Talk of “taking out” terrorists, juxtaposed with a stout defense of habeas corpus, confuses me; it’s like an episode of 24 mashed up with a Con Law class. And yes, I know, I’m guilty of pre-9/11 thinking. Regardless, starting around 3:55, Senator Obama’s on fire*. And from 4:30 on, he brings tears to my eyes**.
* Not literally. Don’t worry.
** Literally. You can worry if you want to.
The Edge of the American West 
30 comments
September 9, 2008 at 3:19 pm
eric
One of the things that I find impressive, is how guys like this can find the question in the question.
September 9, 2008 at 3:22 pm
ari
Message discipline, I think they call it.
September 9, 2008 at 3:23 pm
eric
How many of the people in that room were undecideds?
September 9, 2008 at 3:26 pm
ari
Aren’t we all undecideds, if you really think about it?
September 9, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Vance
Was Obama really surprised by how well the line about “got to catch them first” went over? He acts as though it just happened inadvertently.
While I agree with him, obviously, and am glad to see him hammering on these themes, I feel there’s a wide rhetorical gap that still needs plugging. What do we say to the Republican who claims that there are terrorists too evil to be granted habeas corpus rights? That there are cases so sensitive they can’t be tried in open court? And I mean literally, what do we say — what’s the debate tactic? Can a variant of “Show me” be made to work?
September 9, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Levi Stahl
Vance,
I don’t know if it would work, since I’m so completely not the target audience, but I think I’d try:
“Do you really think terrorists are stronger than the American people? Because I don’t. Do you really think they’re stronger than our two centuries of being a moral light for the world? Because I don’t. Do you think that terrorists are more of a threat than the Nazis? Because I don’t. There is no terrorist in the world who I would bet on against the United States Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the American people.”
September 9, 2008 at 3:54 pm
andrew
I think it’s as simple as talking about what we’re fighting for, rather than who we’re fighting against.
September 9, 2008 at 4:11 pm
Neddy Merrill
I am both thrilled to see this and terrified that it sounds so novel. I hated that Giuliani line so goddamned much. Haha, rights.
September 9, 2008 at 4:22 pm
politicalfootball
Vance, Obama answered your questions soundbyteably enough: you don’t mock the Constitution. Levi gets it.
Will this work? Maybe not, but it has the virtue of being a decent and liberal and American response.
Your question suggests a certain justifiable distrust of the human ability to reconcile rhetoric with the truth, but what’s the alternative? At some point, you have to count on Americans choosing the right thing. They aren’t going to be tricked into decency, not in the long run. At some point, leaders have to stand up and advocate on behalf of – to coin a slogan – “change.”
September 9, 2008 at 4:24 pm
politicalfootball
Neddy, that was Palin (though it could easily have been Guiiani, too. I didn’t watch his speech.)
September 9, 2008 at 5:10 pm
CharleyCarp
We have procedures for handling national security sensitive information in court. Anyway, what kind of idiocy is it to claim that you can’t allow judicial examination of the incarceration of people the government thinks are nobodys, becase there are some somebodys.
What does it mean to be too evil for a trial. Worse that Daumer? Manson? We tried ’em, and they’re in jail.
“Are you afraid to put KSM on trial? What, he might say something mean?”
September 9, 2008 at 5:12 pm
CharleyCarp
All that said, the government is doing an excellent job resisting the Supreme Court’s admonition to get the cases going. Lyle has a post on the latest . . .
September 9, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Vance
Anyway, what kind of idiocy is it to claim that you can’t allow judicial examination of the incarceration of people the government thinks are nobodys, becase there are some somebodys.
Uh — popular, Republican idiocy, enabled by a compliant press?
September 9, 2008 at 5:48 pm
kid bitzer
you know what’s fucking weird?
i have yet to see obama turn in a performance that struck a false note.
by this time in the campaigns of most of the democratic candidates of my lifetime, they had said something–or several things–that just made me cringe on hearing it, something that embarrassed me and made me want to disown my affiliation with them.
this guy is astounding.
and that thing about “the guy running for president”?
when he said that, it really did all of a sudden sound like he’s just some guy, pretty much like any one of us, who, improbably enough, is running for president.
it had the opposite effect from the third-person references of bob dole. “bob dole will never do that as president,” he’d say, and you’d think, “you’re a fruitcake; no one talks about himself that way unless he thinks he’s a destiny, unless he thinks he is god’s chosen one.”
but this guy? he just seems like a guy, running for president.
and at the same time–damn he’s good.
September 9, 2008 at 5:57 pm
urbino
you know what’s fucking weird?
Everybody has their own little fetishes and deviancies, kid. They’re all expressions of human sexuality, so it’s not fair to call any of them “weird.”
And from 4:30 on, he brings tears to my eyes
You’re so weepy, of late.
September 9, 2008 at 5:58 pm
urbino
Uh — popular, Republican idiocy, enabled by a compliant press?
That.
September 9, 2008 at 6:30 pm
Colin
I like the discussion of habeas c, and we could do with even more explanation of why letting gov’ts detain people at whim is a bad idea. But what exactly does “take ’em out” mean in this context?
September 9, 2008 at 6:38 pm
grackle
Well, I’ve got a hanky for you Ari – I mean you can use mine because this doesn’t make me weepy but it does give me some hope since I was in despair over not seeing any mention of Habeas Corpus heretofore. All I can do is say yes yes KB is right, this is a guy I can get behind.
September 9, 2008 at 7:12 pm
zunguzungu
Has there been a democrat who’s so adept at dismissing his opponents without turning off his audience? Biden is okay, but he still comes off as kind of arsehole. But the amused contempt of the “Rudy or Palin or whoever” line is so pitch perfect, and the icy righteousness of “Don’t mock the constitution” too. I guess I’m sort of echoing Kid’s amazement at how good the guy is.
Don’t care for the flipness of “take em out,” though.
September 9, 2008 at 7:45 pm
bitchphd
Agreed that “you don’t mock the constitution” is the soundbite.
What I find interesting about this is that yes, on the one hand, he finds the question in the question–but on the other, despite that and “you gotta catch ’em first,” he doesn’t talk in sound bites. Which is appealing to me as a non-sound-bitey person whose kid learned early on to say things like “you have a point, but.” It worries me, though, as a partisan: is he too thoughtful? Does he need to be snappier?
September 9, 2008 at 7:49 pm
ari
Does he need to be snappier?
If you can figure out what appeals to swing voters, B, will you let me know. We can start a consultancy and make some serious money.
September 9, 2008 at 7:49 pm
ari
And yes, I’ll be riding your coattails. Whatever.
September 9, 2008 at 7:52 pm
ari
Also, forgetting soundbites, I think the real story of this video is his courage in identifying himself with an (even a hypothetical) accused terrorist.
September 9, 2008 at 8:15 pm
Vance
ari @7:52: hear, hear. He even plays with the Arabic associations of his own name — conveys a certain self-confidence.
September 9, 2008 at 8:31 pm
tf smith
$2,300 to the Obama-Biden campaign. I’m tapped out.
I have two sons, one in the class of 2012 and the other in 2015 – I’d rather the country was not still involved in multiple Land Wars In Asia (TM) by the time they graduate from high school, thanks – I am the third generation in my family to have been there and done that. Three is enough, I think.
As my favorite Republican said, you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.
September 9, 2008 at 8:41 pm
bitchphd
I think the real story of this video is his courage in identifying himself with an (even a hypothetical) accused terrorist.
Yeah, well, just wait until McCain spins it.
September 9, 2008 at 8:48 pm
dana
I really like the explanation of habeas as ‘if the government grabs you…’ (aside from the ‘reason is because’ bit.) The dude is such a nerdy prof at heart.
September 9, 2008 at 8:56 pm
Thelonious
I’m a Barack supporter, but I was extremely disappointed in his decision to support the FISA bill this summer. It’s hard to reconcile this exchange with the decision to support a bill that allows the government to continue warrantless wiretapping of US citizens.
September 9, 2008 at 9:23 pm
urbino
Which is appealing to me as a non-sound-bitey person whose kid learned early on to say things like “you have a point, but.” It worries me, though, as a partisan: is he too thoughtful? Does he need to be snappier?
PK? I find non-snappy thoughtfulness endearing in small children.
September 10, 2008 at 7:59 am
“Don’t Mock the Constitution.” « PostBourgie
[…] [Via.] […]