Rand Paul blathering for hours on Senate floor

Yeah, this is not a power I really want so freely available, and yes, I am concerned with the militarization of our police. More and more often I'm seeing military tactics and force used by the police, and it is an uncomfortable prospect.

Silence, baby killer! We'll have no more of your baby eating around here!

Oh, come on! Babies are delicious!

[YT="Baby, it's what's for dinner!"]xv3I6mz0tBY[/YT]

Some Rand quotes:

On vague wording of drone strike criteria: “Are you going to just drop a hellfire missile on Jane Fonda? Are you going to drop a missile on Kent State?” He later added, “That’s gobbledygook.”

On Obama’s civil liberties flip-flop: “I think its also safe to say that Barack Obama of 2007 would be right down here with me arguing against this drone-strike program if he were in the Senate.”

On John Brennan: “I have hounded and hounded and hounded him… Only after yanking his chain… does he say he’s going to obey the law. We should be alarmed by that.”

On the Constitution and the law: “I’m not saying that anyone is Hitler, don’t misunderstand me. But what I am saying that is…when a democracy gets it wrong, you want the law to be in place.”

Taking a stand: “I have allowed the president to pick his political appointees…But I will not sit quietly and let him shred the Constitution.”

On his colleagues in the Senate: “If there were an ounce of courage in this body I would be joined by other senators… saying they will not tolerate this.”
On White House “kill list”: “The people on the list might be me.”

On Obama: “He was elected by a majority, but the majority doesn’t get to decide who we execute.”

On making a point: “This will be a blip in his nomination process. But I hope people will see it as an argument for how important our rights are.”

On Congress: “Nothing ever happens around here.”

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...-filibuster-on-civil-liberties-drone-strikes/

Quit filibustering this thread, you!!!

Wordforge has no rule against it. So

Mister Administrator, fellow members, I'd like to take a moment and discuss all of the many apple pies I have eaten over the years.


Nine.


Shit, I'm bad at this.

“No President has the right to say that he is judge, jury, and executioner.”

“Nobody will ever forget Jane Fonda swivelling around in North Vietnamese armored guns and it was despicable,” he said. “That’s one thing if you want to try her for treason, but are you going to just drop a drone, a hellfire missile on Jane Fonda?”

He should've done a mic drop when he finished.

technically - a fillisbuster IS the "senate functioning properly" according to it's own rules, and has been used extensively by both parties for decades.

I do object to the "ghost fillibuster" that's become popular lately, but this is old school.

Meanwhile, I'm loving watching the left wingers lose their rational thinking because of WHO is staging this. Even Jon Stewart said on the air "this needs to happen" but yall had rather take the easy way and mock.

No, but mockery directed at the person willing to ask "Is this right?" strongly implies if not support, at least aqiesence.

Ironically, many of the same folks who rightly note the hypocrisy of those who oppose a thing just because Obama is doing it are now letting a crucial question be ignored because they don't like the one asking it.

It's quite telling.

Except of course the Senateis controled by pussy Dems who'll do exactly like TOPTB tell them to so Paul is forced to engage in a time-honored manuver and act from the minority to force an issue the majority wants to suppress into the daylight.

If this was Mitt Romeny's administration, with a Republican majority in the Senate and Bernie Sanders or (god forbid) Dick Durbin were leading the fillibuster you would be singing the praises of the wise and noble statesman willing to take a lost-cause stand in defense of constitutional principles.

Your hypocrisy on this fairly glows in the dark.

By the way, when I think of Brennan, I keep thinking of this guy:



Which leads to one of the best moments ever, in television history:

Where's Async when you really need him?

Serious question: Is the current administration doing anything with drones that previous administrations weren't already doing, just with more effective tools?

Serious question.

Well, I don't know how biased or unbiased The Independent is, but according to the article you can click here, the use of drones and drone strikes has gone up sharply under the Obama administration.

And an Opinion piece from Reuters which goes into a bit more detail, that you can click here.

It looks like the Obama Administration has made the drone the go-to weapon of choice.

It's claiming the right to commit extrajudicial assassination of American citizens on American soil. Dick Cheney might have been in favor of doing so, but officially Bush never went so far, no.

AFAIK, the previous administration was not reported to have put forward the thesis that using executive authority to kill Americans on American soil without due process was legit (the drones are merely a methodology)

I'm not really certain that they disagree with the premise, but apparently the did not put it forward.

I assume you are also opposed to the use of drones in Afghanistan and Pakistan?

Take it easy on actormike. Whatever news source he saw it reported probably didnt give any context either.

"Rand Paul is filibustering for hours? Fucking asshole."

Is it? Where can I read about this outside of Wordforge?

Oh, same old GOP bullshit.

The admin is reserving the right to use a drone strike if a serious emergency was happening that they could stop, such as a militarily significant event on the order of 911 or Pearl Harbor.

Which of course we would all support.

There is no intent now nor does there appear to be in any future case to use drones strikes instead of more traditional apparatus of law enforcement in day to day activities or even high profile intelligence issues.

Quite frankly, there's no need to do so and the concept of 'collateral damage' is a huge political poison pill.

The real issue is drones in day to day surveillance - that's something that needs to be discussed.

But Obama using a Hellfire on Jane Fonda? That's point at the stupid guy worthy. Why the fuck would they need to?

Which is of course why Dumbforge has embraced the concept so thoroughly.

Really? That's the best you got? Jesus Christ.

The fact that the Bush Jr. administration was full of assholes and incompetent fools who trampled all over civil rights in the name of TERRORISM! somehow excuses the current crop of assholes and fools?

Yes Demi, if Obama finds himself in an episode of 24 we all support his right to Hellfire a Starbucks. Who's living in the fantasy world again?

More plausible is the administration exporting drones to Mexican drug cartels in order to "track" them.

Indeed. Could it possibly be that that is the entire point?

Yes, that's really more plausible. One of our most advanced technologies that is vital to our international efforts to defeat terrorism are going to be sent to the Calderone cartel. rolleyes: Who's living in the fantasy world again?

As plausible as him sending tanks, fighter jets and a quarter of a billion dollars to the Muslim Brotherhood.

What if the gub'mint gets sick of his blathering and takes him out with a drone strike, just for irony's sake?

On 9/11, had a fighter gotten within range of one of the hijacked planes, would it have been appropriate to shoot it down, even if flying over a populated area?