ABC News really knows how to cause a coffee spit-take. All you have to do is introduce George Stephanopoulos talking to President Obama and put these hyperbolic words on screen: "No Holds Barred."
A famous book on negotiation is called "Getting to Yes." Sometimes, though, the better achievement is arriving at "no." That's what Eric Holder and Rand Paul did the other day.
"Barack Obama of 2007 would be right down here with me arguing against this drone strike program if he were in the Senate," Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., declared in the course of his 13-hour Senate "talking filibuster," which delayed a confirmation vote for now-CIA chief John Brennan.
The masters of the drone strike got struck last week - by an unwanted question.
Republican Rand Paul took to the floor of the U.S. Senate this week to filibuster John Brennan's nomination to become head of the CIA. "I will speak as long as it takes," the junior senator from Kentucky said, "until the alarm is sounded from coast to coast that our Constitution is important, that your rights to trial by jury are precious, that no American should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court."
In conversations with those opposed to the notion of drone attacks against U.S. citizens, on or away from American soil, I ask a question as a consistency test: Is your opposition based on a blanket principle that no President should have such power, or is it a spurred by a mistrust of the current administration?
It didn't snow in DC on Wednesday so I spent the entire afternoon watching Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky) filibustering the nomination of John Brennan to be the director of the Central Intelligence Agency.
While many Americans worry about government drones in the sky spying on our private lives, Washington meddlers are already on the ground and in our schools gathering intimate data on children and families.
In my New York Times best-seller "Heroes Proved," the president of the United States orders the execution of an American citizen in the United States by using precision munitions fired from a remotely piloted aircraft, or RPA -- incorrectly referred to by our media as a drone.
You are a reality star. You might think no one sees you in your fenced-in backyard grilling hamburgers in your boxer shorts. But government drones equipped with HD cameras are filming a new reality show starring you: “Drone Dynasty.”
When President Obama approves a drone strike against someone he identifies as a terrorist, John Brennan explained at his confirmation hearing last week, the missile fired from that unmanned aircraft is delivering prevention, not punishment.
The Obama administration seems to have gone Jack Bauer on us, which would be okay if we were just talking about non-American enemy combatants on some far-flung battlefield.
Who would have guessed that one of the most warmongering presidents would be a liberal Democrat who was awarded the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize?
"When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal." </P><P>So said Richard Nixon in his interviews with David Frost.