• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senator Rand Paul's Epic Filibuster: Reads 'Alice in Wonderland'

Bonzai said:
Maybe. That you think the country will then turn to a Cub Scout on LSD, like Rand Paul, is where you lose me.................
Click to expand...

Do you have evidence that he is on LSD, like blood tests or similar?
 
American said:
Do you have evidence that he is on LSD, like blood tests or similar?
Click to expand...

Some people's ideas of debating is hurling insults devoid of facts or reason.
 
I don't see how anyone could be in favor of suspending the 5th Amendment. When you put it in terms like that....I don't think anyone will support it. We're basically giving the executive the power to execute American citizens suspected of terrorism without the right of due process. No way to plead their case or try and defend their innocence. If you are a suspect...that means you are found to be in suspicion of committing a crime. There is no full-proof evidence against you. Now they take away your right to defend yourself in court as well as a right to be tried by a jury of your peers in front of a judge.

I understand some of you see this as conspiracy theories and nonsense. I get that, but we as Americans must preserve our rights to liberty. We cannot allow the government (especially the executive branch) to have that kind of authority of execution. It goes against the very fabric of our country. It goes against the idea of a free society. It comes straight out of the book of totalitarianism. We mustn't allow any give on our rights and liberties. We give an inch...they take a mile.

Remember that freedom is not safe. To live free means to take risks....we must never think that the two terms belong together because they do not.
 
AreteCourage said:
I understand some of you see this as conspiracy theories and nonsense.
Click to expand...

I remember when the so-called Left was complaining of abuse of power when the Patriot Act was passed. CONSPIRACY THEORISTS!!!
 
Geoist said:
I remember when the so-called Left was complaining of abuse of power when the Patriot Act was passed. CONSPIRACY THEORISTS!!!
Click to expand...

It's funny because the right is screaming for liberty now that it is Obama. The left was screaming when Bush was in office.....

We Libertarians have been screaming the entire time
 
AreteCourage said:
I don't see how anyone could be in favor of suspending the 5th Amendment. When you put it in terms like that....I don't think anyone will support it. We're basically giving the executive the power to execute American citizens suspected of terrorism without the right of due process. No way to plead their case or try and defend their innocence. If you are a suspect...that means you are found to be in suspicion of committing a crime. There is no full-proof evidence against you. Now they take away your right to defend yourself in court as well as a right to be tried by a jury of your peers in front of a judge.

I understand some of you see this as conspiracy theories and nonsense. I get that, but we as Americans must preserve our rights to liberty. We cannot allow the government (especially the executive branch) to have that kind of authority of execution. It goes against the very fabric of our country. It goes against the idea of a free society. It comes straight out of the book of totalitarianism. We mustn't allow any give on our rights and liberties. We give an inch...they take a mile.

Remember that freedom is not safe. To live free means to take risks....we must never think that the two terms belong together because they do not.
Click to expand...
Yep.

And, to add: IMO, killing Americans in Yemen or Pakistan who are suspected of terrorism with drone strikes is one thing. I can almost buy the need there, especially since we cannot easily go to Pakistan or Yemen to arrest these people and then haul them over here for trial. But, to kill someone who is over here, on mere suspicion...that smacks of something this country stands against, and always has. I'm stunned Obama is even considering it.
 
AreteCourage said:
It's funny because the right is screaming for liberty now that it is Obama. The left was screaming when Bush was in office.....
Click to expand...

Yes, the Right have shown hypocrisy as well.


We Libertarians have been screaming the entire time
Click to expand...

Its a great thing about libertarianism: the ideology is pretty consistent.
 
danarhea said:
You hit the nail on the head. Many on the left, who bashed Bush for spying on the American people, are giving Obama a huge pass on this, and are even supporting him. I guess this goes to human nature - "It's horrible, except when our side is doing it. Then, it's the right thing to do". Such hypocricy. I have often criticized Republicans for being hypocrites, but today, the Democrats have taken the cake and eaten it too.
Click to expand...

Umm, for the most part, the left opposes his drone policies.
 
ModerateGOP said:
But the answer isn't as simple as no.
Click to expand...

Yes it is

Your example is a strawman. The Americans in the airplanes on 9/11 became part of an imminent threat, because the airplanes they were in had become weapons. You're talking about a state of war. That is not what any of this is about.

Obama is supposedly a "Constitutional Scholar", yet he can't answer a simple straightforward question in regards to what limits there are on his power. The fact that both he and Holder have to give cute evasive answers should be raising red flags, but instead like a puppet whose strings have just been pulled, you proceed to bleet the talking points from the WH verbatim.

Obama is not some altruistic guy. He has shown a clear pattern of pathological lying, deceit, and questionable character traits. He didn't run an honorable campaign, and he sure as hell isn't an honorable man. He needs to clarify what he believes the absolute limits on his power are. Evasive rhetoric like "Well we never intend to target Americans on American soil who aren't an imminent threat. Promise" isn't good enough.
 
notquiteright said:
I wouldn't mind a review of the LAWS governing imminent threat in counter-terrorism but adding drones to the mix isn't a game changer.
Click to expand...

The govt has had anti-aircraft missiles deployed in order to protect the White House from a terrorist attack by air. This military defense has been public knowledge for many years. The use of drones for similar purposes is just adding another mode of military defense. Since the anti-aircraft missiles didn't raise an uproar, I don't see why drones are giving Rand the vapors.
 
sangha said:
Umm, for the most part, the left opposes his drone policies.
Click to expand...

The Fringe Spring, when the air is fresh and Obama is gettin' thrown under the bus by his supporters.
 
Last edited:
sangha said:
Why don't you read the actual letter that Rand is getting his panties in a wad over?
Click to expand...

It also is avoidances, memorandums and statements by Holder and Obama - who declared he hasn't had any American in the USA killed with a drone yet.

Why doesn't the President simply say, "Absolutely we will not pre-emptively use drones to kill Americans in the USA."
 
sangha said:
The govt has had anti-aircraft missiles deployed in order to protect the White House from a terrorist attack by air. This military defense has been public knowledge for many years. The use of drones for similar purposes is just adding another mode of military defense. Since the anti-aircraft missiles didn't raise an uproar, I don't see why drones are giving Rand the vapors.
Click to expand...

Because the question, as I understand it, isn't about using drones to stop an attack in progress. It's about killing people based on the suspicion that they're a threat without due process. That strikes me as a horse of a completely different color.

Paul asked whether or not the executive had the legal authority to kill American citizens on American soil. Holder evaded and simply said they don't plan on doing so.
 
joko104 said:
It also is avoidances, memorandums and statements by Holder and Obama - who declared he hasn't had any American in the USA killed with a drone yet.
Click to expand...

The letter specifically states that the usee of drones on US soil would be limited to preventing unusual acts like 9/11 and Pearl Harbor.
 
sangha said:
What you're smelling is the bull **** the right has been spreading around concerning this issue
Click to expand...

And hearing the now silence from the left about this.
 
sangha said:
What you're smelling is the bull **** the right has been spreading around concerning this issue
Click to expand...

I'm just sayin', one more hawkish move and it's "Enough Obama the Warmonger, who's next!"
 
Gaius46 said:
Because the question, as I understand it, isn't about using drones to stop an attack in progress.
Click to expand...

Not really. Though the question Rand asked was not limited to any particular circumstance, the answer given by Holder clearly does limit the use of drones to only the most exceptional circumstances and does limit itself to attacks in progress.


It's about killing people based on the suspicion that they're a threat without due process. That strikes me as a horse of a completely different color.

Paul asked whether or not the executive had the legal authority to kill American citizens on American soil. Holder evaded and simply said they don't plan on doing so.
Click to expand...

No, the letter clearly does not allow killing people based on suspicion. That is just hysterical BS
 
Helix said:
yep. the administration needs to walk back this position, and quickly. there isn't going to be broad support for killing citizens in the US with remote control helicopters and no trials. even the 2002-era Republican patriot act cheerleaders probably wouldn't support that if GWB was still president.
Click to expand...
I've said this since day one of the Patriot Act, some provisions actually make sense and clear up due process hurdles during times of immediate danger, no issues there. It's the rest of that bill that needs to be gutted.
 
ecofarm said:
I'm just sayin', one more hawkish move and it's "Enough Obama the Warmonger, who's next!"
Click to expand...

So now it's "hawkish" to say we're going to kill terrorists when they're in the middle of an attack on the US? :screwy
 
sangha said:
So now it's "hawkish" to say we're going to kill terrorists when they're in the middle of an attack on the US? :screwy
Click to expand...

I'm not referring specifically to this thread, just commenting on your claim regarding the left and his drone actions in general. I think he needs to deliver something soon, or it's 'under the bus'. If he strikes Iran, you think he'll maintain a majority support among the left?
 
sangha said:
1. Not really. Though the question Rand asked was not limited to any particular circumstance, the answer given by Holder clearly does limit the use of drones to only the most exceptional circumstances and does limit itself to attacks in progress.

2. No, the letter clearly does not allow killing people based on suspicion. That is just hysterical BS
Click to expand...

1. That's the point I've been trying to get across, the paultards just twist and move things around and say, no Rand Paul mean this. Where Eric Holder was actually specific for once in his life, Rand Paul wasn't yet again!

2. That's what happens when Rand Paul asks a question without any context. I bet Eric Holder was scratching his head and saying to himself, "What does this fool want now? Does he really think I'm going to target him with a drone?" Of course, for some reason the paultards will never admit that this is exactly what they think.
 
ecofarm said:
I'm not referring specifically to this thread, just commenting on your claim regarding the left and his drone actions in general.
Click to expand...

I don't see how your previous comment applies to the left.

And the left has been critical of Obama over many issues. The left doesn't like Obama and his centrism
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom