How does everyone feel about the POTUS

LaSalle I agree but I hope he meant MSNBC. That network was established as a liberal counter to Fox.

 

American big business Comcast (Fortune #49 on the Fortune 100) owns 51% of NBC Universal while American big business GE (Fortune #6 on the Fortune 100) owns 49%...hard to get any more Republican than that...although you'd have to see who their big shareholders are and who those shareholders elected to the board of directors to run the company to be sure

 

I have no issue with it, I didnt have a problem with the Patriot Act or waterboarding.
I am not that liberal.
once you join the enemy, times up.

 

Winston1 said: ↑

“Again Red you like to think what you want but all my cites are Ds. Where are the Rs in the drone attacks?? The only ones I read actually support the president. That must really create a sour taste as it totally destroys your fantasy.​

You are making no sense whatsoever. What fantasy? You certainly haven't destroyed my argument.

No sense Red? you deliberately mis state points. You said it was a R political effort to attack the President's use of drones. That is false! Is Ron Wyden a R?? Don't thinks so... he is a liberal D how about Jane Harmon is she a R? Those two and 7 other D senators and the ACLU are speaking out against this lack of policy. Like wise the NY Times and Wash Post are asking questions. Do you understand that???? Your fantasy is BS because the Rs and Fox are not the ones behind it but his own party. You have no argument other than what your own blindness makes up out of whole cloth.

 

Winston1 said: ↑

“The current definitions are so vague as to have no limit.​

What exactly are the current definitions that you object to

They have been posted before don't ask me to do your job bub.

 

Winston1 said: ↑

“Every action needs a framework to use as a basis for decision. Congress and the executive and judicial review are necessary to make a valid product. There can't be simulatneous approval from outside but with a frame work to use as a basis oversite can be valid. There will always be and should be vigorous discussion of every action. That criticqal process is needed to get better.​

Totally impractical and quite naive. Nothing would get accomplished. The entire reason to have a Supreme Commander and an Executive is to make executive decisions. If he oversteps he can be removed from office. The checks and balances are there already. But it is foolish to demand that check and balances be implemented to approve each and every operation.
BS Red it is always done it is called Rules of Engagement. Ever hear of that term?
I ask again, Why are you defending these turncoat traitors who make war against us? This power is NOT being used to target citizens. Name me a single incident where this has been done. How about Anwar Al Alwaki? His citizenship has never been officially revoked. Also there have been noted times when the target of the attack was not at the spot hit and innocents were killed.

Damn Red are you raising that false flag again? Where did I ever defend them or say they should be left alone. I have said there were problems with the implementation of the program because of the lack of control and Rules of Engagement (as sighted by several Ds and other sources). I am many other believe that just killing limits the effectiveness of the overall war on terror. What information could have been obtained from the top people? Again don't put words in my mouth sport!!

 

Winston1 said: ↑

“Red read my lips I never proposed we stay in Afganistan. I believed from the first we should have left them alone to stew in their own blood after we kicked their asses on 2001.​

Well, we didn't so Obama inherited a full-blown insurrection. You object to his prosecution of the terrorists in Pakistan, you object to his trying to stabilize Afghanistan before we leave.
I object to the waste of lives and dollars doing something YOU admit will never happen. Your own posts admit the Afgans will return to their savagry so why are we still there. That was my point in 2001 and remains so today.
What exactly is your position? Cut and Run? Stay forever? Be clear for once. See above. Why should we not be attacking Al Qaeda wherever we find them? Where did I say not to attack them. Over and over you twist clear comments to fit your line Red. Why not leave Afgnanistan in 2014? Why not now?You complain but offer no alternatives. I have offered many and you ignore all to rant in defense of your position.
-----