Reason: Establishment media getting even more establishmenty on Obama, drones

posted at 9:21 am on February 8, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

The issue of fighting a shadow war against non-state terrorist networks has never been an easy call, not even before 9/11.  When and where to use military force, whether and how to capture terrorists rather than kill them or the other way around, what constitutes a “ticking time bomb” scenario and what it means for interrogations — none of these are easy questions.  Nor is the conundrum that has dominated headlines this week, which is what to do about American citizens who are suspected of joining such groups and participating in their plans to launch attacks, especially on the US.

However, one group has largely always treated these tough issues as cut-and-dried questions.  And as Reason’s Nick Gillespie points out, that’s been true in both the Bush and Obama administrations.  The difference is that they switched sides, arguing dissent, human rights, and the Constitution during Bush’s tenure.  These days, though, they’re arguing that the President should be given the benefit of the doubt when it comes to targeting Americans for assassination:

Back in the day, [Daily Beast writer Michael] Tomasky was a reliable critic of everything related to Bushitler, by which I of course mean Dick Cheney. … Tomasky struggles with the in-your-face spectacle of a president saying he has the right to pick which Americans can be killed unilaterally by insisting that the important thing is to walk a mile in Obama’s mocassins:

I’ve always written about politics with part of my brain focused on the question of what I would do if I were in Politician X’s position. This line of thought came so naturally to me that I imagined everyone did this…. [The memo is] certainly not something that makes the breast swell with pride. But it does make me wonder what I would do in this situation, and I can’t honestly come up with easy answers.

He should try harder to come up with answers, perhaps by halting the mind-meld with the powerful and instead grokking some imaginary solidarity with the falsely accused. After dilating a while on the term imminent as used in the memo and then deciding that al Qaeda is pretty much always about to attack the U.S., he concludes

Well, either this makes a certain sense to you, or you just think that a state can’t be in the business of killing its own citizens and that’s all there is to it. There’s no doubt that a sentence like “the president has the power to order the assassination of American citizens” sounds positively despotic. However, these are people who have gone off and joined Al Qaeda (the white paper also mentions “associated groups,” and one definitely wonders where that line is drawn, precisely). If an American citizen of German descent had gone back to…Germany in 1934 and joined the Nazi Party and worked his way up such that he was involved in the plotting of attacks against American soldiers, and Roosevelt had order him killed, no one would have batted an eye in 1940s America.

You got that? You’re either with the president’s logic or you can’t understand it (shades of George Bush’s simplistic, Bible-based manicheanism when he said you’re either with us or against us!). There’s enough qualifiers in the passage above to give anyone pause, of course: Who are the associated groups after all? How exactly is this like 1940s America? The short version, as even Tomasky eventually grants later, is that “it’s not 1940s America.” Last time, I checked, Congress declared war against Nazi Germany. And the Nazis kept membership lists which greatly minimized – though didn’t eliminate fully – questions of who belonged.

There’s another fallacy in Tomasky’s argument that Nick misses, too.  We didn’t have the technology for remote-controlled assassinations in the 1940s (otherwise, we might have used it on Hitler rather than American traitors).  When Americans got killed in attacks, they did so facelessly and namelessly as part of an overall military attack on Germany.  We can argue the legitimacy of attacks on population centers (especially Dresden), but that was the nature of that war, and Germany set that precedent from the very beginning.  The issue here isn’t collateral deaths of suspected American traitors in military attacks on AQ assets — it’s the deliberate targeting of individual Americans suspected of treason by their government with no real check or due process to make sure we’re getting it right.

Nick continues with other examples, and diagnoses the overall problem with the suddenly-credulous national media:

By making clear that as a journalist he tries to see things first and foremost from the perspective of the powerful, Michael Tomasky helps to clarify why so many in the media are rushing to the president’s defense. They are entranced with power and the view from the top. “Presidents live with that responsibility [of protecting American lives] every day,” he writes. “If that responsibility were mine, I can’t honestly say what I’d do, and I don’t think anyone can.” Not all journalists are awed by power, of course, even on the right (National Review’s Jim Geraghty, for instance, asserts that this sort of thing of extra-judicial killing policy wouldn’t be cricket even under a GOP president).

This isn’t ultimately about ideological hypocrisy – of liberals changing their tune once their guy is in office – but something much more basic and much more disturbing. It reveals that for all their crowing about being watchdogs of all that is good and decent in society, when push comes to shove, too many journalists are ready and willing handmaidens to power – including the power to kill.

The question of assassinations (by drone or otherwise) remains a complicated problem in an age of non-state antagonists.  There are no easy answers for a nation attempting not just to defend itself from military attack, but also from the kind of infiltration attack that can produce massively-scaled casualties, as we saw on 9/11.  The use of American citizens for that kind of infiltration is a real danger, and one difficult to defend against, which means the US government has a big incentive to make it as costly as possible. But that can very easily lead to tyrannical power if not checked and balanced with due process and a mechanism outside the executive branch for oversight of its use.

The establishment media used to remind us of that need for checks on power and due process when a Republican was President.  Maybe we should have a Republican as President all the time so that the media can actually do its job.


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

Hypocrisy…It’s what’s for Breakfast

workingclass artist on February 8, 2013 at 9:23 AM

I recall my first days in a newsroom several years back – the editor spoke to us passionately about the importance of our role of speaking truth to power.

Those days are long gone – as are my days in a newsroom, thankfully.

Red Cloud on February 8, 2013 at 9:24 AM

At this point, what difference does it make?

Galtian on February 8, 2013 at 9:26 AM

It’s because they are all apparatchiks in the mold of WWII-era Germans; ignore that big camp down the road where people enter but never leave and where the ash that falls from the sky has a strange odor.

Every one of these human trashbags would turn away if you and your family were dragged from your house in the name of whatever Bark said needed to be done. They’re all pathetic, enabling cowards.

Bishop on February 8, 2013 at 9:28 AM

It’s been years since we had news. All we get is DNC propaganda straight from the DNC Public Affairs staff (aka Mainstream Media).

Doomsday on February 8, 2013 at 9:29 AM

On the one hand, my brain’s exploding from the hypocrisy.

On the other – will normal people (those who don’t follow politics and world events like we Hot Gasians) notice the hypocrisy now that it’s so blatant and overpowering?

Could this be good?

Washington Nearsider on February 8, 2013 at 9:29 AM

On the one hand, my brain’s exploding from the hypocrisy.

On the other – will normal people (those who don’t follow politics and world events like we Hot Gasians) notice the hypocrisy now that it’s so blatant and overpowering?

Could this be good?

Washington Nearsider on February 8, 2013 at 9:29 AM

That’s the most hilarious thing I’ve read today. Did you forget the sarc tag?

Doomsday on February 8, 2013 at 9:30 AM

Every one of these human trashbags would turn away if you and your family were dragged from your house in the name of whatever Bark said needed to be done. They’re all pathetic, enabling cowards.

Bishop on February 8, 2013 at 9:28 AM

I believe you’re right.

I also believe I wouldn’t go quietly. I want nothing to do with a real fight with the US government in any capacity. I don’t think it’s a fight I could win.

But should that fight show up at my doorstep? I’d be in it. The media would have to cover that, wouldn’t they? Could they turn away from that?

Washington Nearsider on February 8, 2013 at 9:31 AM

From the same group who screeched water-boarding was evil…

hillsoftx on February 8, 2013 at 9:32 AM

The establishment media used to remind us of that need for checks on power and due process when a Republican was President. Maybe we should have a Republican as President all the time so that the media can actually do its job.

Things would be going a lot better for us and the media if that were the case. I’ve said repeatedly that the one good thing to come out of the Obama Presidency is that whoever is the next Republican in the White House will have the ultimate Get Out of Jail Free card to play throughout their term(s) by simply saying “yeah, but when Obama was President….”. After the left has basically gotten on board this week with approving the policy of assassinating American citizens without due process, they’re gonna have a tough time justifying their opposition toward anything a future Republican President does in the name of national security.

Doughboy on February 8, 2013 at 9:32 AM

Tarde just agrees with Chris Rock….Barry is National Daddy…

harlekwin15 on February 8, 2013 at 9:34 AM

Can this actually go on for four more years? Where will we be if it does?

trigon on February 8, 2013 at 9:35 AM

I also believe I wouldn’t go quietly. I want nothing to do with a real fight with the US government in any capacity. I don’t think it’s a fight I could win…Washington Nearsider on February 8, 2013 at 9:31 AM

It is a fight WE can win!

Doomsday on February 8, 2013 at 9:35 AM

And, what this ignorant young Liberal says, matters why?

kingsjester on February 8, 2013 at 9:35 AM

Once upon a time, political assassination was an evil that liberals rejected in all circumstances. There was even an executive order (promulgated by Jimmy Carter, IIRC) that prohibited assassinations of foreigners who were working to harm the U.S. Now liberals twist themselves into knots to justify the assassination of Americans, all because the Boy-King has ordered it. The mind reels at the kind of mental gymnastics that must be necessary for such people to be able to live with themselves.

Athanasius on February 8, 2013 at 9:37 AM

After the left has basically gotten on board this week with approving the policy of assassinating American citizens without due process, they’re gonna have a tough time justifying their opposition toward anything a future Republican President does in the name of national security.

Doughboy on February 8, 2013 at 9:32 AM

No, they won’t. They’ll say they were always against it, counting on people’s short memories. To use a cliche: “We have always been at war with Eastasia.”

Liam on February 8, 2013 at 9:37 AM

Troll Free.

Del Dolemonte on February 8, 2013 at 9:38 AM

Silly Conservatives, don’t you know Emerson said “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds”.

/and it would be foolish for a Liberal to display consistent values- it’s a hindrance to Liberal Fascism.

M240H on February 8, 2013 at 9:39 AM

After the left has basically gotten on board this week with approving the policy of assassinating American citizens without due process, they’re gonna have a tough time justifying their opposition toward anything a future Republican President does in the name of national security.

Doughboy on February 8, 2013 at 9:32 AM

As tough as they had in switching their attitude on GITMO, drones, Iraqi withdrawal, etc?

We’ve always been at war with Eastasia

sharrukin on February 8, 2013 at 9:39 AM

It is a fight WE can win!

Doomsday on February 8, 2013 at 9:35 AM

That would be the only hope at that point, right? That it would mean something.

I can’t believe we’re even discussing this like rational people. That says more to me than any action or inaction on the part of the President or the media.

Washington Nearsider on February 8, 2013 at 9:39 AM

No, they won’t. They’ll say they were always against it, counting on people’s short memories. To use a cliche: “We have always been at war with Eastasia.”

Liam on February 8, 2013 at 9:37 AM

The problem is we live in the YouTube era. This stuff is documented and easily retrievable with the simple click of a button. Counting on the ignorance or indifference of the American people will occasionally work(see Obama’s reelection in 2012), but that’s a dangerous strategery for the Democrat/media complex to rely on all the time.

Doughboy on February 8, 2013 at 9:40 AM

To use a cliche: “We have always been at war with Eastasia.”

Liam on February 8, 2013 at 9:37 AM

Who knew the left would use the novel 1984 as an instruction manual?

sharrukin on February 8, 2013 at 9:41 AM

it’s the deliberate targeting of individual Americans suspected of treason by their government with no real check or due process to make sure we’re getting it right.

Treasonous toward the US of A or toward the government? Hussein believes he is the government.

antipc on February 8, 2013 at 9:41 AM

Del Dolemonte on February 8, 2013 at 9:38 AM

Weird, right? They’re bouncing all over the place, but never manage to poke their heads up on threads like this…

Washington Nearsider on February 8, 2013 at 9:42 AM

Who knew the left would use the novel 1984 as an instruction manual?

sharrukin on February 8, 2013 at 9:41 AM

LOL To me, it’s either an instruction manual or a book of prophesy.

Liam on February 8, 2013 at 9:42 AM

Journalist?

C R E D I B I L I T Y ?
.
.
.
z e r o !

KOOLAID2 on February 8, 2013 at 9:43 AM

As tough as they had in switching their attitude on GITMO, drones, Iraqi withdrawal, etc?

“We’ve always been at war with Eastasia“

sharrukin on February 8, 2013 at 9:39 AM

But switching back and forth? How are the left going to take a future Republican President to task(and be taken seriously) on drone attacks, EIT, indefinite detention, and now even assassinations when all of that was kosher for 8 years under Obama? I’m not saying they won’t go after a Republican over any of this. I’m just saying it’s going to ring completely hollow now they’ve gone on record as being totally cool with the current occupant in the White House engaging in these activities.

Doughboy on February 8, 2013 at 9:43 AM

will normal people (those who don’t follow politics and world events like we Hot Gasians) notice the hypocrisy now that it’s so blatant and overpowering?

Could this be good?

Washington Nearsider on February 8, 2013 at 9:29 AM

Only if it is included in “a very special episode” of Honey Boo Boo.

Happy Nomad on February 8, 2013 at 9:45 AM

Maybe we should have a Republican as President all the time so that the media can actually do its job.

Ohhhh! Ouch!

Put some ice on that, MSM!!!

ted c on February 8, 2013 at 9:45 AM

If it ever gets down to it these MSM people will be hunted down by killer teams.

docflash on February 8, 2013 at 9:45 AM

I’m just saying it’s going to ring completely hollow now they’ve gone on record as being totally cool with the current occupant in the White House engaging in these activities.

Doughboy on February 8, 2013 at 9:43 AM

It’s completely different because the international situation has changed and the Republican president has made several inflammatory statements that have been instrumental in destabilizing world peace. In theory such drone strikes could be acceptable but given the radical nature of the Republican ‘regime’ it would be unwise and would contribute to an already unstable situation. Then you trot out various statements by Muslim and leftist leaders backing that up.

Rinse and repeat every week or so.

sharrukin on February 8, 2013 at 9:50 AM

Maybe we should have a Republican as President all the time so that the media can actually do its job.

Snarky, and the absolute truth.

Bravo Zulu, Ed.

BobMbx on February 8, 2013 at 9:50 AM

If they can support drone strikes on U.S. citizens they can support less violent measures such as locking people up for petty reasons such as refusing to turn-in a high cap mag.

The fascists are straining at the leash now and it’s only the 100 million gun owners out here who are standing in their way, and they know it.

Bishop on February 8, 2013 at 9:51 AM

How are the left going to take a future Republican President to task(and be taken seriously) on drone attacks,

Apparently you slept through the unpatriotic deficits Bush.

BobMbx on February 8, 2013 at 9:52 AM

But switching back and forth? How are the left going to take a future Republican President to task(and be taken seriously) on drone attacks, EIT, indefinite detention, and now even assassinations when all of that was kosher for 8 years under Obama? I’m not saying they won’t go after a Republican over any of this. I’m just saying it’s going to ring completely hollow now they’ve gone on record as being totally cool with the current occupant in the White House engaging in these activities.

Doughboy on February 8, 2013 at 9:43 AM

You’re thinking like a reasonable man, not as a liberal.

Remember when there was this huge ‘homeless problem’ in the 80s and 90s? It then magically cleared up the day Clinton was elected, and didn’t exist for eight years. Then it magically came back in 2001, albeit briefly; it couldn’t regain traction, though.

The media manufacture problems, then forget about them when their guy is in charge. Not everyone is a political or news junkie, so the electorate tends to forget. When they are reminded, they entirely miss the connection between who is in the White House and why the media-produced issue wasn’t mentioned for up to eight years. Then it’s back to square-one.

I’ve seen this so many times, like with the ‘drug problem’. Every year or two, use of a certain drug was ‘on the rise’. Then another, and another. After a cycle, the MSM went back to the first one. Either reporters are crazy, or we are for giving them any credence whatsoever.

Or maybe I’m just too cynical?

Liam on February 8, 2013 at 9:53 AM

The thing to remember is is a Republican replaced Barack Obama as president in 2016 and continues Barack Obama’s drone strike policy, not only the media will be wildly against it, but Barack Obama will come out and attack the same policy his administration created and nobody at the big media outlets or on the situational left will even note the hypocrisy and contradiction.

jon1979 on February 8, 2013 at 9:53 AM

The fascists are straining at the leash now and it’s only the 100 million gun owners out here who are standing in their way, and they know it.

Bishop on February 8, 2013 at 9:51 AM

Those 100 million will not all comply.

Secretary Clinton said that dissent is the highest form of patriotism. I agree. I dissent.

Washington Nearsider on February 8, 2013 at 9:53 AM

From the same group who screeched water-boarding was evil…

hillsoftx on February 8, 2013 at 9:32 AM

… and Abu Graib and harsh interrogation techniques like having to listen to loud rock music or nutritional manipulation. … and Gitmo and extraterritorial rendition …

I like the idea of no longer calling them the MSM but calling them the DNC Public Affairs staff. That was a brilliant description Doomsday

AZfederalist on February 8, 2013 at 9:55 AM

I can’t believe we’re even discussing this like rational people. That says more to me than any action or inaction on the part of the President or the media.

Washington Nearsider on February 8, 2013 at 9:39 AM

I don’t have a problem with discussing the possibility of using drone attacks to take out non-state actors when we have intelligence about showing immediate danger to the national interests.

What I do have a problem with is that, apparently, the protocol in place is simply if the rat-eared wonder is especially cranky on a given day and feels like killing somebody. There is no deliberative process that includes assessments, alternatives, and legal review. Just a thin-skinned bastard who sits on his throne and gives the thumbs up or down sign like some sort of modern-day Caligula.

IMO, the only way this should work in a free society is that if the determination is made to take out an American citizen (or even a bad guy non-citizen) then the need to do it by drone has to be justified in a transparent way. As it is, we are expected and required to simply trust that the rat-eared wonder is not abusing the powers of his office and that these drone attacks are justified on his word alone. If a Republican were in office the term “war criminal” would be splashed all over the MSM. With a filthy commie all we get is the sound of crickets.

Happy Nomad on February 8, 2013 at 9:56 AM

Apparently you slept through the unpatriotic deficits Bush.

BobMbx on February 8, 2013 at 9:52 AM

In terms of deficits, Bush did spend like a drunken sailor. And that it came in the aftermath of the relatively frugal Clinton/Newt era didn’t help matters. But again, the left suddenly became cool with deficits(even ones 3 times as large as Bush’s worst one) under Obama. Even a lack of a budget for 4 years is no big deal suddenly.

Again, I’m not saying the Democrat/media complex won’t develop collective amnesia the moment a Republican is elected President, but that also won’t prevent their own words from being used against them 24/7.

Doughboy on February 8, 2013 at 9:56 AM

If they can support drone strikes on U.S. citizens they can support less violent measures such as locking people up for petty reasons such as refusing to turn-in a high cap mag.

Bishop on February 8, 2013 at 9:51 AM

Or making a YouTube video that the administration wants to use as the excuse for Muslim animals attacking our embassies and killing Americans the old-fashioned way.

Happy Nomad on February 8, 2013 at 9:58 AM

All Hail Obama!
All Hail the State!

Bevan on February 8, 2013 at 9:59 AM

http://www.grimmy.com/editorials.php
When I see this from the left ,
I have hope .

Lucano on February 8, 2013 at 10:00 AM

In terms of deficits, Bush did spend like a drunken sailor.

Doughboy on February 8, 2013 at 9:56 AM

I’m sorry but I’m with John McCain on this one. Sailors stop spending when they run out of money. To compare them to the deficit spending in DC is an insult to drunken sailors everywhere.

Happy Nomad on February 8, 2013 at 10:00 AM

’m sorry but I’m with John McCain on this one. Sailors stop spending when they run out of money. To compare them to the deficit spending in DC is an insult to drunken sailors everywhere.

Happy Nomad on February 8, 2013 at 10:00 AM

This drunken sailor agrees.

Washington Nearsider on February 8, 2013 at 10:05 AM

I thought it was a pretty common, or at least readily available, feature for someone to be convicted in absentia. I don’t see why The Most High Reverend Preezy and sidekick Mustachio can’t be bothered to perform a regular criminal trial against these citizens that fight for the enemy. Shoot, (pun intended) they could even use one of those super-duper-evil military tribunals.

Nutstuyu on February 8, 2013 at 10:10 AM

Who’s Your Daddy?

blammm on February 8, 2013 at 10:14 AM

I thought it was a pretty common, or at least readily available, feature for someone to be convicted in absentia. I don’t see why The Most High Reverend Preezy and sidekick Mustachio can’t be bothered to perform a regular criminal trial against these citizens that fight for the enemy. Shoot, (pun intended) they could even use one of those super-duper-evil military tribunals.

Nutstuyu on February 8, 2013 at 10:10 AM

Trial In absentia is illegal under US law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_absentia

The Court unanimously held, in an opinion written by Justice Harry Blackmun, that Rule 43 does not permit the trial in absentia of a defendant who is absent at the beginning of trial.

sharrukin on February 8, 2013 at 10:15 AM

If the RNC was smart, which they are definitely not, they would hire PI’s to investigate every MSM talking head and publish their findings.

Mr. Arrogant on February 8, 2013 at 10:16 AM

…IT’S SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE!…everyday!

KOOLAID2 on February 8, 2013 at 10:17 AM

We have to get by this complaining!

The media is completely corrupt. Most of America only get information from them. There is no way this country survives that sort of corruption. We can’t just watch and complain

We must organize and fight. Economically and politically.

GardenGnome on February 8, 2013 at 10:21 AM

Still waiting for someone on the left/MSM to say “Oh, so now you care about due process? Where was this when we were capturing terrorists on the field of battle?”

The difference being, of course, that drone strikes could be on American citizens while foreign-born terrorists are just that. Nuance was never a left/MSM strong suit though.

Rufus on February 8, 2013 at 10:23 AM

Maybe we should have a Republican as President all the time so that the media can actually do its job.

THIS

cmsinaz on February 8, 2013 at 10:25 AM

Say, remember when tapping suspected terrorists’ phone lines sans warrant was so diabolical and appalling to the American psyche you just had to make a movie about killing evil tyrant, Dubya, in order to cope with the mind-numbing atrocity?

RepubChica on February 8, 2013 at 10:27 AM

Upon reflection, I would prefer Two Minutes Of Hate rather than 30-90 Minutes Of Supercilious Misinformed PC Juvenile Mockery Posing As Humor.

jangle12 on February 8, 2013 at 10:35 AM

The establishment media used to remind us of that need for checks on power and due process when a Republican was President. Maybe we should have a Republican as President all the time so that the media can actually do its job.

Amen… smartest thing you’ve ever said, ED…

Khun Joe on February 8, 2013 at 10:35 AM

Liberal journolisters would be first to volunteer to insert the canisters of Zyklon-B. That is their nature.

RSbrewer on February 8, 2013 at 10:36 AM

…candidate Obama rejected the Bush adminstration’s position that it could detain U.S. citizens as enemy combatants without pressing charges while President Obama claims the right to kill U.S. citizens without laying charges? The guy may not be able to pass a budget but christ, give him credit for ingenuity and brass balls.

How much longer will it be before Obama himself unilaterally decides to drop bombs from drones, inside the United States, on those “crasy right wingers” at Waco or Ruby Ridge. My perception is the left coasts and MSM would be completely OK with it.

TulsAmerican on February 8, 2013 at 10:36 AM

Pay them no respect when you encounter them. Walk through their live shots. Confront them in public. Jaw at them anytime you come across them. No time is wrong, no situation is inappropriate

Thicklugdonkey on February 8, 2013 at 10:40 AM

The issue here isn’t collateral deaths of suspected American traitors in military attacks on AQ assets — it’s the deliberate targeting of individual Americans suspected of treason by their government with no real check or due process to make sure we’re getting it right.

FISA courts were created for these purposes.

Regardless, the Valerie Plame outing was sooooo much worse than this or the Benghazi attacks. Just ask any journalist.

The sun sets in the West every evening, the tax man will come a callin’, we’ll all die some day, and mainstream media will cover for any progressive/lib regardless of their actions (John Edwards isn’t such a bad guy after all)…guarantees in life.

This place is done for, we just get to be the ones that watch it as it burns to the ground. We had a good run.

Geministorm on February 8, 2013 at 10:50 AM

it’s the deliberate targeting of individual Americans suspected of treason by their government with no real check or due process to make sure we’re getting it right.

Treasonous toward the US of A or toward the government? Hussein believes he is the government.

antipc on February 8, 2013 at 9:41 AM

With Obama, you just know that secretly in his heart he interprets “treason” to mean any citizen against him and his administration of statists and America-haters.

If he happens to assassinate an actual enemy of the United States along the way, well, then that’s some unexpected icing on the cake.

PatriotGal2257 on February 8, 2013 at 11:04 AM

Dissent is the highest form of patriotism. Unless it’s not.

steebo77 on February 8, 2013 at 11:08 AM

Just wait until there’s a Republican in office (if that’s even possible anymore — Republicans don’t cheat very well).

The media will become anti-establishment again.

The Rogue Tomato on February 8, 2013 at 11:15 AM

PatriotGal2257 on February 8, 2013 at 11:04 AM

Considering his history of demonizing his enemies with intent to destroy, coupled with his disregard for the Constitution and a compliant media, what is there to stop him?

antipc on February 8, 2013 at 11:15 AM

The wind blows all right. And the journalist blow right along with it. But it isn’t wind.

Hummer53 on February 8, 2013 at 11:26 AM

I see lots of comments about hypocrisy here and elsewhere. Hannity is very good at pointing it out too. However, does anyone on the left really care? They don’t. There is no morality, there is no conscience, and there is only destruction: Destruction of the opposition and destruction of the nation. Sorry to be so blunt but that’s the truth from where I see it.

To sit and think that these people care about the country or their own well-being is frivolous. They do not think more than one day ahead, these are shallow people with shallow souls. They’ve been trained that way.

In all candor, I think a cold civil war has begun. And those who worship Obama will do all in their power to maintain their savior. Hypocrisy be damned.

Jabez01 on February 8, 2013 at 11:26 AM

Do we seriously expect the in-the-hip-pocket running lapdog media NOT to all eleventy-gasmic over whatever Teh One decides he wants to do.

Notice the lack of a question mark.

dissent555 on February 8, 2013 at 11:32 AM

The question of assassinations

I have a question about this. My hope is perhaps you all will help flesh this out for me. Is a Marine sniper on the battlefield from, lets say, two clicks out committing and assassination when he pulls the trigger on a enemy?

Bmore on February 8, 2013 at 11:38 AM

Jabez01 on February 8, 2013 at 11:26 AM

Excellent comment. +1,000.

To sit and think that these people care about the country or their own well-being is frivolous. They do not think more than one day ahead, these are shallow people with shallow souls. They’ve been trained that way.

This is true, yes; however, some of them might be surprised and perhaps even hurt when they themselves become targets in some way, especially if they perceive themselves to be super-loyal water carriers. Their shallowness also doesn’t include the possibility that they might be perceived as turncoats for any whimsical reason that might arise. Cue much sardonic laughter from the rest of us.

PatriotGal2257 on February 8, 2013 at 11:42 AM

Yes, I say we coopt Hillary Clintons’ “What does it matter” comment for things like this. Right? sheesh sarc off

jake49 on February 8, 2013 at 11:57 AM

Troll Free.

Del Dolemonte on February 8, 2013 at 9:38 AM

My thoughts exactly.

Where are our idiots telling us we lost?

Probably busy changing their Depends.

itsspideyman on February 8, 2013 at 11:59 AM

They’re all pathetic, enabling cowards.

Bishop on February 8, 2013 at 9:28 AM

Yup.

John the Libertarian on February 8, 2013 at 12:05 PM

Every one of these human trashbags would turn away if you and your family were dragged from your house in the name of whatever Bark said needed to be done. They’re all pathetic, enabling cowards.

Bishop on February 8, 2013 at 9:28 AM

I believe you’re right.

I also believe I wouldn’t go quietly. I want nothing to do with a real fight with the US government in any capacity. I don’t think it’s a fight I could win.

But should that fight show up at my doorstep? I’d be in it. The media would have to cover that, wouldn’t they? Could they turn away from that?

Washington Nearsider on February 8, 2013 at 9:31 AM

They might cover it, but that doesn’t mean you’d get any support when the government thugs murdered you and your family. The mass murder of the Branch Davidians in Waco proves it. 21 of those murdered were children under the age of 16.

The US government is evil. It is the enemy. And you should fear it.

woodNfish on February 8, 2013 at 12:24 PM

But should that fight show up at my doorstep? I’d be in it. The media would have to cover that, wouldn’t they? Could they turn away from that?

Washington Nearsider on February 8, 2013 at 9:31 AM

In a heartbeat.

To satisfy their masters.

And, if it’s not reported…it never happened.

Solaratov on February 8, 2013 at 1:25 PM

The establishment media used to remind us of that need for checks on power and due process when a Republican was President. Maybe we should have a Republican as President all the time so that the media can actually do its job.

Yeah, but then most of the media whores would be out of a job. How many actually have the ability for ‘investigative reporting’?

Most of the current crop appear only to have the ability to fall on their knees before The Chosen One and ask difficult questions such as:

1) How was your day?
2) How do you keep such a nice crease in your trousers?
3) Playing golf this weekend?

GarandFan on February 8, 2013 at 1:54 PM

Or maybe I’m just too cynical?

Liam on February 8, 2013 at 9:53 AM

There seems to be a lot of that going around.

Maybe it’s the new flu./

Solaratov on February 8, 2013 at 2:27 PM

This isn’t ultimately about ideological hypocrisy… too many journalists are ready and willing handmaidens to power – including the power to kill.

Horsecrap – ideological hypocrisy is exactly what it is ultimately about. Just watch those willing handmaidens turn into mighty anti-establishment warriors… the instant a Republican becomes President.

Who do you think you’re fooling?

drunyan8315 on February 8, 2013 at 2:47 PM

WTF…There are no easy answers for a nation attempting not just to defend itself from military attack

sure there is….. just use the phrase “imminent threat” then ya can vaporize yahoo’s that are sitting on their Camel in the middle of a Yemen desert. Of course this assumes the the clowns run’n da circus are still argue’n over what the meaning of “IS”… IS

roflmmfao

donabernathy on February 8, 2013 at 3:30 PM

There’s enough qualifiers in the passage above to give anyone pause, of course:

-
I read a full page article in an engineering trade mag today, it had the same long winding excuse ridden format. The article was titled something like ‘so where are the jobs?’… Actually I think it was the editor’s opinion piece…

It went on about off shoring being a decades long problem, and that re-shoring those jobs will not happen… due to efficiency improvements in the manufacturing world. Etcetera… AKA… excuse making for the continued poor jobs market.

There was also one sentence that foisted a load of blame on the REPUBLICANS… but not one drop of ‘dem blood’ or Barry’s finger prints are on the current economic malaise according to the writer. Fact is I saw cover for Barry all over the page. This guy has done this before, maybe it was over the Volt/GM/Detroit… But I’m not sure, it’s been a year or 2.

The faithful are now laying the ground work for a second term that totally sucks… and yet that allows them the warm feeling that Obullsh*tter kept it from being much worse.

RalphyBoy on February 9, 2013 at 12:24 AM

Suppose for a minute that a sufficient number of redheads became annoyed enough at the problems they face just because they have red hair get together in a loose confederation within the US and decide to “get even”. Suppose they arm themselves with bomb making materials, organize themselves in small quasi-military units, and proceed to wreck havoc on our cities and country side. Suppose they manage to give a whole city a case of the runs one day by putting something in the water supply.

Now we’re really mad at this subset of redheads. And they are numerous enough, organized enough, and dispersed enough that they really hurt us with some regularity.

How do we declare war on them? How do we fight them when they can use hair dye and make-up to disguise their being redheads while all the other peaceful redheads still exist, with red hair? They are among us. They are us. They are American citizens. And yet they are attacking us in loosely coordinated and devastating fashion. What do we do? How do we deal with this?

Don’t prattle to me about “police”. What do the police look for?

What do we allow our POTUS to do if he is somebody we trust to do right?

What do we allow our POTUS if a scoundrel is elected two years later when our man’s term runs out?

Reverse that. Do we want our “trusted” man to be saddled with insane restrictions placed on the scoundrel?

Those are tough questions, especially in a political climate such as we have when trust in our government just plain does not exit nor is it warranted, not for Bush, certainly not for Obama.

It is time to figure out what to do rather than blather about the Constitution when arguably it does not apply. Fighting for a foreign government used to and should still end your US citizenship unless Congress decides otherwise. Logically fighting for a more or less organized enemy of the US that is not itself a nation but fights with a nation’s worth of resources should also remove citizenship.

Regardless of citizenship, a silly shibboleth for argument, ALL men and women have a right to a fair trial and so forth given by God. But some of them resist arrest, do not avail themselves of opportunities to safely surrender and submit to trial. They may stay in their bunker with their hostage, instead. Common usage means we send in armed fighters to disarm him and capture him, if possible, and kill him if needed. If moving in on him is impossible, now we have drones. Or perhaps now we arm our police with Apaches. Either way if the person is causing enough disruption, he or she dies. If there is a taint of wrong doing involved those involved may face problems once all the smoke has cleared, presuming we are the victors.

Note that this may redefine our national relationship with organized crime and criminal gangs. What are the consequences. Think it out.

WTF DO we do? And, we’ve dawdled long enough we have to act fairly precipitously. The voters have done this to themselves.

{^_^}

herself on February 9, 2013 at 2:39 AM