Let's see -- Pakistan has never attacked the United States. So why is Barry Hussein denying alleged jihadis there the right to 3 hots and a cot in the USA and a trial before a civilian court? Why use deadly military force instead of sending a couple of beat cops to make the appropriate arrests?

“Missiles fired from suspected US drones killed at least 15 people inside Pakistan today, the first such strikes since Barack Obama became president. . . .

* * *

Security officials said the strikes, which saw up to five missiles slam into houses in separate villages, killed seven “foreigners” - a term that usually means al-Qaeda - but locals also said that three children lost their lives. ”

Yeah, I know -- this is the same policy as we had under George W, Bush. But this is the era of Hope'N'Change, when we are supposed to adopt a kinder, gentler approach towards terrorists in the name of cultivating a more positive world opinion. Since this policy is one of those things that the anti-war apologists for jihadi terror have long argued should be the basis for the impeachment of the recently departed 43rd president, shouldn't there be an uproar over the continuation of the policy by number 44?

The silence is deafening.

Next thing you know, the Obama Administration will be defending warrantless wiretaps and surveillance programs against American citizens.

Oh, yeah -- they've already done that, too.

Where are those rallies and call for impeachment, lefties? Where is Dennis Kucinich and his articles of impeachment when we really need him?

H/T Malkin, Hot Air

Posted by: Greg at 03:49 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 286 words, total size 2 kb.