Sen. Rand Paul has ended his day-long filibuster against President Obama’s claim to be able to kill any U.S. citizen on his own authority without criminal charge or conviction. What was most striking about this principled stand is the virtual total absence of Democrats in speaking out against Obama. Just this week, Attorney General Eric Holder admitted that this policy could include killing citizens on U.S. soil with drones. Yet, the Democrats worked to stop not the kill list policy but Paul’s filibuster. Obama apologists have attacked Rand for some of his other positions to avoid dealing with the fact that Obama is claiming the powers of an Imperial President. I do not agree with Paul on many things, but I commend him for this stand and condemn those who remained silent, again, in the face of this authoritarian policy of Obama.
The filibuster was to block the nomination of John Brennan who has been opposed by most civil libertarians due to his connection to the torture program and other abuses. His more senior colleagues, like John McCain, told him to “calm down” — telling advice from our political leaders that authoritarian power is nothing to get upset about if it does not affect you. Lindsey Graham stated that against up against the unilateral killing of citizens “ridiculous” and just not how things are done in Washington.
Rand fell short of the record of former Sen. Strom Thurmond of South Carolina who filibustered for 24 hours and 18 minutes against the Civil Rights Act of 1957.
He shared some time with other Republican senators. However, after five hours, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid tried to limit the remaining time.
The lack of opposition to Obama’s kill list policy is a national disgrace. It shows the triumph of a cult of personality within the Democratic ranks where both members and voters have chosen Obama over long-standing values of civil liberties that once defined their party.
Source: CNN
“Ron Wyden joins Senate filibuster: Americans have the right to know when they can be targeted”
By Eric W. Dolan
Wednesday, March 6, 2013 19:35 EST
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/06/ron-wyden-joins-senate-filibuster-americans-have-the-right-to-know-when-they-can-be-targeted/
Arthur said:
“Let me know when the President kills somebody arbitraritly under this policy, THEN I will be outraged, but NOT before. As I pointed out before Lincoln did far worse during the Civil War and killed hundreds of thousants of US citizens. I applaud Lincoln for his actions and if we have such a situation come about again, then I will be supporting this policy too.”
http://jonathanturley.org/2013/03/07/rand-paul-takes-stand-against-obamas-kill-list-policy-virtually-alone/#comment-515961
Exactly why do you applaud Lincoln for murder? Do you realize he violated the Constitution by waging war on his own country?
Section 3 article 3 of the Constitution states:
“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”
Lincoln levied war against the states—hence TREASON. Arthur supports treason and murder—-no wonder he supports Obama.
Rand Paul got his day and night on the Floor of the Senate but he also received unbridled media coverage last night. The irony is that no Senator was sitting there in the Chamber listening to him yet millions of citizens saw him on tv. Little sound bites kept getting shown. One interesting twist to the media coverage on CNN with the chickie announcer, is that she kept saying that they were waiting for an interview. Heck, ya dont need an interview if he has the floor in front of your camera for 13 hours or so and all ya gotta do is show the interesting parts. But they were gonna break into the other stories once he came off the floor and they got their interview.
He got his day in the sun. He will be a candidate for the Presidency the next go round. He has some things going in his favor. 1) represents a southern border state– RepubliCons need a Southerner to gather up the base; 2) speaks southern but intelligent southern; 3) He is an eye doctor and many people will see eye to eye with him; 4) He has none of the draw backs of a foreigner, like Rubio, or a New Yorker (close to a foreigner for the rest of us), or a DC insider. 5) Dad.
Ayn Rand is sitting up in Heaven watching and enjoying the show. He did good last night. Held his pee too.
I thought that the Democrats would be more “liberal” than Republicans but they weren’t when it comes to respecting the rights of pro se litigants and access to courts.
#StandWithRand baby! Well done, another Paul is virtually the only voice for liberty and anti Authoritarian govt. Not surprising, vote despot, vote Obama! Maybe we’ll get the equally despotic Clinton for 2016, who seems even more hawkish than the current Crown Prince Obama. I do appreciate Turley showing some respect for Paul, it’s long overdue when clearly most Dem’s & Rep’s have zero respect for the Constitution and only care about govt power over us.
“#StandWithRand baby! Well done, another Paul is virtually the only voice for liberty and anti Authoritarian govt. Not surprising, vote despot, vote Obama! Maybe we’ll get the equally despotic Clinton for 2016, who seems even more hawkish than the current Crown Prince Obama. I do appreciate Turley showing some respect for Paul, it’s long overdue when clearly most Dem’s & Rep’s have zero respect for the Constitution and only care about govt power over us.”
Dave, where were the Gopers when the drone program started under Bush?
Your ” fair & balanced” view is like the one we see on FAUX NEWS daily.:-)
Ross
Actually the caselaw that was used to justify imprisoning me without criminal procedure, a bail hearing etc. comes from the Federal Prisoner Litigation Reform Act. That law allows Courts to deny prisoners the right to a reduction of their filing fee or permission to pay over time if they filed three complaints that were dismissed. The case law from that was repeated and changed every time and is now used to deny a right to have a paid proceeding conforming with written procedures to people who are not prisoners and never had a lawsuit dismissed. The idea is that if you don’t have a lawyer your claims must be worthless. Of course it costs 100K starting out to have a lawyer filed federal court case. It’s a problem for the lawyers because they have to keep going even if they fall on financial hard times. Professor Turley said he didn’t want to rep me because he has so much work he has to pay for an assistant. Very few lawyers take cases on contingency. In Chicago there is a lawfirm that takes cases for unlawful imprisonment on contingency but only if the imprisonment lasted longer than 15 years.
The Federal Prisoner LItigation Reform Act hasn’t really worked out for the government. All the prisoners file for habeas corpus and many use up their three cases pretty fast. Then the guards can rape and beat them with impunity. The Fifth Branch magazine reported on a study in California finding that a lot of prisoner litigation states valid claims but was blown off. A lot of prisoners complain of denial of medical care. If they are long term prisoners then sooner or later they get worse and then their medical care costs more. This mistreatment of prisoners has created more distrust of government and does nothing to turn them into law abiding citizens.
nick spinelli:
it is great fun.
“Yet, the Democrats worked to stop not the kill list policy but Paul’s filibuster.”
What a position to be put into, the dems are now the party of death.
2014 RNC mid-term campaign-Vote for us, we wont kill you.
This is the beginning of the end of the Obama Administration as a viable political force and of republicans like McCain and Graham.
We’re on a very slippery slope.
“But the tendency of a state to feel that they can move against their enemies in the most effective way possible is still there, and it is certainly not limited to dictatorships.” -John Dinges
“Operation Condor Trial Tackles Coordinated Campaign by Latin American Dictatorships to Kill Leftists”
http://www.democracynow.org/2013/3/7/operation_condor_trial_tackles_coordinated_campaign
JOHN DINGES: Well, I wrote—I was writing chapter one, when 9/11 happened, in my house in Washington. And as I finished the book—and I actually end with a reference to 9/11—I said this is not something that we’re condemned to repeat. And I was making the comparison between the war on terror in the 1970s and the current war on terror that was launched by President Bush. I thought we were going to—we had learned the lesson, that you don’t imitate the methods of your enemies and—or those who had been shown to be human rights criminals. Unfortunately, we crossed that line, I think, many times.
The current discussion about drones, I think, is very frightening, because I’m having a hard time distinguishing between what they did with Operation Condor, low-tech, and what a drone does, because a drone is basically going into somebody else’s country, even with the permission of that country—of course, that’s what Operation Condor did, in most cases: You track somebody down, and you kill them. Now, the justification is: “Well, they were a criminal. They were a combatant.” Well, that may or may not be true, but nobody is determining that except the person that’s pulling the trigger.
I just think that this has to be something that we discuss. And maybe trials like this, going back to the ’70s, people say, “Well, that was the dictatorships of the 1970s.” But the tendency of a state to feel that they can move against their enemies in the most effective way possible is still there, and it is certainly not limited to dictatorships.”
-John Dinges is author of The Condor Years: How Pinochet and His Allies Brought Terrorism to Three Continents
What Nal said earlier. While I commend Sen. Paul for his stance against drone strikes here in the US and the Executive power grab to allow any President to kill US citizens without due process, Sen. Paul is on the weak side of many important issues. It is also interesting that he didn’t take his usual approach to filibuster. Normally he would just state he has an objection, like the rest of the over 300 filibusters lodged by the Republicans. Sen. Reid, I want you to take notice that the old fashioned filibuster can be useful and a Republican actually used it. Why not require that for any and all filibusters?
Re: kaysieverding
That is the whole point, “terrorism” laws have primarily been used on “non-terrorism” and “non-criminal” cases essentially corrupting the entire justice system. There is no Bill of Rights at all under this exploitation of the justice system – that is what most Americans don’t get.
There is a Constitutional Right to a Grand Jury Indictment before being charged with a felony but the USMS sent a fax to the Dane County Wisconsin sheriff saying I was charged with a felony, which I wasn’t charged with.
Heard a great metaphor once about what so-called civil libertarians or constitutionalists really are: We try to maintain the internal combustion engine regardless if the brand is Ford or Chevy. Most of us aren’t really partisan at all, we are concerned with how the “constitutional democratic republic” machine works – basically the out-of-bounds that both parties must operate within. If the Constitution is fundamentally flawed there is a process to amend it but you don’t disregard the Rule of Law. Contrary to popular belief the U.S. Constitution (including the Bill of Rights) is a wartime charter designed to be followed during wartime!
” I do not agree with Paul on many things, but I commend him for this stand and condemn those who remained silent, again, in the face of this authoritarian policy of Obama.” – JT
“Follow through will demonstrate the actual motivation and commitment. If there is no follow through then the whole da*n thing was a ruse.” Blouise
Oh, yes, and the kill policy and the surveillance drones and the NDAA and the PATRIOT act are all a disgrace.
nick, Not really much angst……. Talking to Blouise about a replay of 2012 in 2016. Paul can play his dad. Jeb can be Romney and Hillary can win. That is if they all run. Don’t know if Hillary or Jeb will run but I bet Paul will, and he some some major baggage on the social issues. He is certainly no libertarian when it comes to those issues. He appeared at an anti-abortion rally with Santorum recently.
I love the angst here today. Many people seeing the emporer is indeed naked. When you not a member of the duopoly this stuff is fascinating, better than sex! Well..better than sex @ my age anyway.
Blouise, Yep.
I agree with Nal’s assessment of the opportunists but Paul called national attention to an extremely important matter. If he follows up his 13 hours of filibustering with legislation then we can all climb on board by lobbying our own Senators.
If he doesn’t introduce legislation then I’m just going to dismiss him as a guy filling time because he either wasn’t invited to dinner with the big boys or decided not to accept the invitation and wanted to show his constituents he wasn’t breaking bread with the President.
Follow through will demonstrate the actual motivation and commitment. If there is no follow through then the whole da*n thing was a ruse.
Gary, Rand Paul is in the pocket of the anti-abortion lobby and has his name of much of the extremist legislation. Doesn’t that make him anti- women’s rights? He is also against gay marriage.