Chris Matthews Worries That a 'Right-Wing

[GURPS]

Chris Matthews Worries That a 'Right-Wing Politician' 'Like Dick Cheney' Could Use Drones on His Enemies

MSNBC's Chris Matthews on Thursday worried that a future "right-wing" politician "like Dick Cheney" might one day use drone strikes against his political enemies. The Hardball host was discussing Senator Rand Paul's filibuster on Wednesday and the subject that prompted it: Whether the U.S. has the right to use drones on Americans in a non-war situation.

Matthews wondered if "there is a possibility somewhere out there on the edge that a tough-- not going to say he did it-- but somebody pretty far on the far right like Dick Cheney...will push this thing too far?" The host fumed, "Do you think it's possible that a Jane Fonda could be targeted even by the most right-wing American politician we can imagine?" [See video below. MP3 audio here.]

so Obama killing people is OK, the thought a R may get control leaves you sleepless

 

[SamSpade]

so Obama killing people is OK, the thought a R may get control leaves you sleepless

This is precisely why conservatives believe in liberty above the left's concept of social justice. You protect all speech, including speech you hate. Why? Because one day the OTHER party may have the upper hand, and they will try to shut YOU up.

This is why we keep our politician's feet to the fire - or at least, we're supposed to - precisely because when the shoe is on the other foot, any power you grant to YOUR side becomes a weapon in their arsenal. Keep the government small and having less power - and they can't hurt you when it's the other guy.

 

[DipStick]

Yay for edited video.

Before you respond, remember that I had MSNBC on all day yesterday and the day before.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

Yay for edited video.

Before you respond, remember that I had MSNBC on all day yesterday and the day before.

I was just about to post the same thing.

It's hard to come up with a reasonable discussion whenthe video is a small 30 second snippet of the show.

 

[dontknowwhy]

Yay for edited video.

Before you respond, remember that I had MSNBC on all day yesterday and the day before.

I didnt get a chance to see this for 2 whole days like you did

I was working

 

[Chris0nllyn]

I didnt get a chance to see this for 2 whole days like you did

I was working

Not defending him, but I didn't watch the whole episode either, but it's pretty obvious it was edited for the website's agenda.

 

[DipStick]

I didnt get a chance to see this for 2 whole days like you did

I was working

I work from home. But nice try.

Not defending him, but I didn't watch the whole episode either, but it's pretty obvious it was edited for the website's agenda.

And that's strange since, a few threads down, the original poster posts a link to the same exact website whining about the same exact network "gleefully" editing video.

 

[Toxick]

Before you respond, remember that I had MSNBC on all day yesterday and the day before.

How about you post a retort then, rather than a passive-aggressive dare.

 

[Lurk]

Yay for edited video.

Before you respond, remember that I had MSNBC on all day yesterday and the day before.

Furloughed from work?

 

[Lurk]

I work from home. But nice try.

Of course. Mom locked the basement door again, didn't she?

 

[aps45819]

Matthews is 100% correct.
There is a possibility that some right wing politician might use drones against someone he considers a political liability.



.... but there's is a greater likelihood that a progressive president who creates the program and arms homeland security with tanks, assault rifles and millions of rounds of ammunition would use them against citizens.

 

[Baz]

If a future, Dick Cheney-ish Right Winger continues with Obama's policy of turning known, self-admitted terrorists into dead ex-terrorists before they have the chance to perform another violent act, I'm all for it.

Using drones to take out political rivals, nope, I'm not okay with it.

 

[aps45819]

If a future, Dick Cheney-ish Right Winger continues with Obama's policy of turning known, self-admitted terrorists into dead ex-terrorists before they have the chance to perform another violent act, I'm all for it.

Using drones to take out political rivals, nope, I'm not okay with it.

What's the difference when we're talking about strikes within the United States?

 

[Baz]

What's the difference when we're talking about strikes within the United States?

The difference between what?

I'm perfectly fine with the President authorizing drone strikes on known terrorists within the United States as well. I'd rather take them out before they blow up Americans as opposed to after.

 

[Toxick]

I'm perfectly fine with the President authorizing drone strikes on known terrorists within the United States as well. I'd rather take them out before they blow up Americans as opposed to after.

Wonder if you'd say the same thing if Bush had tried this bull####. Or if Romney had won and he was pulling this bull####.









Somehow, I'm doubting it.

 

[aps45819]

The difference between what?

I'm perfectly fine with the President authorizing drone strikes on known terrorists within the United States as well. I'd rather take them out before they blow up Americans as opposed to after.

Know terrorists like the Sierra Club, ACORN, the NRA or the American Legion?

 

[BadGirl]

If a future, Dick Cheney-ish Right Winger continues with Obama's policy of turning known, self-admitted terrorists into dead ex-terrorists before they have the chance to perform another violent act, I'm all for it.

Using drones to take out political rivals, nope, I'm not okay with it.

So killing 180 children because they MIGHT become terrorists is a good thing??

 

[BadGirl]

If a future, Dick Cheney-ish Right Winger continues with Obama's policy of turning known, self-admitted terrorists into dead ex-terrorists before they have the chance to perform another violent act, I'm all for it.

Using drones to take out political rivals, nope, I'm not okay with it.

So American militias that HE says are domestic terrorist organizations would be ok??

 

[DipStick]

How about you post a retort then, rather than a passive-aggressive dare.

Because it's not hard to type in hardball.msnbc.com at the top of your Google Chrome window.

Matthews is 100% correct.
There is a possibility that some right wing politician might use drones against someone he considers a political liability.



.... but there's is a greater likelihood that a progressive president who creates the program and arms homeland security with tanks, assault rifles and millions of rounds of ammunition would use them against citizens.

Ah, of course... the drone program which actually existed under Bush was created by Obama so he could kill all of us on the homeland. Thanks for clearing that up.




I'm no fan of the drone program but the assertions Rand Paul made were over the top. Reminds me of Olbermann barking on MSNBC about how Bush was going to lock people up in GITMO. Except for one thing, Olbermann wasn't an elected official.

 

[DipStick]

So American militias that HE says are domestic terrorist organizations would be ok??

We're not talking about American "militias" that sit around on stupid ass forums all day talking about how they hate government here. We're talking about people who have attacked us and announced their intentions to attack us again. The "American citizen" that was taken out with a drone had very publicly announced his intent to kill other Americans.

Lindsey Graham was right - this discussion about drones isn't a "policy" thing, it's an Obama thing. If Bush was President and he was carrying out this policy, you guys would be applauding and hailing him the greatest President in American history.

And before you go there - there are plenty of Liberal Democrats who have been just as critical of Obama's Drone Wars as they were about Bush's policies.