Posted on 03/10/2013 5:56:32 AM PDT by RaceBannon
As of this writing, Senator Rand Paul is still on his feet filibustering the nomination of John Brennan to be director of the CIA. But as he eventually made clear, his goal is not so much to actually stop Brennan, as it is to make a meal of the comments made this morning by Attorney General Eric Holder when he was pressed about U.S. policies on drone strikes on terrorists during an appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee. When asked whether the government considered it had the right to use an armed drone on an American citizen within the borders of the United States, Holder didn’t give the senators a straight answer. They were entitled to such an answer, as well as to the documents they requested. But those who are now saying that the dustup over using drones in the United States is the sole point of Paul’s filibuster hasn’t been listening closely to him as he held the Senate floor.
(Excerpt) Read more at commentarymagazine.com ...
Those people are not friends to conservatism, or to the America that I love.
I agree with this response.
No one is proposing to kill innocent Americans.
But we can’t exclude the possibility it may be necessary to use drones to terminate Islamic terrorists here in America. I’d rather kill them first than see Americans dead.
Rand Paul wants to read them their constitutional rights. I don’t want them to mass murder Americans. For me, its not even a close call.
The Constitution is not a suicide pact.
A key thought (above imho).
Mimic Vietnam and lose, or mimic Korea and wait for more war. Mimic Iraq and mimic Afghanistan. Mimic the past, reap the past. Perpetual war reaps perpetual profits for the weapons manufacturers. Peace means one side or the other won and profits have to be generated from other methods and by other means while weapons' manufacturing moves to back burner of the stove. Wars build economies as in WWII. Economics build wars as in prior WWII. Vicious cycles till one side has won only to rinse, repeat, rinse, and repeat. To paraphrase ... peace is constantly fleeting.
Lol. Yeah McCain boehner Graham and th other clowns really are the way forward. Geeeeeezzz.
I
I haven’t followed Rand Paul that much but do know he is not near the isolationist his father Ron is.
Lol. Seriously, dude needs to stand in front of the mirror and read that to himself.
Jonathon Tobin on any given day is full of chit. Why do you even post this carpola?
If you want to be afraid of something be afraid of the US govt. They are scarier than the terrorists. They are getting ready to terrorize you and me my misguided friend.
You better go to his web site and rethink that thought. Spewing out words without knowledge is ignorance. Quoting from his web site:
Immigration
I do not support amnesty, I support legal immigration and recognize that the country has been enriched by those who seek the freedom to make a life for themselves. However, millions of illegal immigrants are crossing our border without our knowledge and causing a clear threat to our national security. I want to work in the Senate to secure our border immediately. In addition, I support the creation of a border fence and increased border patrol capabilities.
Immigrants should meet the current requirements, which should be enforced and updated. I realize that subsidizing something creates more of it, and do not think the taxpayer should be forced to pay for welfare, medical care and other expenses for illegal immigrants. Once the subsidies for illegal immigration are removed, the problem will likely become far less common.
I support local solutions to illegal immigration as protected by the 10th amendment. I support making English the official language of all documents and contracts.
Millions crossing our border without our knowledge constitutes a clear threat to our nation’s security. Instead of closing military bases at home and renting space in Europe, I am open to the construction of bases to protect our border.
No matter how anyone spins it the issue is the US Constitution.
Is the Constitution still the law of the land or can Obama continue to ignore it and govern as he sees fit?
Paul had the guts to finally challenge Obama on his unconstitutional governance.
Obama finally had to back down and admit the Constitution still reigned supreme, but it was obvious he didn’t want to.
With the definition or "terrorist" constantly evolving and expanding, it is too easy to replace your "Islamic" modifier with the enemy du jour.
Start with, say drug dealers. Move on to Aryan Brotherhood types. Then the KKK, religious fanatics, child abusers....ad infinitum.
The American system is supposed to punish illegal acts under due process of law. Mitigating that "for the greater good" is not where we want to go. There's no good ultimate outcome to it.
Consider that question for just a millisecond. When were any of those goofball entities you mentioned on the right side of anything, especially rational logical thought? The answer is they are not on the side but Paul's critique was so logical that they decided they needed to hijack it. I mean, really, when have they ever come up with an original rational thought? So I default to my natural suspicion of any of them you mentioned.
To answer your question about the endless war on terrorists; I am tired of the endless string of deployments to hellholes around the world, especially Afghanistan, when nothing is being done to WIN the war, never more evidenced in the self flagellant ROE our kids have to operate under.
Would it have been OK with Holder and the current President if the former President, named Bush, did a drone strike on the Lakawana 7, you know the al queada cell in NY state? What about the al queada cell found in Bly, Oregon, could Bush, former President, same position and power, drone bomb the cell in Bly?
“...the fanciful suggestion that the Justice Department might target Tea Party members is a red herring.”
Yeah, that’s almost as absurd as the fanciful suggestion that they want to confiscate all privately owned guns. Or the fanciful suggestion that they would arm Mexican drug cartels in order to increase gun violence in an attempt to do the same. Or the red herring of the government compiling enemies lists.
The whole premise of this argument can be framed in this fashion with this question: Do we trust this president to do the right thing, ever? The answer is no. That is why this filibuster came to be to begin with. Nothing else. Few of them can be trusted. And that includes McCain and Graham and their remarks like “I think [sic] disservice to a lot Americans by making them think that somehow they’re in danger from their government,” McCain said, “they’re not” (Miller, Yahoo News). Oh really!
Rand Paul is scaring all the right people. And he is awakening many who had tuned out politics altogether.
At the very least they should be convicted in absentia first.
There is a war on terror in Muslim nations and there is a different war on terror against conservative Americans and vets whom globalists do not like. DHS has named conservatives domestic terrorists.
Jan the Man is harassing and molesting the American pepole at the airports - not Islamists. The democrats named the Tea Party, white racist terrorists and falsely blamed violence on them. They have bought way too much ammo at DHS to be harmless unless they are expecting an invasion. They are obsessed with disaster sceniarios and taking over our country to “save” us. DHS has trained and armed our police officers to act as an occupying military force, free from the constitution.
Our government does not support the constitution and is violating it in the name of the war on terror in the homeland. They are not warring against Islamists, they are shipping them in by the thousands and they have left the borders wide open so they can carry in WMD.
There is a war on some jihadists overseas, even though our government has sided with, funded and empowered a terrorist organization, the muslim brotherhood.
Our government can not be trusted with the power of this war - especially in the homeland. They are treasonous, paranoid nuts who basically disrespect and hate Americans.
The very fact that Holder did not have a position on whether it is constitutional for the Pres to fire drones on Americans on American soil without a trial is rediculous for someone in his position.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.