The group of senators joining Rand Paul in his filibuster of John Brennan's nomination to be CIA head grew as the day progressed:
Paul's effort is aimed at drawing attention to the administration's drone program, which Brennan played a key role in administering as White House counterterrorism chief....I think some of these guys -- Paul and possibly Utah's Mike Lee (also involved) on the right, Wyden on the left -- are sincere in their categorical anger about drones; they wouldn't want a president to target their political enemies or their friends this way. I think others (Rubio, Toomey) are being opportunistic -- if Obama's being attacked, they're happy.
Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) eventually helped Paul continue the filibuster, as did Sen. Ron Wyden (Ore.), the only Democrat to join the effort so far.
But how many of these guys are thinking along these lines (Breitbart via Free Republic)?
Homeland Security Drones Designed to Identify Civilians Carrying GunsThe right believes Fast and Furious was an Obama/Holder conspiracy to win support for gun control. The right believes that the Department of Homeland Security is stockpiling guns and ammo meant to be used against right-wing groups. The right believes that DHS just purchased 2,700 light-armored tanks to be used against (presumably) right-wing U.S. citizens. The right believes that door-to-door gun confiscation is coming.
Recently uncovered government documents reveal that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) unmanned Predator B drone fleet has been custom designed to identify civilians carrying guns and track cell phone signals.
"I am very concerned that this technology will be used against law-abiding American firearms owners," said founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation, Alan Gottlieb. “This could violate Fourth Amendment rights as well as Second Amendment rights."...
To what extent are Rand Paul's partners joining his filibuster out of concern for civil liberties -- and to what extent are they doing it out of a right-wing tribal paranoia?
****
UPDATE:
Four of the Senators who joined Paul today voted against a ban on indefinite detention of US citizens. senate.gov/legislative/LI…
— AdamSerwer (@AdamSerwer) March 7, 2013
10 comments:
Who's Lee?
To be fair, at least five of seven are wholly-owned Koch brothers subsidiaries.
It looks like Cruz is just reflexively an asshole on any and every thing.
And I have no doubt, that if it was a Republican President, like, say, Mitt, the Conservatives would all be supporting the drone position - except maybe Paul.
I hate to side with Paul, since he's a stopped clock on war and pot, but I also don't think anybody should have the right to kill someone - even WITH "due process." I'm against the death penalty in all cases.
Lee is Mike Lee of Utah.
They did the right thing, even if it was for the wrong reasons. Why not applaud that?
2nd Amendment paranoia aside, it's an interesting question how satellite or other forms of gizmo intelligence can be or are used to track people and perhaps even determine if they are carrying guns, other weapons, or other things.
But who did not know positional tracking of cell phones and other gadgets like tablets and the TomTom navigator you have on the dash of your car is possible and perhaps even used in criminal or terrorist investigations?
Frankly, this is not the 18th Century and civil libertarian concerns in an age when criminals and terrorists can have much more threatening weapons than anything available in 1789 (when the constitution went into effect) can be easily overdone and out of place.
In that light and in light of the president's constitutional responsibilities for the protection of the nation, the AG's position re the possible killing even of Americans within the US on the say-so of the president makes sense.
Not everything is really a due process issue.
Just a thought.
"To what extent are Rand Paul's partners joining his filibuster out of concern for civil liberties -- and to what extent are they doing it out of a right-wing tribal paranoia?"
Third option is just normal partisan behavior - attack the other guy, always and for anything.
In that light and in light of the president's constitutional responsibilities for the protection of the nation, the AG's position re the possible killing even of Americans within the US on the say-so of the president makes sense.
Wow. One of us must be lost because I thought this was a liberal blog. Just say no to fascism.
"Wow. One of us must be lost because I thought this was a liberal blog. Just say no to fascism."
You're not lost. And I will.
I've been sayin' it for a long time.
Post a Comment