Rand Paul filibuster ends after more than 12 hours
"We need to have a debate about this" ~ Dick Durbin
"If you need to debate this you shouldn't be in congress." ~ repmack
Resolved that it is in the sense of the Senate that:
1 The use of drones to execute, or to target, American citizens on American soil who pose no imminent threat clearly violates the Constitutional due process rights of citizens
2 The American people deserve a clear, concise, and unequivocal public statement from the President of the United States that contains detailed legal reasoning, including but not limited to the balance between national security and due process, Limits of executive power and distinction between treatment of citizens and non-citizens within and outside the boarders of the United States, the use of lethal force against American citizens, and the use of drones in the application of lethal force within the United States territory.
Since the Senators could not sign the piece of paper before you, Mr. Rand decided to pull an old fashioned Frank Capra-esque passioned filibuster to, not fight the nomination of John Brennan, but to call out the Obama Administration's cavaler remarks that they could bomb Americans indiscriminately on American soil... er, hypothetically, of course. You know, to stop 9/11 or Pearl Harbor?
Pause for a moment and noodle on the idea that the nomination of a man who condones drone strikes on American citizens has to be filibustered rather than laughed away.
Of the many things Mr. Paul said, ""No president has the right to say he is judge, jury and executioner."
Others joined in, to Stand with Rand - such as Marco Rubio (a top prospect for seeking higher GOP office) "It's not a Republican question. It's not a conservative question, it's a Constitutional question."
The filibuster ended not when both parties came to their senses and told Mr. Brennan and the Obama Administration to read the Constitution - but when Mr. Paul had to use the facilities.
The bombings will continue.
(It is good to see that someone is reading my column though!)
1 The use of drones to execute, or to target, American citizens on American soil who pose no imminent threat clearly violates the Constitutional due process rights of citizens
2 The American people deserve a clear, concise, and unequivocal public statement from the President of the United States that contains detailed legal reasoning, including but not limited to the balance between national security and due process, Limits of executive power and distinction between treatment of citizens and non-citizens within and outside the boarders of the United States, the use of lethal force against American citizens, and the use of drones in the application of lethal force within the United States territory.
Since the Senators could not sign the piece of paper before you, Mr. Rand decided to pull an old fashioned Frank Capra-esque passioned filibuster to, not fight the nomination of John Brennan, but to call out the Obama Administration's cavaler remarks that they could bomb Americans indiscriminately on American soil... er, hypothetically, of course. You know, to stop 9/11 or Pearl Harbor?
Pause for a moment and noodle on the idea that the nomination of a man who condones drone strikes on American citizens has to be filibustered rather than laughed away.
Of the many things Mr. Paul said, ""No president has the right to say he is judge, jury and executioner."
Others joined in, to Stand with Rand - such as Marco Rubio (a top prospect for seeking higher GOP office) "It's not a Republican question. It's not a conservative question, it's a Constitutional question."
The filibuster ended not when both parties came to their senses and told Mr. Brennan and the Obama Administration to read the Constitution - but when Mr. Paul had to use the facilities.
The bombings will continue.
(It is good to see that someone is reading my column though!)
No comments:
Post a Comment