Speaking of selectively removing rights without due process... This story has been festering for a while, and I've been meaning to bring it up. I know the George Soros implant in my head says I shouldn't criticize Obama, but here goes: I am extremely uncomfortable handing the executive branch the authority to target American citizens for assassination based on information that is likely not to be made public in any way, with no recourse for the target to face their accuser in any kind of open forum. Obviously this case is a good one, from the government's perspective, to use to enshrine this authority in the executive branch's arsenal. Few people are likely to complain if this Imam meets his maker via American weaponry. His words and deeds are quite obviously hostile, and his is an undeniable threat to cause further death and destruction to Americans and others. But once this kind of power is enshrined, it will become more and more tempting for an executive to use it to silence critics. As we watched during the Bush years, dissent was equated with lack of patriotism, with "wanting the terrorists to win". The press needed to "watch what it said". Criticism of the war effort in Iraq was no different than hating our troops. In such an environment, it is hardly a stretch to imagine an executive claim that it's critics were a threat to the nation, and ordering them killed. It's a line I don't think we should cross, no matter how persuasive this particular case is.