I like Rand Paul

by Idéfix Thu Mar 07, 2013 11:48 am

I am glad someone stood up for Americans' right to life and constitutional due process. Democrats who vote with the current president on drones will regret it when the next Republican takes the White House.

by Hellsangel Thu Mar 07, 2013 12:13 pm

Why? You think a Democratic president won't give them cause for regret?

by Idéfix Thu Mar 07, 2013 12:22 pm

Hellsangel wrote:Why? You think a Democratic president won't give them cause for regret?

Both parties think increase in presidential powers is not such a bad thing if their guy is in the White House. But I don't like increasing presidential powers at all. Power corrupts and absolute power, etc. etc.

by Hellsangel Thu Mar 07, 2013 12:34 pm

trofimov wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:Why? You think a Democratic president won't give them cause for regret?
Both parties think increase in presidential powers is not such a bad thing if their guy is in the White House. But I don't like increasing presidential powers at all. Power corrupts and absolute power, etc. etc.

Guess what happens if a Clinton is back in the White House then.

by Hellsangel Thu Mar 07, 2013 4:31 pm

Looks like he is happy:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/07/historic-filibuster-renews-bipartisan-focus-on-drones-regulation/

by truthbetold Thu Mar 07, 2013 4:58 pm

isn't obama policy ilegal ? how can'ti stand a legal challenge?

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:00 pm

truthbetold wrote:isn't obama policy ilegal ? how can'ti stand a legal challenge?

The Tea Partiers - the scaremongers - are being stupid. So Rambling Paul is asking if Obama has a right to use drone to bomb civilians on US Soil ? ...???? he knows he will get a "no" as a response, and he does get it, and he drops the fillibuster.

If he had the real guts, he should have asked if he can kill ANY civilian using any weapon or use drone to kill ANYONE ANYWHERE and vowed to continue filibuster..

Now that would be manly and our rambling Paul would not do take that challenge.

by Idéfix Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:06 pm

truthbetold wrote:isn't obama policy ilegal ? how can'ti stand a legal challenge?

The drone program tests the limits of both domestic and international law. The constitution does not grant the president the power to declare war. That is the responsibility of Congress. Of course, like the second amendment, here the argument is that the constitution was written for a rather different time -- a time when the US did not have standing armies or terrorists for enemies. This program makes me very nervous. There is no real difference between what Obama is doing with drones and what Nixon did with bombers in Cambodia and Laos with his "secret war" there.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:45 pm

trofimov wrote:
truthbetold wrote:isn't obama policy ilegal ? how can'ti stand a legal challenge?
The drone program tests the limits of both domestic and international law. The constitution does not grant the president the power to declare war. That is the responsibility of Congress. Of course, like the second amendment, here the argument is that the constitution was written for a rather different time -- a time when the US did not have standing armies or terrorists for enemies. This program makes me very nervous. There is no real difference between what Obama is doing with drones and what Nixon did with bombers in Cambodia and Laos with his "secret war" there.

Not quite. He can declare war but has to get Congress approval within XY days (think 60).

by Idéfix Thu Mar 07, 2013 9:31 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
trofimov wrote:
truthbetold wrote:isn't obama policy ilegal ? how can'ti stand a legal challenge?
The drone program tests the limits of both domestic and international law. The constitution does not grant the president the power to declare war. That is the responsibility of Congress. Of course, like the second amendment, here the argument is that the constitution was written for a rather different time -- a time when the US did not have standing armies or terrorists for enemies. This program makes me very nervous. There is no real difference between what Obama is doing with drones and what Nixon did with bombers in Cambodia and Laos with his "secret war" there.

Not quite. He can declare war but has to get Congress approval within XY days (think 60).

Article 1, Section 8:

The Congress shall have Power...

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

You are thinking of the War Powers Resolution of 1973.

by truthbetold Thu Mar 07, 2013 10:54 pm

Uppiliji,
My understanding of events is this:
eric holder, att general, clarified that president's drone policy allows him to order a drone strike against a us citizen on us soil.
that started the fillibuster by rand paul. That is a good thing.
Next holder clarified no such plans were ever planned or likely. White house clarified that president did not have the right to call for a strike inside us on a us citizen.
Us citizens are entitled to legal process before any punishment.

by Maria S Fri Mar 08, 2013 12:45 pm

I liked Rand Paul's grand Libertarian stand *in this issue.

*Of course..did NOT like the ambiguity of Atty. Gen. Holder and the silence of the President..until they came to their senses and clarified- because of Sen Paul.
Funny to see how John McCain- the sane Maverick reacted to it!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/03/08/mccain-calls-paul-cruz-amash-wacko-birds/?wprss=rss_homepage

Carvaka you are a Trofimov? I had to look that up.. "occasional" fellow-Comrade! As my pure Capitalist friend DUT Garu says.. it's high falutin for me!

by Sponsored content

I like Rand Paul

I like Rand Paul

Re: I like Rand Paul

Re: I like Rand Paul

Re: I like Rand Paul

Re: I like Rand Paul

Re: I like Rand Paul

Re: I like Rand Paul

Re: I like Rand Paul

Re: I like Rand Paul

Re: I like Rand Paul

Re: I like Rand Paul

Re: I like Rand Paul

Re: I like Rand Paul