Senator Rand Paul actually filibustering

[Juan]

Senator Rand Paul is filibustering the nomination of John Brennan for CIA director - Paul's issue is use of domestic drones.
Here's the CSpan link
http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN2/

[The General]

Senator Rand Paul is filibustering the nomination of John Brennan for CIA director - Paul's issue is use of domestic drones.
Here's the CSpan link
http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN2/

It's pretty awesome.  I like Rand Paul.
He said three hours ago that he will speak until he can't anymore.

[PB the Deplorable]

Senator Rand Paul is filibustering the nomination of John Brennan for CIA director - Paul's issue is use of domestic drones.
Here's the CSpan link
http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN2/

I think he (or maybe it is other R's in the Senate) said they aren't going to allow confrmation until they get to the bottom of the Benghazi coverup.  But they may have caved on that by now, as they said the same thing about confirming /Kerry at State and Hagel at Defense.

[Sardondi]

I'm taking crazy pills: an Attorney General of the United States has actually said it's perfectly acceptable to use drones to kill American citizens on American soil, and neither the media nor the left is saying he must be immediately dragged into the street and beaten to death. Whores.

[Eddie Coyle]

I'm taking crazy pills: an Attorney General of the United States has actually said it's perfectly acceptable to use drones to kill American citizens on American soil, and neither the media nor the left is saying he must be immediately dragged into the street and beaten to death. Whores.

They don't want that certain card in the deck that Holder has(52 of them) played on them. And that yellow bellied high yella would use it on Chris Matthews as fast as he'd use it on Hannity.

[PB the Deplorable]

I'm taking crazy pills: an Attorney General of the United States has actually said it's perfectly acceptable to use drones to kill American citizens on American soil, and neither the media nor the left is saying he must be immediately dragged into the street and beaten to death. Whores.

Holder has gotten bolder and bolder with his fascist comments and policies, this is just the end result.  That is, hopefully it's the end, and not just the most recent slap in our faces.  Word is he's running for Pres in '16 - it is going to be delicious watching how early he gets bounced  if he even has support to begin a campaign.

I really hope that when Obama leaves office the Media and Democrats in general are going to go back to what they were before they got a black President and black Atty General - foolish  Liberals.

They've proven beyond argument EITHER they (not the rest of us, just them) are not ready for a black President and are completely unable to criticize one or access one fairly, OR they are the same America hating Marxists Obama is and really have no issues with him and his policies. 

[MV/Liberace!]

They've proven beyond argument EITHER they (not the rest of us, just them) are not ready for a black President and are completely unable to criticize one or access one fairly, OR they are the same America hating Marxists Obama is and really have no issues with him and his policies.

i think it's a little of both, but primarily option 2.

[davidk26212]

Hes reading Alice in Wonderland now lol

[onan]

hmmm, what I read of the paper says something a bit different...

a US operation using lethal force in a foreign country against a US citizen
who is a senior operational leader of al-Qa'ida or an associated force would be
lawful: 1.an informed, high-level official of the US government has determined
that the targetted individual poses an imminent threat of violent attack against
the United States; 2. capture is infeasible, and the United States continue to
monitor whether capture becomes feasible; and 3. the operation would be
conducted in a manner consistent with applicable law of war principles.

Police do the first qualifier rather frequently, I guess it is in the definition of imminent. To the second, if they can't capture the bad guy...  and third, under what is consistent with war principles.
funny how Obama is a Marxist/fascist/spawn of satan, yet when extraordinary rendition was the buzz word... not so much squawking about these parts.
Don't get me wrong, I ain't happy about this but if froth is just now forming in the corner of your mouths... you have either been asleep or you're a hypocrite.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/020413_DOJ_White_Paper.pdf

Also Paul is a jerk:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/14/rand-pauls-doctor-credentials-questioned-lacking-boards-certification/

[West of the Rockies]

hmmm, what I read of the paper says something a bit different...Police do the first qualifier rather frequently, I guess it is in the definition of imminent. To the second, if they can't capture the bad guy...  and third, under what is consistent with war principles.
funny how Obama is a Marxist/fascist/spawn of satan, yet when extraordinary rendition was the buzz word... not so much squawking about these parts.
Don't get me wrong, I ain't happy about this but if froth is just now forming in the corner of your mouths... you have either been asleep or you're a hypocrite.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/020413_DOJ_White_Paper.pdf

Damn, there you go again, introducing facts into the conversation.  Party pooper!

[PB the Deplorable]

hmmm, what I read of the paper says something a bit different...Police do the first qualifier rather frequently, I guess it is in the definition of imminent. To the second, if they can't capture the bad guy...  and third, under what is consistent with war principles.
funny how Obama is a Marxist/fascist/spawn of satan, yet when extraordinary rendition was the buzz word... not so much squawking about these parts.
Don't get me wrong, I ain't happy about this but if froth is just now forming in the corner of your mouths... you have either been asleep or you're a hypocrite.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/020413_DOJ_White_Paper.pdf

Also Paul is a jerk:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/14/rand-pauls-doctor-credentials-questioned-lacking-boards-certification/

I don't mind grabbing some terrorist and sending them somewhere to pound information out of them one bit.  Under the Geneva Convention, participants in asymetrical warfare - spies, terroriests, assassins, sabateurs, etc, anyone committing these acts not in an army wearing a uniform, has zero rights to anything.  If they weren't captured on American soil they have no Constitutional protection.  If they are caught here it's a gray area, but evn FDR had German spies shot upon capture in New Jersey.

What I do have a problem with is the police having drones in the first place, and attacking us with them.  'Collaterial damage' in countries where they allow terrorists to operate freely is the fault of those countries.  It 's a problem when it happens here.

[onan]

What I do have a problem with is the police having drones in the first place, and attacking us with them.  'Collaterial damage' in countries where they allow terrorists to operate freely is the fault of those countries.  It 's a problem when it happens here.

I agree with ya here. Where were ya when the patriot act, which includes all kinds of civil rights and privacy violations, was being shoved down our throats?
As to violence to citizens of the US, I guess we just disagree on the degree.

[Why are you yelling?]

‎"Bush started this, Obama is expanding this. The irony is that Obama ran as the anti-Bush candidate."  Rand Paul

Damn proud to be from Kentucky today!!

[MV/Liberace!]

Damn proud to be from Kentucky today!!

you have a great senator.

[Juan]

If they are caught here it's a gray area, but evn FDR had German spies shot upon capture in New Jersey.

The Germans landed in 1942 in New York and Florida.  They were executed within a matter of weeks.  But by the end of the war, the Roosevelt administration had second thoughts - by then, we had agents behind the enemy lines and certainly didn't want them executed.

But the issue Paul is debating, for the most part, is the use of drone strikes against American citizens on US soil.

[Sardondi]

....But the issue Paul is debating, for the most part, is the use of drone strikes against American citizens on US soil.

Bingo. I'm just flabbergasted. Just what the hell is Holder's theory of legality? I'll give you a hint: pious talk about "exceptional circumstances" and "we don't intend of ever doing it" isn't a legal basis. There's not a shred of legal or constitutional authority for Holder's proposal...absent a declaration of martial law, which turns us into something indistinguishable from the Soviet Union.

[Juan]

Nixon said he disagreed with Wage and Price Controls and promised never to use them as he signed the bill.  Only a few months later, we plunged into the economic difficulties of the 70s as he enacted the controls.

BTW, an hour or so ago, Paul offered to stop the filibuster if the Senate would pass a sense of the Senate resolution saying that the president did not have authority to launch attacks on American citizens on US soil not engaged in a direct attack on the US.  Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill) stood to oppose the resolution.  Thus, the Democrats, friends of the people, support killing those people, at least sort-of.

[PB the Deplorable]

I agree with ya here. Where were ya when the patriot act, which includes all kinds of civil rights and privacy violations, was being shoved down our throats?
As to violence to citizens of the US, I guess we just disagree on the degree.

That's a good question.  I remember people talking about it and being upset but I never saw any one thing being proposed that seemed all that outrageous.  Because of that I admit to not paying much attention.  Over the years I haven't noticed anything of concern occuring - no doubt I've missed things that could be pointed out.

In wartime, it is not inappropriate to stretch things somewhat if a solid case can be made, there are controls in place and a strong understanding that we're doing this but it's going to be monitored and very limited, and that it's very close to a boundry. 

There is a difference between what is allowed in circumstances of war vs  just regular law enforcement.  This terrorism stuff is/was uncharted territory, some of it has to be fought on our soil and tests those boundries (between what is acceptable in war vs law enforcement).   I'd really have to look at a list of what the objectionable items are to comment.



The US citizen thing.  It pisses me off when some person with US citizenship - but formerly from somewhere else - goes to, say, China or Viet Nam or North Korea to start trouble, gets arrested, then asks for our government to bail them out.  We're just being taken advantage of and given an incident we don't need (similiar to what Salmon Rushdie did to the West, running to the UK and publishing a book he knew to be very insulting to the vast majority of people in his homeland, then demanding protection and security - how did that benefit the UK or the West?).

The same goes for some person with an Arabic name that was born in the US, or got US citizenship, and ends up allying themselves with some al-Qaeda-type outfit out in some desert somewhere.  Fuck 'em -  I don't care if their US Citizenship isn't 'honored' before blowing them up.

[Why are you yelling?]

you have a great senator.

Hes the closest thing to a true conservative that I have seen in a long time.  Contrary to popular belief we want a smaller government and larger amount of freedoms not a religious theocracy with corporations running wild.

[PB the Deplorable]

... Contrary to popular belief we want a smaller government and larger amount of freedoms not a religious theocracy with corporations running wild.

Of course.  The Ds use those - and other false issues - as Red Herrings to block the real message from getting through.

[MV/Liberace!]

I remember people talking about it and being upset but I never saw any one thing being proposed that seemed all that outrageous.

that's because many if not most or all of the last decade's egregious usurpations of constitutional freedom are legally bound to secrecy.  that is, you don't know of them... nor would you.  as just an example... if a warrantless search is conducted of a citizen, there are provisions within the patriot act that make it a felony for the citizen to publicly discuss the search.  this is police state/banana republic/third world bullshittery.  if one wishes to learn more and also increase depression levels by a proportional amount, i submit this as a literary diversion.

...(similiar to what Salmon Rushdie did to the West, running to the UK and publishing a book he knew to be very insulting to the vast majority of people in his homeland, then demanding protection and security - how did that benefit the UK or the West?).

it benefited because it was an example of our culture saying to the despicable, islamo-fundamentalist, cesspool cultures of the world, "like it or not, we will defend free speech."  islamic fundamentalists are coddled to embarrassing levels these days as evidenced by the reflexive speed with which our politicians waddle toward cameras in apology for something "offensive" that's happened.  i can't imagine anyone sticking up for free speech these days when a few olive skinned "youths" start turning over cars.


wrapping up:
you people who voted to retain this obama shit stain another four years... i hope you're happy with all of the hope and change you've purchased at my expense.  stepping back and taking a nice look at the lay of the land, you've done nothing but fund raise and campaign for a continuation of bush era policies.  it's now clear NONE of this patriot act disaster will be erased during the obama administration.  it will only be further endorsed by this president or even expanded upon.  way to go, dummies.  the same goes for you republicans who actually were responsible for romney becoming the nominee.  no real change was possible through that guy, either.


come at me.

[The General]

you people who voted to retain this obama shit stain another four years... i hope you're happy with all of the hope and change you've purchased at my expense.  stepping back and taking a nice look at the lay of the land, you've done nothing but fund raise and campaign for a continuation of bush era policies.  it's now clear NONE of this patriot act disaster will be erased during the obama administration.  it will only be further endorsed by this president or even expanded upon.  way to go, dummies.  the same goes for you republicans who actually were responsible for romney becoming the nominee.  no real change was possible through that guy, either.


come at me.

I hear you!  I wish there was a scorpion army I could join that believed in the above.

[HorrorReporter]

This is making for great TV. I called friends and family. CSPAN2 probably never had more viewers!

[The General]

Sen Ted Cruz just gave the opening monologue from Patton.  Epic stuff.

[MV/Liberace!]

i saw rubio earlier today attempting to suckle up to paul's filibuster.  rubio is a coattail riding establishment republican and i have no plans to support him in his future political aspirations.

[The General]

i saw rubio earlier today attempting to suckle up to paul's filibuster.  rubio is a coattail riding establishment republican and i have no plans to support him in his future political aspirations.

I call that guy Nubio.  Or Newbie-o, however you wanna spell it.  He's being promoted as the token minority conservative savior that's gonna out Obama president Obama.  I don't give a shit if he's hispanic or from Jupiter, is he a real conservative or just another check-pants republican?  I guess that remains to be seen.

[HAL 9000]

Also Paul is a jerk:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/14/rand-pauls-doctor-credentials-questioned-lacking-boards-certification/

onan:

I give/gave you more credit than this - I thought you did or do have a medical background of sorts. Board Certification is in no way reflective of a physicians competency or right to practice; in most cases, these are merely "clubs" you can join by paying a fee and often taking one of their tests so you then have the right to use that organization's letters (title) after your name.

Rand Paul, after being a member of the American Board of Ophthalmology (ABO) for ten years, decided to leave that organization based on principled disagreements with the ABO. Even the American Board of Medical Specialties admits that:

Medical specialty certification in the United States is a voluntary process. While medical licensure sets the minimum competency requirements to diagnose and treat patients, it is not specialty specific.

While the actual numbers are a bit fluid depending on organization and articles, roughly 80%-85% of doctors are Board Certified - often because their employer requires it, or it looks good on their CV and office wall (marketing), or insurance companies offer financial incentives. That also means that up to roughly 1 in 5 doctors are not Board Certified.

Even the once-revered American Medical Association (AMA), often associated by the general public (erroneously) as something special that doctors were members of, has somewhat startling and somber news: after subtracting medical students and residents (doctors in training), membership by practicing physicians is around 15%. WTF? Yes, ~15%. The AMA is really just another pay-to-join club, that acts as a guild, and/or lobbying group for its members, specifically Congress.

So calling Rand Paul a "jerk" for his principled stance against an organization he has disagreements with, and has no legal or moral reason to join, seems a bit specious.

So as not be misunderstood however, I support Board Certification in general, though there are no studies which can show conclusively, that there are better patient outcomes as a direct result of certification. However, I also support a doctor's right and individual freedom to not join an organization, especially when there is no legal compulsion to do so.

I'd just as soon this not devolve into a medical sidetrack, as my post is merely intended to set forth some facts. You may feel he's a jerk for his ideology, but to relate "jerk" with Board Certification is, well, misleadingly jerky. Not to mention the story and article you cited is nearly three years old, and didn't then, or now, have any relevance to anything.

[PB the Deplorable]

...  stepping back and taking a nice look at the lay of the land, you've done nothing but fund raise and campaign for a continuation of bush era policies.  it's now clear NONE of this patriot act disaster will be erased during the obama administration.  it will only be further endorsed by this president or even expanded upon.  way to go, dummies.  the same goes for you republicans who actually were responsible for romney becoming the nominee.  no real change was possible through that guy, either.


come at me.

I never thought I'd ever defend Obama, not ever - but no one was ever going to overturn any Patriot Act provisions or anything else.  Not Ron Paul, not the other Rs, not Mitt Romney.  Who moves to limit their own power when they get into office?  Especially when nothing much has changed between us and groups like al-Qaeda.  Even if they wanted to the Congress would block it.  Whichever side wanted to do it, the other side would go all out to scare the citizens and the bill would fail.

I don't buy the idea that all sorts of awful things are going on to innocent citizens all around us, and we don't know because there is a gag order on it.  But the lack of successful large-scale terror attacks here in the US must be due to something other than dumb luck.  I'm guessing the right people are being targeted and eliminated.

[PB the Deplorable]

... the last decade's egregious usurpations of constitutional freedom...

Our Constitution is long gone.  Read through it.  Look at what specifically the Congress is allowed to do and what powers the President, and Supreme Court are supposed to have.

Read the first 10 Amendments and see how many havent't been debased.  Here is a very short list that doesn't get into the minutia:

1st - free exercise of religion.  This has been re-written as separation of church and state - a prohibition of religion anywhere the arm of government reaches, which is just about everywhere.  We are free to be religious - in our homes and at church - for now

2nd - constantly under attack

4th - we aren't secure in our homes or our papers without due process - not with the powers given the IRS and other govt agencies.

5th - try not giving the IRS what they demand.  In addition plenty of people lose property without due process for a variety of reasons

9th - retention of Rights not enumerated - what rights would those be, the Federal govt invades any part of our lives they want

10th - powers not delegated to the Federal govt are retained by the People and by the States.  What a laugh that is.  It means everything from Social Security to nearly all the Cabinet Departments and their Agencies to ObamaCare are absolutely Unconstitutional. 

There is plenty more, this is just the lowest of the low-hanging fruit.


All the people that think the Supreme Court is 'Conservative'?   Conservative would be to immediately disband 95% of what the Federal Government does, renounce the debt built up doing all that, imprison most if not all past and present federal judges, Congressmen, Senators, Presidents, and members of their staffs.

[Yorkshire pud]

  This terrorism stuff is/was uncharted territory,

Oh to live in a bubble; Uncharted as far as being the victim is concerned perhaps. The PIRA was attacking it's own citizens in Ireland and later mainland Britain, (and at least one in Germany) long before the attacks on the WTC. I'm close to someone who was in a Manchester shopping centre with her (then young) daughter the day the PIRA visited it with a bomb. The fact both escaped being cut to shreds by flying glass was a minor miracle; she said she felt the air pressure change and a low 'wumph' sound and threw herself on top of her daughter. To this day she has no idea why; she isn't military trained so had no experience what an explosion should feel like. PIRA were of course partly financed by Americans descended from the Emerald Isle, under the noses and tacit approval of various US administrations. The murder of Mountbaton, and Airey Neave didn't stop the funding from across the pond..Can you imagine the outrage if a terrorist organisation was openly raising funds with 'charity' dinners in the UK and funding terrorist attacks in the US? And the occasional Senator or Congressman/woman was caught up?

I don't buy the idea that all sorts of awful things are going on to innocent citizens all around us, and we don't know because there is a gag order on it.  But the lack of successful large-scale terror attacks here in the US must be due to something other than dumb luck.  I'm guessing the right people are being targeted and eliminated.

Why don't you buy into it? Because no-one in government has confirmed or denied it? Tony Blair said for long enough that no UK air bases were being used to transport suspects to the US (or rather non US based torture centres in various countries around the world) full stop..Up until photographic evidence and flight logs were made public: "Oh those flights! Why didn't you say?" Tony Blair wouldn't know the truth if it fell on his head. He even went iinto Bush's back pocket and convinced enough MP's that Saddam Hussein could hit the UK with missiles in 45 minutes, with his fictitious WMD's! This was in 2003 after Condi Rice had said in 2001 that SH had no means to attack anyone!! They all lie, irrelevant of political leanings.

The lack of large scale terrorist attacks on the US is one of luck and advanced detection by the various anti terrorist agencies..As the PIRA said after blowing up the Brighton hotel that Margaret Thatcher was staying in, killing the wife of one minister; "We only have to be lucky once. You have to be lucky always".

The drone thing is a damp squib. If it's okay for an operator in Nevada to attack a house in Pakistan (And that could be seen as a declaration of war, attacking a sovereign state, especially when the attacks so far have taken out innocent civilians-It sure would if it were the other way around) allegedly containing a suspect, why wouldn't the same operator attack a house in Boston or NJ containing a terrorist suspect if the 'drone' was the only means of doing so with possibly a very tight deadline before the suspect took flight? He has far more chance to launch an attack on US soil than the guy in Pakistan.