Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh, and try to abstain from casual commentary of half-assed complaints from half-cocked couch bloggers.....we want to see reputable liberal dissention backed up with data and facts supporting their case.
Who cares liberals are a small per centage i US especially among voters. failure is always punsihed when it hits home. Its about to hit home as we pay for the faield spendig under Obama that has not created a means of payig for the spending.The euroepans knw the price of continously countig on teh rich to pay mroe and more.No growth. german who did the reforms needed in thne 90's even with reunification are the financwers of Europe.
Leave it to you when you are bested to blame it on semantics.
Here's another semantics trick.
Large and poorly-defined groups where the individuals have a broad range of opinions can't be hypocritical. The breadth and range of the opinions mean that there will always be individuals within that group with completely anti-thetical opinions and perspectives.
Individuals are hypocrites when they apply a philosophy or belief system inconsistently.
Small groups with well-defined goals can be hypocritical when they hold different people to different standards for reasons that are illogical.
But amorphous groups like "liberals" or "conservatives" or even "Republicans", "Libertarians" or "Democrats" cannot be hypocritical. Only individuals within those amorphous groups can be hypocritical.
Basically, all you're saying is that, because liberals don't 100% coordinate and speak with one oppositional voice against Barack Obama, liberals cannot be held to the standards of an ideological monolith. This is a fundamentally flawed assessment on your part because, even in the absence of a specific unified voice, liberals have routinely and persistently remained conspicuously silent (and monumentally hypocritical) in defiance of their past record of being in fact a unified voice against the policies of George W. Bush.
Your mental gymnasitics and ideological contortionism in defense of liberal hypocrisy and Barack Obama is not at all impressive.
Our ability to make recommendations is significantly limited by the secrecy of US drone operations. In this report we raise concerns about US standards and practices, though we cannot assess their sufficiency without more information.
In other words, killing civilians with drones is bad, but we don't have enough information to suggest that the Obama Administration should be held more accountable for its actions.
Its not true. Many progressives have called the Obama admin out on it. Many tv show hosts as well: Rachel Maddow, Chris Mathews, etc. including high profile progressives/democrats such as John Cusack et al.
In other words, killing civilians with drones is bad, but we don't have enough information to suggest that the Obama Administration should be held more accountable for its actions.
If that is your interpretation, fine. I still gave you what you asked. I see you didn't look at everything or even the selected press coverage.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
