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 ...
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.