Dr. Marc Lamont Hill: We Refuse to Hold Obama Accountable on Drones

by Yvette Carnell

On Monday night Bill O’Reilly asked Columbia University professor Dr. Marc Lamont Hill whether liberals who sharply criticized marc lamont hillGeorge W. Bush over his administration’s waterboarding policy are being hypocritical for accepting drone strikes under President Obama.

Hill agreed with O’Reilly, saying that the left “doesn’t want to deal with”  drones, adding “I think the problem is we have convinced ourselves that Obama’s drones are somehow softer and kinder and gentler than Bush’s drones.” Hill then concluded, saying, “We refuse to hold President Obama accountable for drones the same way we would have under the Bush administration.”

Hill did make the additional point that there are hypocrisies which exist within both parties, but that wasn’t a point that Bill O’Reilly felt he needed to acknowledge.

“So basically you’re saying your crew is hypocritical on the issue?” O’Reilly snapped, clearly pleased that the liberal Hill had agreed to his premise.

Hill went on to explain how whenever he tries to hold Obama accountable on something like drones, he’s immediately told by Democrats to quiet down and focus on the big picture.

“People have convinced themselves that Obama is much more reasonable and dovish on war issues than he actually is and I don’t think it’s just strategy,” he said. “I think we are wrong.”


Check Also


If The Planned Parenthood Gunman Was Black He’d Be Dead

Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadRobert Lewis Dear is now in custody for the ...


  1. Where are the multifarious comments on this article? The silence is deafening. Senator and Presidential Candidate Obama was hyper-critical and ended up HYPOCRITICAL in his sanctimonious criticism of former President Bush’s terrorism interrogation/extermination methods such as waterboarding and drones and felt that his brand of “negotiation” with our enemies would be all that was needed to wipe out all of the centuries of Islamist extremists’ animosity toward their regional and global enemies.

    Well, obviously, this did not work for Obama and he has seen that it is much easier to denigrate one’s predecessor BEFORE one assumes office because one has NO IDEA what the job really entails before he takes on the actual responsibilities.

    War is hell and there are numerous sacrifices of military and civilian casualties. Why is it now okay with the MSM and other vehement critics of Bush on these issues when they crucified Bush and the Republicans on the Drones issue and their terrorism interrogation tactics?

    So, I guess it is okay for Obama to kill people at will at the expense of at least capturing a few terrorists so that we can glean important information that will aid us in our global fight against terrorism.

    And, what is his justification when he complained about the same things when he was a Senator and a presidential candidate? Perhaps, it was to make himself look like a strong foreign affairs president when he really is not in the least. He has essentially used many of Bush’s policies and intel and now he is walking around like he is the “Mulatto John Wayne of the West” where he can pick and choose to kill our enemies at will!! But, alas, he packaged himself as the “Great Negotiator in Chief” but is anything but!!!

    It doesn’t matter what this president says or does because the MSM lapdogs have given him a all access pass to do as he pleases as long as he continues his radical, left-wing agenda of taxing the filthy, stinking rich and spending, more spending and even more spending until we accrue so much debt that the next generations of Americans will need to speak Chinese, Japanese and Korean in order to get a job at McDonalds.

    And, I guess that outcome will be favorable to some as long as we embrace gay rights and marriage to the fullest extent, amnesty for illegal immigrants, contraception so that we can continue our hedonistic overload and abortion on demand just in case we slip up and need to get rid of one of our little “accidents” or “inconveniences” so that we can continue to live our insouciant lives!!

  2. The drone campaign exists because a) President Obama wants far fewer American boots on the ground to fight radical Islam in foreign lands and b) his rhetoric during his first run for President – that his presentation of a kinder, gentler America to people who hate modernity, the West, Christians, etc., etc., would reduce this hatred – has not proven doable. As President, Mr. Obama is sworn to protect America and Americans. There are people who have declared global war on America – drones are one of our defensive weapons of choice. And they cost a lot less – in human lives, real money and political capital – than the foot soldiers who would otherwise be put at risk.

  3. Putting aside personal labels; I feel Marc L. Hill and many other Americans who are not combat veterans have no idea of human suffering and death caused by the devastation of military weapons…and the affects both physically and psychologically are imbedded for life. War is not a movie you can walk away from and go have dinner with family or friends. Drones were designed to kill people, and any authority that use them are responsible for the results regardless of self political views. My life label is a two tour Vietnam veteran, so unless others have walked in death foot steps their opinions are invalid.