| Author |
Message |
|
Zebulon Dak
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul  Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:02 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:57 pm
Posts: 10037
Location: King In The North
|
Seahawk Sailor wrote: Seahawk Sailor wrote: They're not trying to create another "not allowed to kill with this one" law. They're asking that the executive branch acknowledge where the Constitutional limits are on this regarding American citizens, and so far the Obama administration has essentially said, "no, we retain the prerogative to use drones against Americans on American soil." This is what Democrats are refusing to sign. If this were the previous administration, there would be riots in the streets over the unconstitutionality of it. Why is it even a thing? Aren't they already not allowed to do that? If it was the opposite, and somebody was trying to make it legal, then yeah, I'd be pissed. Is the government allowed to snipe Americans? Are they allowed to plant landmines? Are they allowed to send in assassins? Why is it all of a sudden important to make it so they can't use drones? Is it being threatened? _________________   Tanzania¹²
|
|
  |
|
 |
|
Maelstrom787
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:05 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
 |
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 12:38 pm
Posts: 1252
Location: Delaware
|
12evanf wrote: Maelstrom787 wrote: So the legislative branch checking the executive powers is bad?
All they're asking for is a straight response which hasn't been given. The executive branch damn well better acknowledge their Constitutional limits, and they won't. What gives?
The filibuster was brought on by Holder's absolutely insane tip-toeing around answering whether US drones will be used against US citizens. No other answer will do, other than an unequivocal "NO."
It is that simple.
Fun fact, #StandWithRand has been top trending on twitter for a looong time. I agree there needs to be a discussion about drones, and that Obama's policy on curtailing our rights in the name of safety is a mirror image of lil' Bush. There was talk last election when Ron Paul joined Mitt Romney that it was due to the Republican Party pushing him to do so for his son's sake. That is if Rand Paul had any hopes of running for higher office, Ron Paul better step in line. Fast forward today and Rand Paul is filibustering the issue that both Democrats and Republicans dislike, and its one of Obama's major weak spots. Rand Paul gets national recognition, makes the opposing party president look bad, and garners new followers on his across the aisle stand. Its all too good to be true. It was planned. Ron never formally endorsed Romney, stating that it'd be against his principles. He didn't speak at the RNC because he'd be required to support Romney in his speech. The uproar came from Ron fans at Rand when Rand stepped in line. I don't get it. _________________ 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Seahawk Sailor
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:06 pm |
|
| * Navy Badass * |
 |
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:23 am
Posts: 16295
Location: Bothell
|
|
They are doing that because this administration has pointedly retained the flexibility to use them against Americans on American soil. It's the response to that they're looking for, not just to "get it in writing" they can't use drones.
_________________ I blog, I tweet. When I'm not writing or goofing around on Seahawks.NET.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SonicHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:07 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 12:56 pm
Posts: 2365
|
Seahawk Sailor wrote: They are doing that because this administration has pointedly retained the flexibility to use them against Americans on American soil. It's the response to that they're looking for, not just to "get it in writing" they can't use drones. You're not going to stop the use of drones. Drones are just another weapon and technology. Rand has only questioned that they not be used lethally in situations that are not of imminent and direct threat.
_________________
RIP ROAD WOES 12/2/2012
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zebulon Dak
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:11 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:57 pm
Posts: 10037
Location: King In The North
|
Seahawk Sailor wrote: They are doing that because this administration has pointedly retained the flexibility to use them against Americans on American soil. It's the response to that they're looking for, not just to "get it in writing" they can't use drones. I can guarantee you one thing, and that's that this isn't a situation where the Dems want to be able to use drones against Americans and Reps don't. If roles were reversed this exact same argument would be going on from opposite sides. In 4 years when the Reps are in power again if they decide they need to use drones against Americans they will. This "Rand Paul is a true patriot" is as much bullshit as Obama's "change". _________________ Tanzania¹²
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Seahawk Sailor
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:15 pm |
|
| * Navy Badass * |
|
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:23 am
Posts: 16295
Location: Bothell
|
SonicHawk wrote: Seahawk Sailor wrote: They are doing that because this administration has pointedly retained the flexibility to use them against Americans on American soil. It's the response to that they're looking for, not just to "get it in writing" they can't use drones. You're not going to stop the use of drones. Drones are just another weapon and technology. Rand has only questioned that they not be used lethally in situations that are not of imminent and direct threat.Exactly. And that's why it's so fuckin' scary this administration won't even acknowledge that. _________________ I blog, I tweet. When I'm not writing or goofing around on Seahawks.NET.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SonicHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:18 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 12:56 pm
Posts: 2365
|
|
The point is... they can't do that anyways. And a drone has absolutely nothing to do with this. A drone is just another weapon.
_________________
RIP ROAD WOES 12/2/2012
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Seahawk Sailor
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:21 pm |
|
| * Navy Badass * |
|
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:23 am
Posts: 16295
Location: Bothell
|
|
Understood. And it has nothing to do with drones. The point of this filibuster is this: "We can't get a straight answer from the Administration to the simple question of whether they believe it is OK to execute an American citizen with NO due process."
_________________ I blog, I tweet. When I'm not writing or goofing around on Seahawks.NET.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The Outfield
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:27 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
|
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 12:11 am
Posts: 1166
|
|
Yep, and still no communication from the White House, almost 13 hours into it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SonicHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:28 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 12:56 pm
Posts: 2365
|
Seahawk Sailor wrote: Understood. And it has nothing to do with drones. The point of this filibuster is this: "We can't get a straight answer from the Administration to the simple question of whether they believe it is OK to execute an American citizen with NO due process." No. That would not be ok. That has never been okay.
_________________
RIP ROAD WOES 12/2/2012
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SonicHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:32 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 12:56 pm
Posts: 2365
|
|
Drones aren't suddenly going to be applicable. If Bin Laden was in an apartment in Chicago we would go in and apprehend him.
_________________
RIP ROAD WOES 12/2/2012
|
|
| |
|
|
|
12evanf
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:34 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
|
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 10:40 am
Posts: 1711
|
|
Ironic tidbit: We hate Congressional gridlock, until a person, single handed, gridlocks it all day to make a point.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The Outfield
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:43 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
|
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 12:11 am
Posts: 1166
|
|
Well, it's over. In his closing statement, Rand said "I have discovered that there are limits to filibustering and that I have go take care of one of those in a few minutes."
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zebulon Dak
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:54 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:57 pm
Posts: 10037
Location: King In The North
|
|
So let me get this straight... the Dems want to be able to gun us down in the streets but the Repubs don't?
Ha. Not buyin it.
_________________ Tanzania¹²
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zebulon Dak
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 1:59 am |
|
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:57 pm
Posts: 10037
Location: King In The North
|
|
This is all such bullshit and you all know it. If they want to shoot us down in public they will, doesn't matter what Obama or Rand Paul say.
_________________ Tanzania¹²
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HawkGA
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 5:34 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 12:29 pm
Posts: 1566
|
|
Sadly, that part is true.
Along the "it's not okay now" arguments, unfortunately, the government tends to treat laws not as they are clearly written but as they "interpret" them. So to say it's not okay now is to ignore the fact that the government was suggesting it was okay.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Vetamur
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 6:07 am |
|
| *TOP 5 SUPPORTER* |
 |
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:41 pm
Posts: 5049
|
|
This is all so...disappointing.
I want Obama and his admin to say "of course we cant" immediately when asked if they could use armed UAVs inside the US.. I want all US politicians to immediately say "of course we wont" when asked if we will torture.. I want all Republicans to say "of course he is" when asked if they believe Obama was born in the US...
so..sick..of..all ..of ..this.......
_________________
“If somebody thinks they're a hedgehog, presumably you just give them a mirror and a few pictures of hedgehogs and tell them to sort it out for themselves.”
|
|
| |
|
|
|
volsunghawk
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 6:19 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
|
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
Posts: 6183
Location: Surrounded by Elway, Tebow, and Manning jerseys
|
SonicHawk wrote: The point is... they can't do that anyways. And a drone has absolutely nothing to do with this. A drone is just another weapon. What is the National Drone Association's stand on this? "You can have my drone when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers"? I think Rand Paul is a tool, but I will give him big props for actually filibustering instead of just threatening to. Not many folks in Congress have the fortitude to actually DO it. _________________  Okay, so maybe that pass rush is still an issue. Lather, rinse, repeat.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Seahawk Sailor
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 7:49 am |
|
| * Navy Badass * |
|
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:23 am
Posts: 16295
Location: Bothell
|
volsunghawk wrote: I think Rand Paul is a tool, but I will give him big props for actually filibustering instead of just threatening to. Not many folks in Congress have the fortitude to actually DO it. Yep. You know, it's funny, we voice bitter complaints that politicians are all a bunch of crap, that they're all bought and paid for, that they don't have American's best interests in mind. Sadly, that's almost entirely correct, but when someone like Rand Paul actually has the balls to step up and fillibuster for such an obvious cause, many of us still find fault. I don't agree with a lot of Rand Paul's ideology, but whether you agree with his ideology or not, he's one of the very few politicians that actually deserves to have/keep a job in politics. _________________ I blog, I tweet. When I'm not writing or goofing around on Seahawks.NET.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
kidhawk
|
Post subject: Re: Rand Paul Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:58 am |
|
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
Posts: 10269
Location: Anchorage, AK
|
SonicHawk wrote: The point is... they can't do that anyways. And a drone has absolutely nothing to do with this. A drone is just another weapon. It's funny you say that so easily, yet when asked, the people who actually make those kinds of decisions at the administration level can't or won't say that. Also, it's not all republicans either. I know I heard at least one democrat (from Oregon I believe) who spoke on the floor about how he was in agreement with "the gentleman from Kentucky" that the administration should be able to come right out and just say that they would never do that except in the extreme circumstance of another pearl harbor or other similar event of an attack on our country. Sonic, you do understand the difference between can't and not supposed to don't you? You always talk about how we need government to police corporations because we can't trust them to always do what they "can't do", why can't you understand that it's Congress' obligation to police the administration similarly?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests |
| |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|
