Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Rand Paul filibustering


  • Please log in to reply
212 replies to this topic

#1    F3SS

F3SS

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,416 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh, Pa

Posted 07 March 2013 - 04:55 AM

Apparently this is what's called an old school filibuster and I like it. The administration is on the spot.

Quote

‘I WILL SPEAK UNTIL I CAN NO LONGER SPEAK’: SEN. RAND PAUL IS DOING AN OLD-SCHOOL FILIBUSTER OF OBAMA’S CIA NOMINEE RIGHT NOW

The Senate Intelligence Committee voted 12 to 3 on Tuesday to confirm John Brennan as the next director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

However, Brennan may have at least one more hurdle to clear before final confirmation, namely, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who has vowed to block his nomination until the White House provides more information on its secretive drone program.

The Kentucky senator doesn’t have the 41 votes necessary to prevent a cloture vote, which would block Brennan’s confirmation, so he’s doing the only thing he can do: He’s stalling all senate business with an honest-to-goodness, old-fashioned filibuster.

“I rise today to begin to filibuster John Brennan’s nomination for the CIA,” Sen. Paul at approximately 11:45 a.m ET on Wednesday.

“I will speak until I can no longer speak, I will speak as long as it takes, until the alarm is sounded from coast to coast that our constitution is important, that your right to trial by jury is precious, that no American should be killed on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court,” he added.
And it looks like he’s in it for the long haul.
Continued... http://www.theblaze....inee-right-now/

He sure is. It's been around twelve hours now. I'm not sure any democrats have found this issue important yet but it looks like Obama's got some splainin' to do tomorrow. Do you think Obama will address this personally and publicly?

For fairness, here is the huff link. Looks like even a lot of their liberal commenters are liking it too and wondering where their party's at.
http://www.huffingto...nk3&pLid=279777

Edited by -Mr_Fess-, 07 March 2013 - 04:56 AM.

Posted Image

#2    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,475 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 07 March 2013 - 05:08 AM

It might be the ultimate proof of political decadence, when our people are so politically misled that they don't even find the idea of using drones to attack our own people is important enough to take a stand on.  This is symptomatic of the end of our greatness.  

Neocons, liberals and zionists all, the chickens have come home to roost.

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#3    Detective Mystery 2014

Detective Mystery 2014

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,323 posts
  • Joined:31 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:twilight zone's outer limits

  • Mysteries are tomorrow's histories.

Posted 07 March 2013 - 05:11 AM

What happened to his ostensible allies, on both the left and right sides of the political aisle, who claim that they support civil rights and the Constitution? He sounds like the lone voice of reason as he questions why the State should have the right to kill Americans on our own soil before we are even tried in courts of law. He *should* have a chorus of support! The silence is troubling.

There is one reality with billions of versions.

#4    acidhead

acidhead

    Were Not Your Slaves!

  • Member
  • 10,513 posts
  • Joined:13 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Victoria, BC CANADA

Posted 07 March 2013 - 05:11 AM

For liberty!  Great job so far Rand.  Nice to see a Senator actually working for the people.... that means everybody.

"there is no wrong or right - just popular opinion"

#5    Detective Mystery 2014

Detective Mystery 2014

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,323 posts
  • Joined:31 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:twilight zone's outer limits

  • Mysteries are tomorrow's histories.

Posted 07 March 2013 - 05:16 AM

View PostYamato, on 07 March 2013 - 05:08 AM, said:

It might be the ultimate proof of political decadence, when our people are so politically misled that they don't even find the idea of using drones to attack our own people is important enough to take a stand on.  This is symptomatic of the end of our greatness.  

Neocons, liberals and zionists all, the chickens have come home to roost.

I agree with your main point. I think that one can be pro-Israel and anti-statist at the same time, though. It could be that Israeli citizens face similar challenges from the Israeli government. We all want true representation, not ownership.

There is one reality with billions of versions.

#6    pallidin

pallidin

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 6,786 posts
  • Joined:09 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere south of the North Pole

  • "When life gets you down... swim with a dolphin"

Posted 07 March 2013 - 05:56 AM

I guess Senator's have a right to do this. Though I can't imagine talking for 12-hours.

Reminds me of this:



Edited by pallidin, 07 March 2013 - 05:57 AM.


#7    spartan max2

spartan max2

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,601 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

  • There's nothing so absurd that if you repeat it often enough

Posted 07 March 2013 - 06:27 AM

Someone standing for us. Finally :). 2016

" I imagine that the intellegent people are the ones so intellegent that they dont even need or want to look "intellegent" anymore".
Criss Jami

#8    RavenHawk

RavenHawk

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,981 posts
  • Joined:09 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 07 March 2013 - 06:37 AM

View PostYamato, on 07 March 2013 - 05:08 AM, said:

It might be the ultimate proof of political decadence, when our people are so politically misled that they don't even find the idea of using drones to attack our own people is important enough to take a stand on.  This is symptomatic of the end of our greatness.  
Not all are misled.  That's why the inner circle has already been planing using drones because they are afraid of an uprising.  They have no intention of doing the people's work.  They're out to usurp the authority of the Constitution.  They don't dare talk about that.  And the MSM only dares report this is a general manner.  They will only go as far as covering using drones to kill US citizens on US soil.  Putting the emphasis on the individual as being the bad guy and nothing on the reason why.  So I'll ask, why would it be necessary to target law abiding US citizens?  It was totally unbelievable how long it took Holder to respond to Senator Cruz on the Constitutionality of using drones.  After seeing drones flying around myslef, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand the possibilities.

*Signature removed* Forum Rules

#9    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 9,090 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 07 March 2013 - 06:44 AM

View PostDetective Mystery 2013, on 07 March 2013 - 05:11 AM, said:

What happened to his ostensible allies, on both the left and right sides of the political aisle, who claim that they support civil rights and the Constitution? He sounds like the lone voice of reason as he questions why the State should have the right to kill Americans on our own soil before we are even tried in courts of law. He *should* have a chorus of support! The silence is troubling.
Truth is, sometimes you have to shoot the terrorist with the suitcase nuke, regardless of their citizenship.

Holder's already said that theres no plans to use drones domestically, and that it's totally hypothetical, but for it to occur, there would have to be exceptional circumstances, such as to stop another Pearl Harbor, or 9/11, and that it wouldn't be used if it were possible for law enforcement authorities to otherwise stop the said terrorist threat.

I'm perfectly fine with the idea that under exceptional circumstances, the government reserves the right to use military assets to protect itself from terrorist attacks on US soil.

Or let me out it another way: No-one was filibustering on the floor of the Senate the day after Bush gave orders for military jets to shoot the planes out of the air on 9/11.

Presumably the difference today is that Rand needs the publicity for his 2016 Presidential nomination run.

NaNoWriMo 2014 - Posted Image


#10    Rocketgirl

Rocketgirl

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 732 posts
  • Joined:06 Sep 2009
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Earth

  • "I envy the dead for they do not have to see how the world is changing for the worst."
    -Rocketgirl

Posted 07 March 2013 - 07:02 AM

I think this needs to be said....I do NOT trust our government. They could careless about it's people, but it's our fault because we chose them to represent us. Having drones fly over the heads of Americans is not something to take lightly. It's only a matter of time before the Americans start to speak out, get mad and do something like overthrow the people who are in government because a person can only take so much before they decide that they have had enough.

"I envy the dead for they do not have to see how the world is changing for the worst."
-Rocketgirl

"Try to change the world for the better, if you fail keep trying. Always aim for that impact of change in a positive way."
-Rocketgirl

#11    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,475 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 07 March 2013 - 07:03 AM

View PostRavenHawk, on 07 March 2013 - 06:37 AM, said:

Not all are misled.  That's why the inner circle has already been planing using drones because they are afraid of an uprising.  They have no intention of doing the people's work.  They're out to usurp the authority of the Constitution.  They don't dare talk about that.  And the MSM only dares report this is a general manner.  They will only go as far as covering using drones to kill US citizens on US soil.  Putting the emphasis on the individual as being the bad guy and nothing on the reason why.  So I'll ask, why would it be necessary to target law abiding US citizens?  It was totally unbelievable how long it took Holder to respond to Senator Cruz on the Constitutionality of using drones.  After seeing drones flying around myslef, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand the possibilities.
It's necessary just like you think it's necessary to target law-abiding Pakistanis, Yemenis, Afghans, Uzbekis, Georgians, Sudanese, Palestinians, etc. The principle fails, the chickens come home to roost, because we have contradictory opinions of the role of government and its behavior, dependent entirely on what side of an arbitrary line drawn by governments called borders we're on.  You're intensely nationalist and you can't be nationalist without being statist.  They're twin sisters and kissing cousins.   You have all kinds of great ideas on how you want to go around the world with big government force, you just don't want to eat your own cooking.   Foreigners are guilty until proven innocent (i.e killed) and we don't know what we are anymore with the unconstitutional attitudes and entitlement complexes people have these days.   What side of the magic line we're on might be important for a myriad of reasons, it is not important enough of a reason to throw common sense and principle out the window because the rule of law will follow.  The rule of law secures common sense, it provides that principle.    It is totally unbelievable but not merely when it happens in our own backyard.

There is no secret conspiracy to usurp the Constitution, it's a shameless bipartisan exercise right in front of our faces.  It's been happening for decades, it builds a little at a time, every year and every President, it gets worse and worse.

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#12    pallidin

pallidin

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 6,786 posts
  • Joined:09 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere south of the North Pole

  • "When life gets you down... swim with a dolphin"

Posted 07 March 2013 - 07:04 AM

View PostTiggs, on 07 March 2013 - 06:44 AM, said:


I'm perfectly fine with the idea that under exceptional circumstances, the government reserves the right to use military assets to protect itself from terrorist attacks on US soil.


:tu:


#13    spartan max2

spartan max2

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,601 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

  • There's nothing so absurd that if you repeat it often enough

Posted 07 March 2013 - 07:10 AM

View PostTiggs, on 07 March 2013 - 06:44 AM, said:

Truth is, sometimes you have to shoot the terrorist with the suitcase nuke, regardless of their citizenship.

Holder's already said that theres no plans to use drones domestically, and that it's totally hypothetical, but for it to occur, there would have to be exceptional circumstances, such as to stop another Pearl Harbor, or 9/11, and that it wouldn't be used if it were possible for law enforcement authorities to otherwise stop the said terrorist threat.

I'm perfectly fine with the idea that under exceptional circumstances, the government reserves the right to use military assets to protect itself from terrorist attacks on US soil.

Or let me out it another way: No-one was filibustering on the floor of the Senate the day after Bush gave orders for military jets to shoot the planes out of the air on 9/11.

Presumably the difference today is that Rand needs the publicity for his 2016 Presidential nomination run.

Listen to rand actually speak. He agrees with the exceptional case. The problem is the president will not give a straight forward answer to the question and that there are no guidlines to dictate what an "exceptional" case is.

" I imagine that the intellegent people are the ones so intellegent that they dont even need or want to look "intellegent" anymore".
Criss Jami

#14    acidhead

acidhead

    Were Not Your Slaves!

  • Member
  • 10,513 posts
  • Joined:13 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Victoria, BC CANADA

Posted 07 March 2013 - 07:12 AM

Drone strike usually kill multiple individuals.  This is a horrible law loaded with unintended consequences just waiting to happen.... typical of GOV and those who defend ignorant ideas to 'keep us safe'.

Edited by acidhead, 07 March 2013 - 07:38 AM.

"there is no wrong or right - just popular opinion"

#15    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,475 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 07 March 2013 - 07:18 AM

"Weapons of mass destruction, mass graves, torture chambers, imminent threat, immediate danger, Saddam is a threat because he's dealing with Al Qaeda, terrorists, has chemical weapons, terrorists, probably has biological weapons, yellow cake, Saddam Hussein 9/11, uranium from Africa, 9/11 Saddam Hussein, in 45 minutes, September 11th, there is no threat greater than Saddam Hussein, terrorists, terrorists, terrorist attacks, the final proof the mushroom cloud, massive quantities of VX nerve gas September 11th and Cyclosarin toxin September 11th, buh blah buh blah bu blah blah blah buh blah buh blah bu blah blah blah".

Well it seems the kool aid has finally stained the fabric.   Yeah the gubmint has the "right" to protect itself from Americans with military force because when it talks about "terrorist attacks on US soil" it's so eminently believable after the past 12 years of its bloodthirsty BS.  

Lucy, I'm home!

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users