-
You know its bad when one of the most liberal news anchors is lambasting the policy of a Democrat president. -
ugh, I'm liberal and Rachel Maddow pisses me off.
Edited By: DaVols May 21st, 2012 at 10:28 AM
She can gtfo imo -
Balancing her range to fool all the sheep watching. Now they can be like "Seeeeeeeee she's totally not biased."
-
Doesn't she understand that this president has done way more good than bad, so we can let this sort of thing slide. On a side note, I see the NAACP's position on gay marriage evolved last week too.
-
I think she's genuine in her criticism and isn't just looking to "balance her range." That's the great thing about defending civil liberties, people on both sides of the isle see the value in protecting them (unless you're the elite of either party).
-
Seems standard for a liberal to take this stance against such a non-constitutional change. I for one am against all forms of "prolonged detention" to include this, Guantanamo, even simply life imprisonment for an actual crime/crimes.
-
"Prolonged detention." Last used by a democratic President named FDR.
-
Your statement is out of context and makes no sense when coupled with what you qouted.
-
Oh so you're suggesting that Rachel Maddow's stance on a given issue is a good gauge of good and bad in terms of policy? cause i just figured you were referring to politics..
Edited By: The Precedent May 21st, 2012 at 06:51 PM -
Huh? I'm suggesting that when a liberal newscaster criticizes a policy from a liberal president on an issue of civil liberties then the policy probably isn't a good one.
-
She is horrible.
Looool @ comparing locking up terrorists to a precrime movie. Ffs
I think it's funnier how obama wont send these suspects to gitmo bc gimo bad! And he wont send em for rendition so...we justbomb them instead of capture. Dead terrorist is a good terrorist but he also cant tell us much. Just more of obama's goofy way if doing what must be done but feeling real bad about the horrible excesses...of bush. Lol -
well it's still better than drone killing. That's my least favorite of all of his power grabs
-
Locking people up for potential future crimes and comparing that to a movie where people are locked up for potential future crimes? Yeah I see the problem...
-
The movie is about the government detaining people to prevent future crime.
Originally Posted by norcaljeff
She is horrible.
Looool @ comparing locking up terrorists to a precrime movie. Ffs
I think it's funnier how obama wont send these suspects to gitmo bc gimo bad! And he wont send em for rendition so...we justbomb them instead of capture. Dead terrorist is a good terrorist but he also cant tell us much. Just more of obama's goofy way if doing what must be done but feeling real bad about the horrible excesses...of bush. Lol
Obamas speech was about detaining people to prevent future crime. -
Just to be clear who is for prolonged detention itt?
-
No I couldn't because then it would be a blanket statement that isn't true. I'm certainly not giving Maddow any credence when she complains about policies from a president that frees markets, reduces taxation or reduces regulation.
-
Yes make NCJ defend the President's policies!!
-
No it isn't. You never differentiated the kind of president in your original question. If I said "yes" to your question then the statement would apply to any policy by any president from any party.
Oh so you're suggesting that Rachel Maddow's stance on a given issue is a good gauge of good and bad in terms of policy?
-
ohhhh, I get it. just out trollin'...
-
E Pretty standard for his fp. Well his fp actions, not words. And he still shouldbe doing more. But yeah
It had nothing to do with past crimes?Originally Posted by Dyzalot
Locking people up for potential future crimes and comparing that to a movie where people are locked up for potential future crimes? Yeah I see the problem...
Let me know when the first person is plucked off our streets for "thought crimes" lol
What's next, locking up people for threats???...














