Skip to comments.Rand Paul ends filibuster against CIA director nominee after almost 13 hours
Posted on 03/07/2013 12:06:18 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Sen. Rand Paul ended his self-described filibuster against the confirmation of President Obama's nominee to lead the CIA early Thursday - at 12:39 EST -- just short of thirteen hours after the Kentucky Republican and tea party favorite began speaking.
But Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, also a Kentucky Republican, said he would continue to oppose Brennan's confirmation and try to keep the debate going.
After Paul yielded the floor, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., filed a motion to cut off debate on Brennan's nomination and bring it up for a vote....
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
Self described filibuster? What’s that? Here I was thinking it’s a real filibuster. Silly me.
I spent 13 hours running a youth basketball program last week. My feet were sore.
We have One-Party Government, and the Confirmation is a done deal, as are ALL other Socialist Agenda items from now on.
There is no turning back now. Deal with it, because if you're out there earning a living, you spend half that time paying for handouts to parasites, lobbyists, and politicians who buy their jobs with your money.
What is with this guy? So far, unreliable.
Where was the rest of the party is what I want to know...
Did this do any good? No, I don’t think so, not without the rest of the party.
Yesterday they tested the tornado alarms in my area, I didn’t realize they were going to to that and for several minutes as the alarm wailed away over the valley, I waited for the formal codeRed call. Of course, the call never came and I went back to work with the siren being nothing but background noise.
These are dark days indeed.
Paul gave Washington a good hard shake last night and even liberals are questioning why the democrats can’t say they won’t kill Americans.
#StandWithRand is still the top tag on twitter this morning.
I’ll believe Rand shook them when a Democrat starts a drone filibuster today.
There has to be at least some common ground between the two parties in order for us to secure our liberty.
The common ground used to be the Constitution, it isn’t anymore. So, what is?
Death by drone on American soil? Is that threat serious enough to break party loyalty and move them to American people loyalty?
Darn that alarm wailing the background is sure annoying...isn’t it.
Don't know that I've ever read anything sadder - or truer. Socialism is antithetical to Christian-like thoughts and values.
I really don’t care how pathetic you are.
Self described filibuster?
>> As I said from the beginning; it was all for show.
Politicians are too lazy to perform that kind of show.
What Paul and Cruz are doing is for real.
No, just noting the apathy and pondering what it will take to break it.
I don’t think Rand broke it yesterday. He tried, but he ended up like that darn tornado alarm test wailing in the background.
You’re happily promoting apathy and I have no use for discussing it with the typical tokyo rose republicans who do nothing more than encourage others to stop fighting.
You may go now.
Funny I see nothing ‘happy’ in any of my posts. Morose yes...happy...no.
And cripplecreek, you know my much better than this post and your quasi dismissal is taken as sarcasm.
If you don’t quite grasp the fact that Rand and the rest of the Tea Party can’t do this alone...
The apathy you think you see in my posts points to that which is far greater apathy in the country.
So very oddly like my response to the tornado drill yesterday.
There was no shaking in DC yesterday. It makes me sad. And as my previous post ponders,
What will it take?
"Paul cited, as one of his reasons for stopping, the need to use the bathroom. Traditionally, the rules of the Senate do not permit a "talking" filibuster to be sustained if the Senator conducting the filibuster leaves the chamber. He expressed regret that he had not broken the late Sen. Strom Thurmond's record of over 24 hours, but declared that the effort--in which won support from Senators of both parties--had been worth the effort."
The destruction of San Francisco and New York or perhaps LA and/or Philadelphia.
The current problem with Republicans and Conservatives is that they do not quite understand what they need in the way of coalition partners. Instead they look at it as though there's this 'big tent' and everyone of any race, creed, color, national origin or state of handicap can participate, and i suppose that's good, but that's not what the Conservative coalitions are about, and certainly not the residual Whig divisions.
Among our natural coalition partners are the Traditionalists for example. That group includes regular church attendees EXCEPT blacks, but including Hispanics. About half the Roman Catholics can be counted on to regularly vote for the most Conservative candidate on that basis. 25% of the Hispanics can also be counted on to do so on that basis. Certainly traditionalist Catholic, Hispanic and black business owners will also regularly vote for the Republican candidate. There's another class of business owners who will never vote for Conservatives or Republicans of course ~ and that's mostly because THEY OWN THE DEMOCRAT party in a number of areas and view their support as an investment.
Do we also want the half of the RCs who never attend church? Do we want uneducated Hispanics with no real property to protect? How about the educated RCs, Hispanics, blacks and possibly East Asians who don't happen to own businesses? What is our attraction to them? The Democrats sure go after all those folks who have an occupation that brings them within the shadow of a labor union, particularly the National Educational Association! is there some program we want to offer them that the Democrats won't? Think hard and tell me what it is ~ at the moment that union affiliation seems to be one of our targets, so how do we get their votes and allegiance if we are targeting one of their major programs for elimination?
See, tough problems are inherent in this business of coalition politics. Yet we have some who imagine it's all about the Fiscal Conservatism, or even Defense Conservatism ~ both requiring an interest in the way government revenues are raised and controlled! Remember when the highway lobby, a traditional Whig element, was pulled out of the Roosevelt coalition and added to the Republican coalition? Bet you don't, but that happened DURING WWII! We'd lost them in1932 ~ we got them back with a slogan "National Defense Highway" ~ and in that WWII era that sounded pretty good ~ high quality highways to beat down people like Hitler!
The full thing came together with Dwight David Eisenhower ~ a General, a highway program, vast amount of public spending ~ what's not to like eh?
We almost lost our anticommunist Cons in that period when it wrapped up with a JFK win. Thanks to a brand of militant Conservatism we allowed the Rockefeller Republicans to criticize, we kept them anyway, and the Democrats never ran a Cold Warrior again! Their viewon that ~ 'why waste money running a candidate THEY will not vote for' ~
There is a theory that the Democrats view coalition politics the same way we do ~ but that's just not so. They have Incorporated unions as an action arm of their party which allowed them to obtain campaign workers without having to pay them out of contributions. I could go on for hours how this one item ~ unions ~ brings about a totally different organizational structure and why we need to study that structure more dispassionately if we want to beat them. Our own structure has managed to pick up its own political caste ~ the GOP-e ~ which we really do need to study to see how we can rein it in, or maybe kick out of the coalition. They've given us 12 Presidential candidates who lost at least one Presidential waste ~ at a cost of billions of dollars in campaign funds.
They got a lot in to the record. A lot was said about Obama that has never been said formally.
What Rand Paul did was brave and something to admire. That in itself is a breath of fresh air.
Kudos to Ted Cruze from Texas and others who had the ability to stand and deliver.
People were watching. People were listening. It was not an effort that went unnoticed and Im betting that this wont be the last time we see this.
There will be retribution by Harry Reid. You could see how pissed off he was when the little twit showed up last last and acted like Duke and Duke in the movie Trading Places. How dare Rand Paul EXERCISE his rights. Well to hell with Harry Reid who for all his power cannot change the rules to stop the filibuster. I urge Paul and Cruze and others to use the filibuster more and more. It is the only way they will get heard and it is real leverage against the evil destroying the United States of America.
Might as well go down fighting. The Alamo comparison was and appropriate and unfortunate analogy and a sad one at that. But the good thing is that we saw some real leadership by men who are worth following and supporting as long as they keep fighting like this.
Way to go Rand Paul!
Good, now he can get some rest and vote to confirm Brennan...
nobama: “So he talked for 13 hours. And?? So what?”
What real, concrete difference did Sen Paul’s filibuster make?
Uber RINO Lindsey Ping
"Republican by day, Democrat by night."
Want on or off this ping list?
Just FReepmail me.
h/t to martin_fierro for the graphic
What you said!
A bunch were standing with Rand Paul like Senator Cruz and Congressman Gohmert.
For crying out loud, the man stood up in the Senate and did exactly what we've been demanding for years---fight back----and here we have some people on this board who are actually trying to diminish his effort.
Jeez, give me a break!
I can’t hear it anymore.
“It could never happen here (even though people are trying to make it LEGAL to happen here)” is a brain-dead argument, because that is the one belief that would actually ALLOW it to happen here.
Lindsey Graham, tell me exactly what would happen if Obama performed assassinations through the use of drones - especially if they were medical assassinations as it appears may have been the case with Andrew Breitbart. A drone shoots a heart attack dart at John McCain, down he goes, the coroner says it’s a heart attack. Then what? What exactly would keep this from happening in the USA, Lindsey Graham?
I’m going to have my female exam this morning. What gets found out there will go directly to the government. If they wanted to, what would prevent them from using that information to decide which carcinogen to put in a dart and deliver by drone? I’m not saying I think they’re going to do that to me at this point; I’m small beans. But the fact that the provisions they are making right now would allow this to be done WITHOUT ANY MEANS OF INVESTIGATING OR GETTING REDRESS FOR THE GRIEVANCE OF POLITICAL MURDER should be alarming to everybody.
The only way you make sure this can’t happen wholesale in this country is if you require the processes to all be transparent, specifically restrict access between the agencies/people who would have to work together on something like that, give people defensive capabilities to protect themselves, AND ensure that incorruptible law enforcement holds all the players accountable for murder if it would happen. IOW, there is no way to ever ensure that this could never happen. The only way to ensure that assassinations by drone would not happen in the US is if somebody immediately shot down any drone flying over the US.
The best defense against terrorism - whether it be by crazed gunmen (including teenage hoodlums), pre-meditated terrorist attacks, mafia, or corrupt government - is a population where any gathering of people (including in planes or other public transportation) is likely to have at least two people who are capable and armed with enough force to counteract the force of the terrorist (2 so that if one is hit immediately the other can take out the aggressor before any more lives are lost). But drones and medical assassinations are a whole different level of aggression because there may not be any way to know that the attack has occurred or to shoot down the attacker.
Cruz and Paul have lost us more liberty with their stunts. Why not go to the heart of the matter - unwarranted government surveillance.
Thanks for condemning what I wrote and not answering my query.
He is now ....RANDO.
Hagel is a wounded veteran enlisted republican....not gonna get better than that from odumbi.
Brennan is a lover of the Islamic religion. I know that RANDO says it isn’t so much against Brennan, but I believe it is.
If the Government could go after American Citizens on U.S. soil with snipers and TANKS in Waco, drones is certainly not going to be a problem.
So shove it.
I'm with you brother!
Where was the rest of the party is what I want to know...
Don’t know about the all the rest of the party but it’s reported that a dozen had dinner with Obama Wed. evening during the time that Paul was speaking.
That's the most ridiculous statement I've seen on this forum (outside the Palin threads) in a long time.
“Brennan is a lover of the Islamic religion.”
And this Arabic-speaking lover of Islam was educated by the far-Left coven at the University of Texas in Austin. That he will be heading the CIA is a nightmare.
Paul certainly didn’t get much support.
A few republicans helped him out but the majority of the senate, republicans and democrats, seem to be okay with Obama deciding which American citizens he can order killed with drone missles right here on American soil.
After all Obama wouldn’t really go after Bitter Clingers, would he?
The US Constitution means nothing to these people.
I would bet that most senators and congressmen have never even read the US Constitution all the way through.
As I said from the beginning; it was all for show.
Our government would never attack their own citizens.
Well, maybe once in a while.
Waco and Ruby Ridge come to mind.
The fact that Holder wouldn't say "never" is all we need to know.
My kudos to Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Senators from Utah and Kansas. Marco Rubio snuck in also.
Who's being naive, Lindsey?
He did and for his effort he gets...credit.
But, the reality is he and a handful ain’t gonna be enough.
I really don’t think anyone is trying to diminish his effort, but we’re trying to reconcile what real good if any, did it do? What did he accomplish?
Nothing changed because of his effort, so now what?
☞ Shifts emphasis in leadership powers in the Senate;
☞Holds and controls the microphone so that it can give rather than suppress information;
☞gives time to clarify a concern publicly, increasing accountability;
☞obtain concessions from the opposition and win over moderates; educate the public;
☞emboldens the party base to elect such members to Congress;
☞preps for future legislation;
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
Way to go Rand Paul!
But, really, who saw or will see any of it? It makes our side feel better because Paul brought up a lot of issues we like to harp about. But who is talking about this today besides pundits and those of us who don’t need convincing.
Sorry, but Paul’s vote for Hagel has just really soured me on his motives.
Are these sour notes of yours another variation of “what difference does it make?”
Rand Paul is Senator from Kentucky and Ted Cruz is Senator from TEXAS.
For crying out loud, the man stood up in the Senate and did exactly what we’ve been demanding for years-—fight back——and here we have some people on this board who are actually trying to diminish his effort.
Perhaps Paul’s vote for Hagel’s confirmation has colored our thinking....
Here’s a guy who’s been hiding for 4 yrs since he was elected in ‘08, didn’t even know who he was.... James E. Risch, (R-Sen, ID), where was he yesterday???
Where were the ‘loud mouths’ of the GOP??... McCain, Graham.. the ‘grand-standers’ who “stand” for NOTHING!
So now, the Senate agrees 0bama can Hellfire to death any American at will.
And nobody but Cruz stood with Rand to oppose the naked assumption of the power to murder at will.