Rand Paul does something right.

[Wendigo]

Y'know, one thing they might consider is removing the drone program from the authority of the Central Intelligence Agency, which is perhaps the least trustworthy organization within the US federal government.

You know, with a law. Sometimes lawmakers pass laws, like this here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Pinkerton_Act

They should take PMCs from the State Department while they're at it.

[Balmvng]

Complex Systems

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.

Or is it just not the answer you were wanting to hear?

[Complex Systems]

Lord Balmung of Azure Sky

Complex Systems

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.

Or is it just not the answer you were wanting to hear?

The question was for the Obama administration to clarify the grounds under which it would carry out a military drone strike in the US. The Obama administration fed him a "maybe, maybe not," just as they had before.

[Agent Thrax]

He's gonna get whacked, talking like that. People who ******** with the CIA get ******** with.

[Agent Thrax]

Wendigo

Y'know, one thing they might consider is removing the drone program from the authority of the Central Intelligence Agency, which is perhaps the least trustworthy organization within the US federal government.

You know, with a law. Sometimes lawmakers pass laws, like this here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Pinkerton_Act

They should take PMCs from the State Department while they're at it.

It takes integrity, self-sacrifice, and sincerity to stand up against the current government-versus-the-rest-of-us agenda as a politician. I know of no politician who possesses those qualities.

[Balmvng]

Complex Systems

Lord Balmung of Azure Sky

Complex Systems

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.

Or is it just not the answer you were wanting to hear?

The question was for the Obama administration to clarify the grounds under which it would carry out a military drone strike in the US. The Obama administration fed him a "maybe, maybe not," just as they had before.

Looked more like a "No" than a "Maybe" of any kind.

[lmasdlkjasdoiajusdlknm]

The Infamous Unami

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.

Rand Paul: Do you believe that the President has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil, and without trial?

Eric Holder: nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnyes

[ariaore]

While I am a liberal at heart I do like Rand Paul's decision to actually use the filibuster as intended and talk it out instead for all 13 hours. I am very much for the reform that would require it to revert to the old school means of filibustering like this. And additionally while I understand the administration has said that they can't drone strike anywhere anytime the whole issue makes me nervous and calling more attention to it with a filibuster is not something I'm opposed to. I would prefer things be firmed up so that I can read it not just in some top secret document for someone else's eyes only. Transparency is always best imo.

[Wendigo]

Agent Thrax

It takes integrity, self-sacrifice, and sincerity to stand up against the current government-versus-the-rest-of-us agenda as a politician. I know of no politician who possesses those qualities.

Russ Feingold did, he didn't make it through the...whatever you want to call it, a few years ago.

ariaore

I am very much for the reform that would require it to revert to the old school means of filibustering like this.

I find the other kind difficult to wrap my head around.

[Brian Eyre]

I'm a huge Rand Paul supporter. I've never been concerned if whether the government believes it has the right to just go around killing Americans without trial. It's just silly. The amount of time it took to get an answer to such a simple and obvious question was frightening. I'm glad Paul is getting more attention and I hope it holds up to 2016.