Just saw the first part of tonight's show, occurred to me there's another possibility. Taking your statement on its face that "everybody knows we launched the drone strikes we've been denying", it's not hard to imagine that the President knows that everyone knows. If so, covert drone strikes may not be that useful anymore.

Throw in another fact, that other countries are developing their own drones, and covert strikes on our part go from "less-than-useful" to "outright dangerous to us" as our government risks being blamed for someone else's actions. Maybe Brennan is genuinely expressing both his own opinion and the President's wishes? One can hope.

Rachel, I think you took this drone thing too far. The issue isn't so much what is being done in our name or which agency is doing it. It is that innocent people are getting killed. I wouldn't care if Time Warner ran the drone program if they could do it with 100% accuracy and 0% innocent death.

If we can all accept that running it perfectly is probably not possible we have to decide if it is a necessary evil on our fight against terror. Notice, I did not say 'war' against terror. I believe this should be a law enforcement function. Moving the drone program back under the military makes it harder to stop this from being a war.

We just had an election and, [the current foreign policy which included the drone program], President Obama won. I have to believe that people voted partially based upon his policy since Romney attached himself to it in the 3rd debate.

I'd rather have you railing every night about getting our troops our of the middle east, job creation, improving infrastructure, improving education, corporate corruption, and even politics.

I hope Brennan doesn't get what he says he wants and it stays at the CIA (and State).

Drones are technology, and as you might know, technology is spread across the globe.

Apply duct tape to the mouth and think, is it so hard, try to envision consequences, use a historical perspective, and place yourself in a battle place of the being attacked. Go back to the first use of the first weapon, and imagine the surprise, shock, fear, anger, indignation, embarrassment of the enemy's unanticipated audacity who dared to use this surprise secret weapon against you.

IT DOES NOT matter your ideas of war, rules and weapons, it does not matter you ignorance, it does not matter your casualties, your loss of battle or your loss of war. It is useless to wonder how, by whom, for why, by what means, the weapon that hit you was made, that it was hidden, that it was expensive, that took resources, that it was deadly.

All that matters is that you now KNOW that the weapon was made to exist by an enemy who is not one bit smarter than you.

You know in an instant what it took the enemy months or years to create it and unless you are STUPID you know what to do with the 'information' the enemy at first kept from you and then revealed to you in the weapons first use.

There is one thing you should know, and that is if you use blind retaliation to match the enemies weapon that the enemy knows that as well.
But what you are blind to is that you should keep that last weapon behind your back, and if you do use that weapon; as the enemy has against you that you need to have yet another weapon hidden behind you.

The danger of using any weapon against an enemy who then survives, is that know in an instant what is must be capable doing.

Drones are just technology, technology we have exported across the globe, those countries that are being attacked are given this 'information' very directly and will seek to make, beg, borrow and steal to make their own drones. Those other counties, who are not being attacked now, will surely seek that same drone capability.

I know that escalation of weaponry step by step by step is a natural thing for peace loving peoples to revile and avoid, but to have the consequences hidden by the babble of tongues, blinded by not being able to think is the real danger.

…

The following you could have read before, (it always was about China) but, we have a precedent from Zen Tzu's, Art of War, a Chinese fellow who 'predicted' the Korean Conflict and Vietnam, without even knowing about Nuclear Weapons used on Japan. But you will be blinded by details that you imagine to be relevant but not seeing far, far ahead. The game of conflict is like that of checkers, begins in India and hops to Pakistan takes a smuggled nuclear weapon across Afghanistan, in rug carried to IRAN (in an instant without development Iran become a Nuclear Power), Iran can ally with Iraq, and pose a threat to the Oil States. This plays into the cards long already on the table, it is unstoppable. The threat to stop it comes again from those Chinese. …

While U.S. Congress betrays trust and honor: We ask for what purpose?

No doubt the NRA supports this form of target practice, but given that no one in the human race can think clearly, about anything, I will just offer my alien view.

The ignorant attempt (by the Chinese) to use the satellite space surrounding the Earth for space armaments relies for our protection on the governance offered by treaties, approved by such sensible legislative bodies such as the U.S. Senate (not sleeping), signed by the President and enforced by threats of national means.

Casting aside the responsibilities of such bodies; as not being willing to take this step, and by the general reluctance to engage in military retaliation necessary to act as deterrent, that seems that this can be easily escalated by any nation (Chinese) capable of placing an armed satellite into a threating orbit.

Given that space around Earth is frequently transited and inhabited by living beings, and given the unnecessary and irrational ease of which dangerous space weapon can be lofted, and the generally irreparable harm possible it seems that serious negotiated treaties (with the Chinese) are necessary.

That being said there is extensive, costly and wide spread utilization of orbiting satellites in a wide variety specialized orbits. And that we have developed a significant commercial value to this usage of these properties it can be stated that there is significant value to these assets. That threatens national technical means and worldwide telecommunication markets.

Be it now, or be it later, these orbiting assets can be easily threated by simplistic exploded ball bearing SEBB armaments (Chinese), also in wide variety of threating orbits, all without much devastating cleverness. Most of the world's satellite asset can be subject to assault even as simple as occupying an orbit in the opposite direction. The threat is that once deployed, activated and working there is no means to clear space of fragmentary ammunition.

Hence it is without much elaboration, those serious consequences, including widespread and devastating effects on populations that the world governing bodies and countries negotiate an immediate cessation of anti-satellite testing, weaponry and deployment.

While we wait to be assured that no country (Chinese) dare pursue such armaments, without bearing the total and devastating consequences.

Thus it is imperative that (Chinese) treaties be drawn up and approved, and that serious threats of retaliation are made certain and that all nations must recognize the threat to themselves and their people.

From alien view point, it would natural to expect that space faring nations, would make such arrangements, because such a threat is in every way obvious.

(In the meantime please resume killing each other and making needless wars and enemies where they don't exist. Our alien children will someday be told bedtime stories as what happened to the people of Earth, so please leave evidence of your civilization.)

Remove duct tape from the mouth

Dear Rachel, please consider this idea as a practical way to marginalize the NRA. Start a new gun group. Call it the American Rifle Association (ARA). Get Gabby Giffords to be the founding chairperson. Advocate a Well Regulated Second Amendment. The NRA claims 4 million members. Make a membership goal of the ARA to eventually reach 50 million. Allow people who do not own guns to join. Consider all assault weapons to be military weapons, and mandate storage of them into armories located at every police station. Outlaw large ammo clips. Close the gun show loophole. Take the profit out of guns by taxing them to pay for medical costs that guns engender. Establish a voluntary nationwide gun registration database. Charge gun manufacturers for legal costs due to any gun the manufacturer made that was used to commit a crime. Mandate background checks and waiting periods for all gun sales. Differentiate between offensive weapons and defensive weapons. Regulate and restrict ammo sales. These proposals could be implemented without the Congress by invoking the Homeland Security act if Congress proves to be obstructionist. Many other ideas should be considered, but this solution is a good start.

I hope Hillary would read a statement before the Benghazi Hearings that declares that Republican dirty tricks tried to affect the Presidential election by releasing an inflammatory and defamatory film that was calculated to incite Muslim violence. Romney even mentioned that he wanted to quickly take advantage of the situation in his 47% discussion. Romney was so anxious to capitalize on the tragedy that he violated an agreement not to be political on 911. Romney criticized the Commander in Chief for diplomats calling for respect for all religions without knowing that our ambassador was killed. She should also read a list of lawmakers that turned down funding to increase consulate security, and specifically blame them for the tragedy.

Another brillant show! Thank you, Rachel.

Discussion of the attitudes of firearm partisans has been long overdue. You did a fine job. Those that were watching can now make their support known to a group that will accurately reflect a point of view. Well done.

If Michael Bloomberg thinks that guns are so inherently dangerous, then maybe he ought to mandate that the NYPD universally disarm.

Oh, he won't do that? Curious, no?

Imagine what would happen if the left was as aggressive on other progressive issues as they seem to be on gun control these days.

Where's the backbone when it comes to addressing global warming? Where's the spine when it comes to ending the Bush tax cuts or significantly raising taxes on the rich? Where's the gumption to put Wall Street criminals in jail for wrecking the world economy? Where's the spine to fight for a national universal single payer health care system? Where's the courage to do something about income inequality?

If fighting for things quickly means that's how you win, then why did the Obama administration spend a year and a half on health care reform that forces all of us to pay money to a for-profit disease industry?

If progressives don't get twice as aggressive on solving global warming, as they are on gun control right now, then we're all doomed. We don't need to worry about the long term financial stability of social security, because this planet will be cooked to a cinder before I reach retirement age.

There is no other single issue that is more important than this. We should start acting like it.

The newsies are whining all over about the sequester vis A vis air travel... Please tell us about the Sequester and returning GIs. The returnees who are pondering suicide need help while therapists are getting days off. Just a little more critical than a flight delay. Tell us about returning GIs and applications for disability assistance--something that was already in the crapper before the Sequester. IT IS NOT FAIR THAT PEOPLE WHO HAVE MADE A SACRIFICE WAIT TO HAVE THEIR GRIEVANCES HEARD BEHIND PEOPLE WHINING ABOUT A FLIGHT DELAY!