Yep, which is why we better be damn sure of who we want in the oval office. To defend this nation against ALL threats foreign and domestic, YES, as long as their is a clear line of checks and balances, Yes 100% Bush, Obama or anybody else, and they do all the time.
Many liberals and conservatives are both guilty of the "team" mentality where they think everyone on the other side is always wrong and everyone on their side is always right. I wish more people would judge everything on a case by case basis instead of looking at the letter next to someone's name and pre-determining whether they are good or bad.
Time...line? Time isn't made out of lines. It is made out of circles. That is why clocks are round. ~ Caboose
Like I said, you're railing against "liberals in general" while coming right out of a thread about the GOP and rape rhetoric saying what I quoted there.
You're just being hypocritical. Apparently your broad stroke summation of liberals is ok. But heaven help us if anyone says the same about the GOP and rape/abortion/women.
---------- Post added 2013-02-06 at 03:01 AM ----------
Here are some links you should really have included in the OP:
Article on the issue:
The white paper itself (link in the NBC article above):
I note this in particular:
Seriously shady stuff. That kind of logic can basically sanction anything as long as you yell "national security!" while doing it. Not that that's anything new in this "war".In the Department’s view, a lethal operation conducted against a U.S. citizen whose conduct poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States would be a legitimate act of national self-defense that would not violate the assassination ban. Similarly, the use of lethal force, consistent with the laws of war, against an individual who is a legitimate military target would be lawful and would not violate the assassination ban.
If the GOP were in power now we'd have the same authoritarianism abroad that we have now. Plus we'd have all the GOP's other awful shit.
So in the minds of liberals it goes something like: awful foreign policy decent economic policy and good social policy > awful foreign, economic, and social policy.