed a policy that looks virtually identical to the prior administration except where it is more aggressive. Meacham doesn't realize that he's demanding a "referendum" on policies Cheney and Obama actually agree on almost entirely in substance, with the exception of torture and closing Guantanamo Bay prison. The battle between Obama and Cheney has been partisan political theater -- but Meacham, apparently lacking any real knowledge on the subject, presents "latte" as a cultural shorthand for liberalism, when it's properly a shorthand for crappy journalism that relies on political totems rather than actual research.
-- A. Serwer
Feeds: 



COMMENTS (10)
Come on. Cheney is white and Obama is black - what else do you need to know?
Posted by: SteinL | November 30, 2009 10:06 AM
Meacham is also the same guy who defended Newsweek's insane cover of Palin. Does this guy have any credibility?
Posted by: Anonymous | November 30, 2009 10:09 AM
A contest between Obama and Cheney, Meacham says would be definitive. "Whatever the result," Meacham writes, "there could be no ambiguity about the will of the people."
Bring it.
Posted by: Noam Sane | November 30, 2009 11:03 AM
I think the question of closing Guantanamo is still open. The administration won't meet the one year deadline, and the resignations of Phillip Carter and Greg Craig bode ill.
Posted by: JayAckroyd | November 30, 2009 11:31 AM
I don't know of anyone besides Broder who is more representative of the Village and its decadent moral corruption and lazy self-absorbtion that this idiot. I'm really going to enjoy it when Newsweek goes under and takes this jackass with it.
Posted by: Lee Gibson | November 30, 2009 12:36 PM
Cheney cant run. He already served two terms.
That aside, Meachem is another example of the "liberal media" that is really a joke to anyone with a brain.
Posted by: Chris from Maine | November 30, 2009 1:14 PM
"Lattes," even. Can't these guys update their derisive liberal signifiers once in a while? Overpriced coffee is so early nineties.
Posted by: gil mann | November 30, 2009 3:29 PM
This is of a piece with the far-right philosophy that elections only count when Republicans win them
They don't even have to win them -- just as long as they can semi-plausibly steal them. See: Florida, 2000.
Posted by: Peter Principle | November 30, 2009 3:46 PM
I think that a Palin run has a better chance than a Cheney one. She can at least work up some enthusiasm.
I imagine that the kind of people who would be big into a Cheney presidency aren't the type who do phone banks. They contribute a lot of money, but campaign as boringly as possible. I'll bet Cheney would get the lukewarm support from his party that Obama is getting from his own.
Posted by: Sara Anderson | November 30, 2009 8:28 PM
I think the question of closing Guantanamo is still open. The administration won't meet the one year deadline, and the resignations of Phillip Carter and Greg Craig bode ill.
Posted by: wholesale clothing | December 1, 2009 3:25 AM