Posted on 03/09/2013 1:12:13 AM PST by Kaslin
I asked the president, can you kill an American on American soil, it should have been an easy answer. It’s an easy question. It should have been a resounding, an unequivocal, “No.” The president’s response? He hasn’t killed anyone yet. -- Rand Paul
I do not believe that question deserves an answer. -- Lindsey Graham
Mr. Holder’s letter answers Mr. Rand’s question, “Does the president have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill Americans not engaged in combat on U.S. soil. The answer to that question is 'no.’”-- Jay Carney
I don’t think that what happened yesterday is helpful to the American people. -- John McCain
Poor, poor John McCain and Lindsey Graham. Here they were discussing new tax hikes and amnesty with Barack Obama over a sumptuous dinner and that rakish scamp Rand Paul made it impossible for them to enjoy the fine cuisine.
It was bad enough that he was picking a public fight with Barack Obama, but that scalawag actually confronted Obama over a constitutional issue! Didn't he understand that just isn't done in Washington?
Worse yet, Rand Paul won and he WON BIG! He made Obama look bad, got Democratic Senator Ron Wyden to join in on his filibuster, and he thrilled the conservative base in the process. Obviously, exciting conservatives is a terrible idea because John McCain didn't take a single stand that electrified conservatives in his entire presidential campaign and look how well that turned out!
As a result of this whole fiasco, the Obama Administration is now admitting that it doesn’t have the right to use a drone to kill American citizens on American soil. Is that really the road Republicans want to go down? High profile confrontations with the Democrats on conservative issues directly relating to the Constitution that can be turned into big political winners?
That's certainly not the formula George W. Bush used in his second term. John McCain and Mitt Romney didn't go that way either. No, they stuck to a tried and true formula. They showed their bipartisan spirit by being tougher on other Republicans than their Democrat opponents. When they did disagree with their opponents, they used lots of forgettable boiler plate language to make sure it didn't stick in anybody's mind. No sir, they didn't go in for any of these flashy attention-grabbing tactics like marathon filibusters.
Moreover, doesn't Rand Paul understand that the Republican Party's consensus strategy is to stay perpetually on defense? The Democrats attack and we spend all our time explaining that we're not horrible people. If a Republican in D.C. does fire back, we have to make sure that it's so boring that no one even remembers what was said five minutes later. After all, effective criticism gets the attention of the liberals in the press and they might say mean things about us. If it really scores points, Rachel Maddow might even call you a racist and David Frum might write that people like you are ruining the Republican Party. Are we really going to win that way?
Of course, not! Ideally, we'd just retreat on every issue, but these doggone conservatives who vote Republicans into office keep demanding that the politicians they send to D.C. actually represent their values and interests. How unreasonable can you get? Everybody knows the way that Republicans win is by convincing everyone that they're just like the Democrats, but not quite as a bad. Then when the Democrats screw up badly enough, people will realize that we're the lesser of two evils and then we'll get into office and prove it!
Granted, there are other establishment approved tactics we can pursue: Like talking tough about how we're not ever going to give in on principles and then folding or making lots of noise about how horrible Obama's cabinet nominees are before we allow them to be confirmed. It's also perfectly acceptable for Republican politicians to whine that Democrats aren't being fair, call for more bipartisanship, or to promise to do the right thing later on in exchange for doing more of the wrong thing now.
Really, that's the worst thing about Rand Paul's irresponsible little stunt. Twitter and Facebook were going wild, people were tuning into C-SPAN for hours at a time to watch, Libertarians were saying nice things about a Republican, and conservatives across the country loved it. When you create that kind of energy and on top of it, you WIN, it can only lead to demands for more of the same.
Is that really a road we want to go down? Actually trying to succeed? After all, trying to win is hard! The liberal mainstream media will criticize you if you're effective. The comfortable same old, same old has to change. You can't keep relying on the same well connected consultants, leaders, and old faces that keep failing and you have to turn to new voices. Isn't it better to be thought of as reasonable, moderate fellows who lose honorably while the country slides into oblivion than it is to actually strive for victory? John McCain and Lindsey Graham think so and it's EXACTLY that kind of approach that has been causing the Republican Party to lose.
I just sent this article to McCain and Graham via Twitter. I want them to know how unpopular they are with the base.
Graham and MCCains FB pages are literally thousands upon thousands of negative comments
Thanks for the posting. I don’t know where Townhall is going with this. Seems like the Townhall editors asked John Hawkins to do a 1000 words on it and so he did. When Limbaugh noted McCain and Lindsey’s reaction to this he suggested that both were hissyfitted because they were upstaged from their collaboration photo op with Obama by Rand Paul.
Why Rand’s rant occured at the time of the Vichy dinner as Rand Paul explained was because of the machinations of Reid and senate rules which allowed for it to happen. Personally I’m glad Rand did because the collaboration dinner was giving credulace to the idea that Obama was and had been seeking bipartisan solutions to the problems he created
and would play well with the LIV’s as Limbaugh calls them as the moderating socialist media ground it out. Because Obama is not interested in bipartisan approaches he wants to destroy opposition to his policies.
This has yet to sink into the heads of the GOPES(GOP Elite Snobs)in the senate.
I have never criticized McCain and Graham, but this time they were wrong
Holder's answer proves that Rand Paul lost that round. Paul didn't gain one single bit of ground other than some additional name recognition in the media.
McCain and Graham, on the other hand, attacked one of their own, they broke ranks, they stepped in where they didn't need to step in.
The "Snickers Filibuster" -- so named because Paul nourished himself with candy bars during the grueling 13 hours of mind-boggling, torturous, personal deprivation -- will go down in history alongside weekend little league tournaments, hours long golf outings, and entire days at the beach or amusement park as an example of personal hardship and durability of the human spirit.
Paul: can you kill Americans on American soil?
Obama: We'll kill 'em if we decide they're involved in combat.
Call me absolutely, totally unimpressed.
Speaking of criticism: Rand Paul spoke for 13 hours and never called anyone a name. McCain spoke for 3 minutes and called him several.
I disagree with the Senator.
If anyone wages war on Americans on American soil, perhaps via an attack such as Beslan or Mumbai, then it is entirely appropriate and necessary for the President to reply with military force using the laws of war as the ROE.
It makes not one particle of difference whether those attacking are Americans or Guyanese.
Just as it would have been proper and necessary, given the opportunity, for GWB to authorize the shooting down of Flight 93 on 9/11 before it killed more people on the ground. Even if the hijackers as well as the hostages were Americans.
Snipers routinely and properly take out hostage takers. Nobody asks to see proof of citizenship before firing. Nor should they. It's not relevant.
The attorney general should not have answered, "No." He should have answered with a calm and reasoned explanation of the circumstances under which it is appropriate for the President to authorize use of lethal force, even by the military, against American citizens on American soil. And of course the limitations of that authority.
What is disturbing is that he doesn't seem to recognize there are limitations other than his own whim.
Do I trust our present Leader to use this power wisely? Nope. But elections have consequences. I hope those freepers who insisted we should all stay home on Election Day because the alternative was insufficiently conservative are proud.
What is truly weird is the present obsession over drone strikes, with the implication that using the same weapon in the same way to kill the same people would be perfectly fine if the weapon were mounted on a helicopter, a piloted plane or a ground vehicle.
She is not “damaged goods” in my mind.
Paul is my second choice. And a distant second.
If we can get his daddy’s base in now we can turn all kinds of seats all over the US red before 2012.
Or 2014
Is that what they call "reaching across the aisle"?
Two words-
Primary
McCain
Paul’s success at broad appeal with his well-articulated filibuster
has just happened! I promise you there are hundreds of
journolisters doing oppo research and in Kentucky going
through the trash this weekend.
They will demonize and ridicule him swiftly,following
the formula that worked so well with Mrs.Palin.
Each day that goes by, I regret voting for McCain in 2008 more and more. I understand that he lost but that doesn’t negate the fact that I voted for him. I really voted for Sarah Palin becuse before he picked her I was going to sit the election out. But never the less, the fact is that I did vote for McCain. And he has caused me to regret it ever since.
The republicans are just as bad as the democrats. There needs to be a major flushing out of the republican party with new blood like Rand Paul filling the void.
We’ve had enough of the republican’s failed leadership - it’s time for a REAL change.
Did Senator McCain call his fellow Republican Senators wackos?
Name one time he has ever called any democrat a wacko.
What a disgrace!
Lol!
That's what passes for it with these so-called conservative republicans.
John Hawkins nails it and it's good to see others on all sides of the political spectrum respond to a strong Constitutional stand.
I have to admit, these days I've come to hate the GOPe with a white hot passion for what they have done and allowed to happen.
Watching their governors cave to obamacare one by one is just more proof of what they are and I am not.
That arrogant pos occupant wants to make it a one party system by eliminating the GOP. Are you going to help him achieve this goal, because your third party has no chance?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.