You’re ‘Standing Here Today Like a Modern Mr. Smith Goes to Washington’

Political Animal 62 Comments

Midnight Bump: #StandWithRand is trending #1 on Twitter worldwide, and has been #1 in the US for several hours. The Senate chamber, near empty when Paul began to speak, is filling with Senators as the political fallout becomes apparent to both sides of the aisle.
Update 2: After 12 hours, 52 minutes Rand Paul yields the floor, at 12:39am EST

The Rand Paul filibuster, live on C-SPAN. With guest appearances from Ted Cruz and others.
(Background here.)
*corrected

62 Replies to “You’re ‘Standing Here Today Like a Modern Mr. Smith Goes to Washington’”

  1. He has been talking about Holders comments that using drones to kill American citizens on US soil and Obama refusing to refute that claim. Quite an eye opener.

  2. The Obama regime can do anything they please. I only noticed Eric Holder’s ‘legal’ opinion while scrolling through the news, nothing stood out about the article. If Bush were still President there would have been howls of outrage, especially from the usual suspects, but hopefully from at least a few more people.
    Drone strike. Revolver to the side of the head. What’s the difference?

  3. Drone strike – sniper shooting a hostage taker, what’s the difference? This seems pretty made up to me and I’m no Obama fan. If there is an immediate threat I don’t care what is doing the shooting. On the other hand nothing Holder wrote suggests that a drone strike would be used instead of an arrest where an arrest was possible. Comparing that to a strike against a US citizen in Yemen is ridiculous because there is no real ability to arrest a US citizen in Yemen. Do we really want US citizenship (or Canadian citizenship – see the Khadrs) to be a shield against the use of force in a war zone? I sure hope not.

  4. Watching world reaction to the death of the cordillo Chavez from Brazil ( hey, someone has to take a vacation for Canadians). I can only suggest that Saint Chavez, the Benificent, should be made Pope, if not God.
    Anyone else puking over the leftist fawning over a dead dictator who, although giving lots of money to his supporters, destroy,ed h is countriEs economy?
    Yes, he was charismatic, but all the people following the death train of his burial are party members who profited from his largess. Those who opposed his theft and destruction of the economy are keeping low at present so as not to be lynched.
    Follow the story over the months … The VP is temporary Prez and there will be elections. Be sure they will be run by the VP “continuing the destiny” or some such, of the dear dead Chavez. And, if successful, the looting will continue.
    The way leftist lootists work is thus: Take a lot from everyone and give a little back to key sectors that support you” The rest … Party on!

  5. The key dimension most often lost in this issue is whether or not the US citizen is acting as an agent of a foreign power (i.e., a traitor), especially in the context of committing an act of war against the US (vs. a mere felony), and or committing an act of espionage pursuant to acts of war.
    The 9/11 hijackers were foreign agents of a foreign power committing acts of war against the US. A US citizen planning or acting to commit acts of war against the US or its allies should be target-able, at home or abroad.
    Holder and Bathhouse Barry are apparently too stupid to articulate this nuance effectively, and/or don’t even grasp or make the distinction. If they don’t make the distinction, then they are, indeed, advocating the ability to target any US citizen because Progressive President so shut up. But saying things like “agent of a foreign power”, “traitor” or “espionage” doesn’t fit the Progressive narrative since, you know, Religion of Peace so shut up.

  7. Cicero’s last words are said to have been,
    “There is nothing proper about what you are doing, soldier, but do try to kill me properly.”
    Cheers
    Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
    1st Saint Nicolaas Army
    Army Group “True North”

  9. @the on: I disagree. There’s a hell of a moral difference between a human trigger-puller on the ground with a team of his peers observing him, and a drone operator who is isolated from the significance of his act by technology and difference.
    There’s something particularly creepy about the new generation of small-platform observation drones that can go nearly anywhere. It’s only a matter of time before there will be armed platforms of this type that could literally fly in through a window and light up a room with sub-machine gun fire. I can imagine them making any combat veteran twitchy and they’d be a vision of hell to civilians. The current level of technology is horrible enough.
    But here’s the real problem: so long as policing is done by men, you have to suborn or pervert the morality of individuals in order to transform them into enforcers for an immoral regime. I realize that history is full of examples of this in all parts of the world, but how much easier it would be to impose a new “utopian” Leviathan when your will can be extended to all corners of your dominion by a handful of bored functionaries who will never be confronted with the full reality and consequences of their actions.
    This makes me think of that line by Winston Churchill, who spoke of a “new Dark Age, made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted by the lights of perverted science.”

  11. Christopher Ivey: Actually, the phrase “technology and difference/distance” makes sense either way, if you think about it.

  12. I think you all miss the point. If the President of the USA can by executive order and a kill list fire a Hellfire missile from a drone on US soil and kill an bonafide US citizen without a trial by Judge and Jury, Obama and others of that ilk have just declared civil war on the poplace of the USA. If he thinks he can overturn 1000 years of English Common Law with the stroke of a pen he is an idiot. Prepare for Civil War in the USA and soon. And to the Liberal Bedpissers who come here on occasion, if Harper said the same thing, what would you do. Oh I know the answer, you would Idle No More, or Occupy and Rape etc. I know what I would do and it would not be block a street or take over a park.

  14. Relax pipples…you are just watching the USA go to the USSA in our time.Happened before,will happen again. Until we learn to totally eradicate parasites that are leftards,etc. they will come back.Simple nature.
    But we never seem to learn from simple nature,which defines us as so called “sapiens”.

  15. Yes, a lot of people seem to be missing the point, including CNN. Which is hard to do if you listened to more than 15 minutes of the debate. It’s not about hostage takers, or accused murderers. It’s about whether the government can apply what is essentially profiling to take out US citizens on home soil, in the way they do overseas.

  16. John McCain will have a hard time collecting enough faux Republican votes to stop this. Let’s hope the whole Republican starts to see the light – or feel the heat – on this matter, courtesy of their constituents.

  18. “Nobody’s opposed to using a drone against an imminent lethal strike.
    We’re concerned with using a drone against a non combatant without due process”
    8:08 PM Wed 03/06/2013
    Rand Paul

  19. Trivia:
    When the movie “Mr Smith Goes to Washington” premiered in our capital, the press and the politicians were furious. Of course back then they were all Democrats. One senator, a Democrat, walked out of the premier showing in Washington DC.
    The movie was banned in fascist countries:
    Read about it here.
    So, like, what’s changed. Obama will play golf tomorrow, Biden will say something dumber than a 3rd grader and life will go on.
    At least Chavez died.

  20. Treason is a felony as are any other offenses which an American citizen might commit in any imaginable hypothetical situation arising in connection with a drone strike by an American citizen in the territorial limits of the United States. There is no – I say again: NO – legal justification for killing any American citizen within the territorial limits of the United States without first an indictment voted out by a grand jury, followed by a jury trial with 12 other citizens chosen by the usual rules, capped by both a finding of guilty of a capital felony and a sentence imposed by that jury under the usual rules for capital cases of death. It’s called “due process” and what the crime is or may be doesn’t allow or legally permit or justify killing an American citizen in the U.S. without it. Now, do felons get themselves killed in the course of committing or escaping from the commission of their crimes? Sure, but not by a drone strike!! That is what the police are for and what distinguishes our police from our military. It is also what distinguishes the U.S. from all the other little tin-pot dog-hole dictatorships around the world, at least until now. The rule of law.

  21. I guess it’s all in the wrapping when you consider a drone strike to someone pressing a pistol up against another persons head and pulling the trigger. Both result in the individual dead although the first method might kill the other 30 people in the building and is somehow, so much more acceptable….it’s kinda like a video game…..and they’re alright…..aren’t they?
    To make the authorization of killing without trial on US soil the norm, then it’s only the method that’s at question. Now if you have REALLY A LOT of people that are deemed undesirable, does that mean that gassing is acceptable? After all, dead is dead. where have I read about this before?

  22. Obugabe …. does not have any intention of obeying any laws.
    If this has not sunk in for anyone by now ….. there’s just no hope for anyone that dense.

  24. “There is no – I say again: NO – legal justification for killing any American citizen within the territorial limits of the United States without first an indictment voted out by a grand jury, followed by a jury trial with 12 other citizens chosen by the usual rules, capped by both a finding of guilty of a capital felony and a sentence imposed by that jury under the usual rules for capital cases of death.”
    However, a US citizen acting as an agent of a foreign power to commit an act of war is no different than a foreign-born agent of a foreign power committing an act of war. Though when Major Nidal Hasan shot up Fort Hood, it was apparently just workplace violence. At least to Holder and Bathhouse Barry.

  25. I would be fully in favor of the use of drones on US soil to kill American citizens if the first people to be eliminated were Obozo, Biden, Holder, Schumer, Feinstein, Wasserman-Schultz and Sandra Fluke. There is some doubt about the US citizenship of one of them but I think it would be reasonable to eliminate 7 people in a test program and then put the idea to a vote to see if the public wants this program continued.

  26. Obama HAS been given the power to kill Americans at whim because low-information voters have given it to him. Does one think that voter X would care even if you told him? If he voted for Obama, probably not. People have been conditioned into thinking that someone like him is perfectly capable of seeing to their interests and Obama is fine with that.

  27. the said: “Drone strike – sniper shooting a hostage taker, what’s the difference?”
    Precision. The sniper is on site, he can call the shot from what he sees with his own eyes. He’s a human with a friggin’ brain, so he can chose to disobey illegal orders. He can hit a dime at one hundred yards and a dollar bill at three hundred if he’s worth the money they pay him.
    Drones shooting Hellfire missiles are a bit more indiscriminant. Targets smaller than a pickup truck can’t really be chosen. The blast and fragment danger zone is -large-. Any fool of a politician can push the button with nobody to tell him “no”. That’s not very safe, historically speaking.
    Then the said: “On the other hand nothing Holder wrote suggests that a drone strike would be used instead of an arrest where an arrest was possible.”
    Two problems with your statement. First, the very fact that Holder is bringing it up at all should be making the hair on your neck stand up, because this makes the guy choosing up the target list into judge, jury and executioner. That’s illegal under the US Constitution AND its incredibly f-ing dangerous. Do cops get to decide who they’re going to shoot tonight? No. Should anybody be able to do that? No.
    Second, is there any place on United States territory that -can’t- be reached by regular human beings to make an arrest? If so please list, because I can’t think of anyplace helicopters or boats won’t work. Furthermore, is there anyplace on US territory that can’t be reached by a regular armed aircraft instead of a drone? No.
    Finally, the said: “Comparing that to a strike against a US citizen in Yemen is ridiculous because there is no real ability to arrest a US citizen in Yemen. Do we really want US citizenship (or Canadian citizenship – see the Khadrs) to be a shield against the use of force in a war zone?”
    Ah, reading comprehension malfunction. Holder is not talking about a war zone. He’s talking about US TERRITORY. You know, places called “America” on the map. Holder’s not talking about whacking some goon in Yemen, where the cops can’t go. He’s talking about whacking them in Nebraska. New York. Illinois. With a freakin’ drone aircraft. By remote control. He’s talking about blowing sh1t up in the USA -instead- of sending cops. Or even a jet fighter with an actual American in it.
    This is not some academic debating society question either. Mr. Holder’s Department of Homeland Security is taking delivery of a whole bunch of Predator B drones, the same ones that mount the Hellfire and blow up American guys in Yemen.
    The purpose of using drones on US territory is to shorten the chain of command to two guys. One is the drone pilot, the other is a -politician- or appointee who makes up the kill list and pushes the red button. Which he can do while pointing a gun at the pilot’s head if necessary.
    The other purpose is to make it -cheaper- to get air support for things happening on the ground. Predator B drones have long loiter times and low operating costs. They’re tremendously cheaper to fly than helicopters or jets. This is DHS’s own little air force, which they can afford, and can use without upsetting the Posse Comitatus act.
    Wake up to the Hope and Change, dude. Hope they don’t Change your landscaping with a big ol’ HE explosion.

  28. (That was me above “the” seems rat got left out)
    I understand what Kate is saying and if that was what Obama and Holder were proposing I’d be upset, too, but I do not believe it is. This all comes from the drone killing of a US citizen in Yemen when said citizen was plotting to commit violent acts against US interests. The only difference between him and the rest of the drone splatter is the passport that was left in the mess. Obama’s opponents are up in arms over the US government creating an extra-judicial hit list of US citizens. That sounds pretty bad but these targets are not Republicans, they’re active Jihadis in areas outside of the ability of US police to act. As I said, it would be the same as saying a Canadian sniper in Af’stan, knowing that it was a Khadr in his sights, would have to refrain from firing. He could shoot all the others but the passport would be a shield for Khadr. It shouldn’t be.
    As I said, I don’t care if it is a sniper or drone. I understand the discomfort the disconnect of distance and technology brings but it’s the same discomfort knights felt for archers and pikemen for musketeers. Snipers can kill at almost two miles. Call me naive but I do have some trust in our soldiers and their commanders, if not for the Commander in Chief.

  29. “I will speak until I can no longer speak. …that your rights to trial by jury are precious, that no American should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court.”
    I don’t see why this should have to go on very long. Why doesn’t Holder just promise Senator Paul that he will have people charged and pronounced guilty by a court before having them killed for opposing the President’s wishes?

  30. . First, the very fact that Holder is bringing it up at all …
    Phantom, I have made my point and I will stand by it. I understand your point of view and in a narrow discussion of the topic I will disagree. However, your statement above misses the salient point that Holder was responding to a question from Senator Paul, he did not “bring it up”.

  32. Holder co-wrote a book back in the 70’s with Paul Erhlich of “Population Bomb” fame who advocated for putting sterilants in the water and food supply to reduce the population. Holder was also involved in the decision to authorize indefinate detentions without representation-then there is the fast and furious fiasco he was directly involved in, so there is that. Yet Americans are supposed to believe that although drone strikes can be initiated on Americans, it’s unlikely. The foxes are indeed in charge of the hen house.

  33. This is really great. Nothings beats this live stream stuff. I’m gonna watch and drink beer until I can no longer drink beer.

  37. The only diff between the Chimp in Chief and Chavez (besides one being dead)??? The dummies voted for the CinC. Oh. And the CinC supossedly can afford the drones.

  38. That was John Holdren, Obama’s science Czar, IIRC, not Eric Holder, Obama’s Attorney General. Same pit, different snake.

  40. They’re getting tired. Cruz just stumbled IMHO. Sneaking in under the Pakistani radar to whack Bin Laden in his suburban residence was a bad example of a battlefield killing. Not that I disagree with the job, it was just the wrong example to use. Oh, it looks like they’re wrapping up? Your beer may get you through.

  41. This ‘enthusiasm’ is great to see.
    I would like to think that when we get up in the morning somehow the USA would be turning around bt this.
    But Obama will still be in the WH, so I am not optimistic.

  42. I stand corrected-thanks you for that. Can’t trust my memory like I use to be able too- taking me sometime to adjust 🙁
    Either way, the dictator in chief cannot be trusted-his choice of department advisors is frightening-their actions are proof.

  43. Heh.. “#StandWithRand That awkward moment when your Nobel-prize winning Prez won’t promise not to kill us.”

  45. I hadn’t heard about this new power grab by Obomba – been working to hard and long I guess.
    This makes Janet Reno look tame by any standard.

  46. So now the president can decide by dictate if guilt exists and the defendant has no right to petition the court to give thier side of events?
    What would you call a legal system where one persons word is law?
    I hear a whirring sound coming from Arlington.

  48. The best tweet I’ve seen on this at Rand Paul 2016 NEWS@RandPaulNEWS
    “That awkward moment when your Nobel Peace Prize-winning President won’t promise not to kill US citizens. #StandwithRand”

  49. I’m with Ike on this. No crime carried out in the continental United States justifies the use of drones that are indiscriminate in their collateral killing capacity.
    Three cheers for Rand Paul and Ted Cruz.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation