Welcome to Gaia! ::


Profitable Prophet

8,300 Points
  • Brandisher 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
Rand Paul filibusters nomination of John Brennan to head the CIA.

Quote:
Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, began an old-school, speak-until-you-can-speak-no-more filibuster on Wednesday just before noon, and was still going strong hours later.

Mr. Paul, who opposes the nomination of John O. Brennan to lead the Central Intelligence Agency, had previously said he would filibuster President Obama’s nominee after receiving a letter this month from Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. that refused to rule out the use of drone strikes within the United States in “extraordinary circumstances” like the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

On Wednesday, Mr. Paul did exactly as promised, taking to the Senate floor to filibuster Mr. Brennan’s nomination.

“I rise today to begin to filibuster John Brennan’s nomination for the C.I.A.,” Mr. Paul began. “I will speak until I can no longer speak. I will speak as long as it takes, until the alarm is sounded from coast to coast that our Constitution is important, that your rights to trial by jury are precious, that no American should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court.”

More behind the link.

Even if his filibuster is unsuccessful, I think it's useful anyway because, as was noted in the article, this keeps an important issue that must be discussed in the limelight. Drone strikes in the US would be no small thing, and it's incumbent upon citizens and legislators to really think about the consequences of such a party, both practically and, in my opinion, the role and legitimacy of the government as an institution that is supposedly beholden to the population. The Obama Administration's adoption and extension of cavalier attitudes regarding executive power vis-a-vis the rights of its citizenry has been disturbing.
A filibuster is an abused system that needs to die. And Rand Paul is not a fighter for freedom. He is a federalist who believes the states have the right to discriminate.

Conservative Raider

Kudos to Rand Paul.

Eric Holder's revelation that this administration thinks such tactics are perfectly legal on US soil was alarming. Drawing attention to it is a excellent use the filibuster. Even if it is a filibuster doomed to fail.

Tipsy Explorer

The one and probably only time I'll agree with Rand Paul. s**t like this is reason Obama deserves to be spat at just as much as Dubya was.
The Danguy
The one and probably only time I'll agree with Rand Paul. s**t like this is reason Obama deserves to be spat at just as much as Dubya was.


Agreed. Or have shoes chucked at him, borrowing on the customs of the Iraqi people (the idea of someone chucking their Nikes at a politician's head at this point (particularly a certain scumbag Attorney general) just seems appealing for some reason).

Will Rand Paul have any impact? Unlikely, but at least it keeps the issue alive.

As the Zen Master says, "We'll see."

Shadowy Powerhouse

9,125 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Super Tipsy 200
I like the talking filibuster, it's the only way that filibusters ought to happen. Not so warm on filibustering nominees, as the nomination process allows debate on the merits or lack thereof that their appointment would have.

It seems as though drone strikes on American citizens on American territory weren't on the program in the first place? We've already had a drone strike on al-Awlaki, which was a fairly public event. I'm personally opposed to that business.

Profitable Prophet

8,300 Points
  • Brandisher 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
As an aside: someone please tell the senator that the jheri curl went out of style.

Tipsy Trader

8,550 Points
  • Ultimate Player 200
  • Conventioneer 300
  • Clambake 200
I agree with Rand Paul on this issue and it is something that needs to continue be focused as of right now. I am also glad he did an old school filibuster.

Aged Lunatic

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day, I guess.

Find it ironic that only now is the right spooked about anti-terrorism measures on US soil after they proclaimed how necessary it was to be able to phonetap US citizens and try US citizens under military tribunals.

Questionable Codger

Too bad that the thing Rand Paul was railing against doesn't exist.

Quote:
The Honorable Rand Paul United States Senate Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Paul:
It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: "Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?" The answer to that question is no.
Eric H. Holder, Jr.
It's all a stage. Rand Paul would easily kill someone if they got in his way.
Ammo Amy
Too bad that the thing Rand Paul was railing against doesn't exist.

Quote:
The Honorable Rand Paul United States Senate Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Paul:
It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: "Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?" The answer to that question is no.
Eric H. Holder, Jr.


Even if it did exist, Rand is still a member of the party that filibusters EVERYTHING for little to no reason. So even if it did exist, it sounds like the boy who cried wolf.

Tipsy Explorer

Ammo Amy
Too bad that the thing Rand Paul was railing against doesn't exist.

Quote:
The Honorable Rand Paul United States Senate Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Paul:
It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: "Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?" The answer to that question is no.
Eric H. Holder, Jr.
The question is how long until that changes? They already showed they don't care about Americans dying in drone strikes, so I doubt the location will be an obstacle for long.

6,000 Points
  • Tycoon 200
  • Wall Street 200
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
Ammo Amy
Too bad that the thing Rand Paul was railing against doesn't exist.

Quote:
The Honorable Rand Paul United States Senate Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Paul:
It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: "Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?" The answer to that question is no.
Eric H. Holder, Jr.


The issue is that Eric Holder and President Obama have not defined rules of engagement for what exactly constitutes "engaged in combat." This is another reach around, and I was actually fairly disgusted with Rand today when he accepted this as an answer. This still leaves the ability for Obama to use (effectively) his own judgment to order a drone strike on American soil in "extreme" circumstances, that he promises he won't.

This wasn't an answer.
Ammo Amy
Too bad that the thing Rand Paul was railing against doesn't exist.

Quote:
The Honorable Rand Paul United States Senate Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Paul:
It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: "Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?" The answer to that question is no.
Eric H. Holder, Jr.


Unfortunately that very narrow answer still leaves assassination by sniper, bomber strike, poisoning, and a hundred other possibilities on the table. We need a more general affirmation: "It is never lawful to kill American citizens not engaged in combat without due process." The Constitution is clear. No american citizen can be deprived of life by the government without due process.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum