up as a reason not to vote for Obama and only then does it become a lesser of two evils discussion. In other words, they never actually treat it as an evil. At worst, it's an inconvenience because it means they have to spend their time lecturing radical liberals on why they need to vote for Obama anyway." Not really sure what the point is here. Whether they specifically see the drone program as evil or not, they are convinced, and, as I argued above, not without some reason, that Romney. on balance, is more evil than Obama. And of course, Romney, to them, is evil in ways that Obama is not, whereas, when it comes to the drone program itself, there is no reason in the world to believe that Romney will be any better than Obama, and pretty good reason to think he will be even worse. "I always think of the discussion about Ron Paul on the internet months ago, when Greenwald and others were praising his foreign policy ideas. The prevailing line was that Ron Paul is disqualified as a candidate because of his other objectionable stances and actions. This was a perfect example of what Freddie is talking about in his post. The posts listed Ron Paul's bad qualities and then branded him disqualified, with no discussion of why Obama's bad qualities didn't do the same, or what someone who prioritized foreign policy over abortion rights, for example, might think about the issue. Instead it