While the President dances, innocents mourn their dead, dead at the President's hand.

[ProSense]

319. Wait,

"It still does not say that the president is deliberately killing civilians."

...which statement:

Question for those who support unfettered use of drones to kill civilians:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2237714

Naturally, targetting civilians for death is anti-Obama.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2237864

He is the CinC, he does have his own personal kill list, he does give the orders
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2236253

I mean, the arguments fall apart if the point is "collateral damage."

The vitriol, the statements that the President doesn't care, the claim that the kills list is of "innocents" and the rest become absurd.

Collateral damage is a tragic consequence of any type of warfare (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_War#Civilian_losses).

Presidents who care try to minimize the lost of life. The case can be made for drone strikes over all out war, ground troops.

That doesn't make it right, and one can oppose the policy without the hyperbole, without shitting on the inaugural, and without impugning other people's morals.