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
click here to read article
The paperwork that every member of Congress should be required to fill out and publish for public view is their response to this “quiz”:
List 10 things the current regime can NEVER do, the legal reasoning that would be used to attempt it, and the names of the exact people who would stop them if they tried.
Well the above is not really true. I watched Paul, Cruz and a few others take a stand for the US Constitution yesterday the out pouring of support on social media and twitter was quite remarkable. Those of us that believe in the US Constitution have been leaderless for many years. Most politicians just play lip service to our Constitution. Now we have at least two leaders, Paul and Cruz, that have taken on the White House directly and by name in defense of the Constitution. At last we have creditable and competent leadership at the national level. That in and of itself is a major step forward.
No. Pretty sure no Americans were murdered by terrorists in this incident.
My point was that Paul’s filibuster accomplished nothing other than giving us the rare opportunity to say, “Yeah, that’s what I would love to be able to say in their faces!”
Who is actually talking about this today? Conservatives, the very people who do not need convincing.
Believe me, I would love to share in the ebullience this morning. But it just reminds me of all of the times we were just beaming, during the 2008 presidential campaign, when Gingrich would speak up to the obnoxious debate questioners. Nothing was accomplished other than our having transitory feelings of pride.
Shifts emphasis in leadership powers in the Senate;
How so? Can you tell me how you see it as a leadership power shift?
Holds and controls the microphone so that it can give rather than suppress information
Ideally yes. But if a tree falls in a forest and nobody is there to here...does it make a noise? Was it just preaching to the choir?
gives time to clarify a concern publicly, increasing accountability;
I don’t hear any calls for accountablity this morning...and this concerns me. I ‘m not surprised though as is the media just discussing there was a filibuster of Brennan or are they discussing the real reason for the filibuster?
obtain concessions from the opposition and win over moderates; educate the public
How so? What concessions have been made or even rumored about? Educate the public. Were they even really paying attention or was it just the conservative base? Low information voters don’t watch C-span all they likely heard was crazy Rand Paul filibustered....blah, blah, blah...
emboldens the party base to elect such members to Congress;
Maybe. Yes, Rand Paul needs help in Congress.
I don't get what the naysayers on this thread are about, just criticism, no suggestions.
And the longer he, personally goes, the more the debate among the talking heads will move towards the Drone issue. It stops being perceived as a Republican thing, and becomes another unconstitutional tyrannical act by Holder and backed by the President. It’s very elegant if you think about it. It’s similiar to when Buddhist monks would self-immolate in Viet-Nam. It wasn’t a Viet Cong thing, but a personal protest, a personal sacrificed. And the debate then slowly changes. You get just one talking head on CNN discussing eminent threat and the Sixth Amendment, and no matter how the vote goes, Rand Paul won big, and the President and his cabal lose big.
Indeed it does...and the Jews wandered in the desert for 40 years too.
>> Cruz and Paul have lost us more liberty with their stunts.
That makes no sense whatsoever. Care to elaborate?
Don't believe that shit for a minute, My FRiend. If we are at the place where we can and do murder the unborn with an assembly line efficancy for thwe sake of conveince and also non chantally stand by as an elderly person slowly dies before one's eyes and the child of the deceased says that they are o.k. with that. Then we are not far from the point that those in power will order the wholesale slaughter of their political enemies. And those that are otherwise hated and reviled. In the previous sentence I am referring to Christiana, legitimate gun owners, business owners, other people of good character, individuals who believe in the Principles set forth in the Constitution, etal. The Socialists, Communists, criminals, muslims, and parasites are or will be as the same ilk of the politicians when this begins. We are not quite at that point yet, but I believe one can see it from where we are now.
In closing, always keep in mind that when the Jews were warned as to what Hitler had planned for them, the majority said,"It will never happen." History testifies as to who was correce and incorrect.
Yes, we need to be pounding our Senators as to why they didn’t stand with Rand Paul.
I suggest we ask them the following question: List 10 things the current regime could NEVER do, the legal reasoning they would use to try to justify doing them, and the names of the exact persons who have the ability and willingness to stop them if they tried doing those things TODAY.
Come to think of it, this should be a required question for anybody nominated for a cabinet position as well.
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.
If it turns out that Brennan is Moslem, then it’s game over for me. However, I worked for a couple of station chiefs in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, back in the 80s. COS Jeddah is a very prominent and prestigious post in the Agency. Both of the guys I knew worked their way up from the streets to the pinnacle. Even though Brennan is associated with America’s number one domestic enemy, there could certainly be worse choices for DCI.
>> Perhaps Pauls vote for Hagels confirmation has colored our thinking...
Yes, it was mistake to concede the vote to the inevitable, but to remain discolored for the sake of acrimony undermines any momentum generated by the efforts of Cruz and Paul.
Okay, I will cease making such comments on this topic. Not because my opinion has changed but because my comments are not helpful.
Some people aren't going to be satisfied until the Republicans go "President Camacho" on the Senate floor. I would say to them - be careful what you wish for. Civil wars aren't things to be taken lightly, and if there is any opportunity to fight back using the existing rules - as Rand Paul did admirably yesterday - then that has to be tried first.
It wasn’t my intention to suppress your opinion, but to provide an opposing view.
Rand could not leave the Senate floor -- not even to use the toilet -- without yielding. How long could you have physically kept a filibuster going under those constraints?
What are you suggesting? You have a secret plan?
While Rand Paul was filibustering, Obama was wining and dining what Drudge calls the “old guard”:
In addition to McCain...
“Also dining Wednesday evening, according to the White House, were Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, Bob Corker of Tennessee, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, John Hoeven of North Dakota, Richard Burr of North Carolina, Mike Johanns of Nebraska, and Dan Coats of Indiana.”
I don’t know about the others, but Mike Johanns has already said he’s not going to run for re-election, so he’s a lightweight - and he’s already bent over to be screwed by Obama multiple times so this seems like more of a payoff than a bribe for the next round.
Thank you Cripplecreek! Enough is enough!
He’s an imbecile.
You made statements to which I don’t understand your perspective or how you got there. So I asked you to explain yourself. I do truly want to comprehend how you are arrived at your conclusions, because I can’t see it that way.
we have idiots eating dinner with this clown and then now saying how things look good and the clown is open to compromise.
Yet again the usual stupid suspects think eating a meal wiht the backstabbing clown is great and some wonder why this country has gone to crap
I frigging despair I really do
You are impatient.
He made both Obama and Holder appear to be unmitigated douches on a national stage, in front of a broad message, who might not understand the nuances of some of the stuff we discuss here on FR about Obama sucking the big one, but certainly understand the notion of "the President shalt not kill Americans on American soil indiscriminately."
He found the chink in Obama's armor, attacked it, and established a beach head, so that others may now exploit it and take down one of, if not the, most dangerous presidents in American history.
That's what he did.
A shame to see that people here are so busy trashing Paul they can't see that.
Oh I think you’re right about Paul giving them a good shake. It’s that some people on here have become so anti-Republican that nothing any of them (Republicans)do pleases them! They’ll comb through a pile of gold to find a clod of dirt, instead of the other way around! tsk! At least Rand Paul is trying to do something; apparently, so is Mitch McConnell in continuing to oppose Brennan’s approval! (at least for now)
Happy to note that Rand didn’t talk your talk for 13 hours.
I learned long ago that, for the most part, the main difference between the Deomcrats and Republicans is in the spelling.
Happily Mitch McConnell isn’t going to reign as minority leader in perpetuum.
explanation would go a long way you know.
How about pointing out what was wrong or right about the fools who have a dinner wiht bozo, then go out today and harp on about how things are looking good bla bla instead of a post which points nothing out but a sly dig
R and D for the most part are the same.
Paul is out there raising awareness on these drones and others think having a meal and a laugh with bozo is great news and now the love fest starts again for some and they can;t even see what bozo is doing and thne a couple of freepers make silly sly digs wiht no warrant or explanantion
No wonder I’m pissed off
What was the proposed resolution that he wanted a vote on ? I Intend on calling my more than useless senators (Boxer and Fienstien) and demand they vote on it. I know it was a sense of the Senate about killing Americans with drones. I would like to see the exact wording.
Wht will it take? 100,000 armed citizens in the Capitol Mall would be a start. That’d get their attention, no matter how their lapdog media spun it. 10,000 more in each state capitol would also work.
SEN. PAUL: The resolution that we've talked about. And this resolution says, "To express the sense of the Senate against the use of drones to execute American citizens on American soil." "Expressing the sense of the Senate against the use of drones to execute American citizens on American soil." "Resolved that it is the sense of the Senate that the use of drones to execute or target American citizens on American soil who pose no imminent threat clearly violates the Constitutional due process of rights.
Brennan refers to Jerusalem as “al Quds”. He also is always supportive of Islam and has said that jihad is a legitimate part of Islam.
Yes, I know that jihad CAN be an inner battle for “religious purity”, but he did NOT qualify his support of jihad by any definition.
There is a reason we pretend there is no Islamic terrorism. It’s now just undefined extremists. Brennan is part of that reason and he is the security advisor to the Precedent.
He is also (as is the Precedent) pushing for the success of the rebels in Syria even though many of them are Muslim Brotherhood and/or al Qaeda. The whole stinking Arab Spring thing is that way.
We are fortunate that some Egyptians are fighting back against the Muslim Brotherhood dictatorship, but Obama—as advised by Brennan—continues to give them billions even as our country is heading for financial devastation.
For me, it’s clearly game over on the question of his ultimate loyalty and it’s not the USA.
Thankyou. I intend on calling my senators after their offices open. This policy definitely needs clarification.
I'm challenging any liberal to read This is Barack Obama Obama: All You Need to Know, In One Place. Go ahead, read it!
We're only talking about our country here. . Please wake up and do some serious research! Do you have children? Do you care at all about our Sacred Republic and our Constitution? Please read these links and pass them on.
He isn’t exactly the first leftist to become the Director of Central Intelligence. On the contrary, I’m scanning my memory trying to think of any conservative who has ever held that position.
Most of the people in the internment camps of World War II were American citizens. 110,000 of them.
No, please do not think that I was under the impression that you were suppressing my opinion.
What I realized was that I was raining on the parade while many were feeling triumphant. That is why I decided to shut up.
You mean the most thoughtful. What have they accomplished? I watched the testimony that Holder gave and he gave an honest answer. Right now no LE action would be to kill a known “terrorist” on American soil. Holder extended that out to drones. Cruz tried to make it into a Constitutional issue.
Cruz’s actions amount to a distraction from the real issue: The 4th Amendment. For what purpose would government have permanent drone coverage over America? That’s where this is going. The Executive branch and police forces get every warrant they want, pay no price for errors, and live under the public’s dangerous presumption that you’re innocent until proven guilty.
I don’t want drones in American skies all day long. We already have too much police state. How will Cruz and Paul turn back the clock?
That’s what I’m wanting in my “conservative” leaders. Get us back to the Constitutional government of our Founding Republic. Does that make sense to you, Tattler?
LE wants a permanent drone presence in America’s skies. Drones covering everywhere airborne all the time. Cruz’s pedantic game playing starts from the premise that a permanent drone presence is OK, just don’t kill with it.
It’s an utter joke and amounts to smoke. Don’t breathe it in. It isn’t conservative and it doesn’t get us back to the Constitutional limits on government. Just say NO to drones.
I didn’t know Idaho even had a second senator.
Blah, blah, blah...!
You don't even know what you're trying to criticize him for.
I’m under the impression, with no particular insight, that the drones are being used to detect radiation. But in principle, I agree with the “No to drones”.
Hasn't he heard of one of these?
Didn’t LBJ used to use something like that?
I am not sure. What I read is that LBJ would just pull it out and pee wherever he wanted to.