>>>>>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/world/asia/15pstan.html?hp
>>>>>
>>>>>Summary: 30 people killed in Pakistan from airstrike called by Obama. What give Obama the power to employ capital punishment on these people? Did they all have federal trials before being punished? I thought that's what he was all up in arms about regarding Gitmo.
>>>>>
>>>>>I would expect the media to be harsh on Obama. Oh wait, the media is liberal-controlled. Obama is a savior while Bush is a blood-thirsty cowboy.
>>>>
>>>>Isn't it interesting how Obama's views on American action in the middle east changed after he began attending the morning CIA briefings at the White House with George Bush? Furthermore, not much changed after Obama became President. It makes me wonder what is being withheld from general public knowledge.
>>>
>>>Based on my experience (although old), I'm sure it's something(s) you really don't want to know... :o)
>>
>>Also there's a certain amount of inertia in government so things done't necessarily change instantly.
>
>For policy change in general, I would agree with you. For this situation, no, because approval for the strikes was asked for and granted.

In any case, Obama can't win for losing. If he keeps hunting Al Qaeda as he said he intends to do, then we'll be indundated by sarcastic comments about how a saint is bombing people, but if he calls it off, then we'll be inundated by sarcastic comments about how he's handing America over to the terrorists. And in both cases it would be the same Obama haters writing the comments because no matter what he does, it will be unacceptable to them.