If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Republican lawmakers express anger over Rand Paul's drone-related fearmongering. Let's look at the key words here. Republican lawmakers. Angry. Over fearmongering   (foxnews.com) divider line 65
    More: Ironic, Rand Paul, lawmakers, Zoe Lofgren, Ted Poe, North Vietnam, public humiliation, laws of war, John McCain  
•       •       •

1040 clicks; posted to Politics » on 07 Mar 2013 at 5:47 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



65 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-07 05:50:55 PM
I'm not really surprised, subby.  Something had to make them realize that it was high time to get out from under the crazy table.  What hits closer to the bone than attacking the future of the defense budget?
 
2013-03-07 05:51:57 PM
And they're angry over budget cuts they proposed. Who's surprised by this?
 
2013-03-07 05:53:08 PM
Interesting little schism there.  Rand Paul, darling of the Tea Party, getting smacked around by McCain and Graham, a couple of establishment GOPers.

I suspect Boehner's unity meeting is looking a bit shaky already...
 
2013-03-07 05:53:55 PM
information doesn't want to be free. it wants a fueled airplane drone at the hangar and no one gets hurt.

fact is, these guys are chasing their tail so fast between defense hawks and cost cutting their making ME dizzy. They have no clue what their message is anymore and that's all just part of the process.

/shh shh.... everythings fine.. shhhh... [no pulse]
 
2013-03-07 05:54:04 PM
Yeah, because there's a chance Paul's antics will lead to a serious effort to either clarify the legal basis for those actions or repeal it outright, and we can't have that.
 
2013-03-07 05:54:46 PM
All I got from that was that McCain was cranky. Isn't McCain always cranky?


"Your notification is the buzz of propellers on the drone as it flies overhead in the seconds before you're killed. Is that what we really want from our government?" Paul asked.

For someone so concerned about drones he really doesn't understand how they operate. Sorry Rand, you ain't gonna hear shiat before that Hellfire blows you to smithereens.
 
2013-03-07 05:55:35 PM
I'm enjoying this GOP civil war so much.
 
2013-03-07 05:55:51 PM
A rare occasion where I agree with Republicans.  Rand has his head up his ass.  There is no god damned program to bring drone warfare to the United States.  It's patently absurd.
 
2013-03-07 05:56:32 PM
When do they all jump into a large dirt pit and start fighting each other with teeth and crude homemade weapons?  Will it be on CSPAN?

/so excited
 
2013-03-07 05:56:50 PM
"Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., and Ted Poe, R-Texas, last month introduced a bill to regulate domestic drones much like the government regulates wiretaps."


Heh. Poe's law.
 
2013-03-07 05:57:34 PM

Ex_Parrot: When do they all jump into a large dirt pit and start fighting each other with teeth and crude homemade weapons?  Will it be on CSPAN?

/so excited


There's room for AGGRESSIVE expansion!
 
2013-03-07 05:57:49 PM

Infernalist: Interesting little schism there.  Rand Paul, darling of the Tea Party, getting smacked around by McCain and Graham, a couple of establishment GOPers.

I suspect Boehner's unity meeting is looking a bit shaky already...



I was under the impression Graham was also a Tea Party darling. Discuss.
 
2013-03-07 05:58:37 PM
I'm ashamed that this thread has over 10 posts without anyone else posting this.  I have to do EVERYTHING, don't I?

img2-1.timeinc.net
 
2013-03-07 05:58:37 PM
Democrats would make this front page news (as they should) if there was a Republican president. It's really sad the Republican party can't even decide if this is bad.

How is it that Republicans can wear their asshattedness and corporate shillery on their sleeves with everything they propose or object to, and people still vote for them?
 
2013-03-07 05:58:55 PM
"Hooray!" Paul responded when the letter was read to him for the first time during an interview with Fox News. "For 13 hours yesterday, we asked him that question, so there is a result and a victory. Under duress and under public humiliation, the White House will respond and do the right thing."

Wow, what a self-important jackass. They didn't change anything. They gave you the same answer they gave you before your little stunt. I don't think they were publicly humiliated by you in any way. But hey, keep tilting at those windmills.
Paul told Fox News the critical senators "think the whole world is a battlefield, including America."

"I don't think the laws of war apply to America. I think the Bill of Rights do," Paul said.


Maybe you should get Congress to change the damn rules then, instead of directing your ire at Obama. Also, why wouldn't the laws of war apply to America?

"Your notification is the buzz of propellers on the drone as it flies overhead in the seconds before you're killed. Is that what we really want from our government?" Paul asked.

"As we enter this uncharted world of drone technology, Congress must be proactive and establish boundaries for drone use that safeguard the constitutional rights of Americans," Poe said in a statement last month.


Because that's way worse than being killed by a sniper or from a helicopter. But oh noes! A drone! Booga booga! Way to miss the whole point.
 
2013-03-07 05:59:03 PM

fusillade762: All I got from that was that McCain was cranky. Isn't McCain always cranky?


"Your notification is the buzz of propellers on the drone as it flies overhead in the seconds before you're killed. Is that what we really want from our government?" Paul asked.

For someone so concerned about drones he really doesn't understand how they operate. Sorry Rand, you ain't gonna hear shiat before that Hellfire blows you to smithereens.


[factually, a hellfire missile would not blow you to "smithereens". The most likely scenario is that the initial under pressure literally rips your lungs out through your mouth but that's the point - pressure waves like that concentrate drastically, underground or in enclosed areas.]

[i dont have a problem with drones at all. I have a problem with accountability, but damned if any of these conservatives are accountable, so.. shoo. go on]
 
2013-03-07 05:59:22 PM

qorkfiend: Yeah, because there's a chance Paul's antics will lead to a serious effort to either clarify the legal basis for those actions or repeal it outright, and we can't have that.


it would lead to a kneejerk effort which would result in something all encompassing and vague that will take decades to chip away at, like the PATRIOT Act.  And that's not good in either direction.
 
2013-03-07 06:01:00 PM

Lord_Baull: Infernalist: Interesting little schism there.  Rand Paul, darling of the Tea Party, getting smacked around by McCain and Graham, a couple of establishment GOPers.

I suspect Boehner's unity meeting is looking a bit shaky already...


I was under the impression Graham was also a Tea Party darling. Discuss.


Oh no, lol, he's an establishment type.

Supported McCain's run back in 2000 and 2008, was one of the 14 Senators that tried to play bipartisan just after Bush got reelected, and pushed heavily for the bank bailouts.

The Tea Derpers might have considered him 'one of them', but he's a bought and paid for GOP minion, through and through.
 
2013-03-07 06:02:13 PM
Doesn't the Posse Comitatus Act prohibit these types of federal government behaviors?
 
2013-03-07 06:05:00 PM

qorkfiend: Yeah, because there's a chance Paul's antics will lead to a serious effort to either clarify the legal basis for those actions or repeal it outright, and we can't have that.


A Paul actually get something passed when a chance to score brownie points with the base and collect campaign donations exists instead? Not bloody likely
 
2013-03-07 06:07:01 PM

What in The: Doesn't the Posse Comitatus Act prohibit these types of federal government behaviors?


Well, here's something to consider...

In 2011, U.S. President Barack Obama signed into law. Section 1031, clause "b", article 2 defines a 'covered person', i.e., someone possibly subject to martial law, as the following: "A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces."

So...
 
2013-03-07 06:08:13 PM

What in The: Doesn't the Posse Comitatus Act prohibit these types of federal government behaviors?


Yes  The military cannot be used on US soil.
 
2013-03-07 06:09:46 PM

Infernalist: What in The: Doesn't the Posse Comitatus Act prohibit these types of federal government behaviors?

Well, here's something to consider...

In 2011, U.S. President Barack Obama signed

 the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal year 2012into law. Section 1031, clause "b", article 2 defines a 'covered person', i.e., someone possibly subject to martial law, as the following: "A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces."

So...


Whoops.  Modified.
 
2013-03-07 06:14:31 PM
I'm pretty sure at least 1 US citizen was killed by drones.
 
2013-03-07 06:16:52 PM

DarnoKonrad: A rare occasion where I agree with Republicans.  Rand has his head up his ass.  There is no god damned program to bring drone warfare to the United States.  It's patently absurd.


Yes but his use of the filibuster was gold
 
2013-03-07 06:17:54 PM

potterydove: I'm pretty sure at least 1 US citizen was killed by drones.


Dude, America has been killing its citizens since we became Americans.
 
2013-03-07 06:19:10 PM

ghare: potterydove: I'm pretty sure at least 1 US citizen was killed by drones.

Dude, America has been killing its citizens since we became Americans.


He's just biased against remote controlled planes.
 
2013-03-07 06:20:27 PM

potterydove: I'm pretty sure at least 1 US citizen was killed by drones.


Yes, but it wasn't on US soil.  That is important for some reason.
 
2013-03-07 06:20:36 PM

Infernalist: Infernalist: What in The: Doesn't the Posse Comitatus Act prohibit these types of federal government behaviors?

Well, here's something to consider...

In 2011, U.S. President Barack Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal year 2012into law. Section 1031, clause "b", article 2 defines a 'covered person', i.e., someone possibly subject to martial law, as the following: "A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces."

So...

Whoops.  Modified.


Where does this law explicitly state that the President can attack people who are physically in the United States? Does the FBI use armed drones?

So, generated fear is the best kind of fear? Is that what these idiots are attempting to shove down our throats?
 
2013-03-07 06:21:53 PM

Lord_Baull: "Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., and Ted Poe, R-Texas, last month introduced a bill to regulate domestic drones much like the government regulates wiretaps."


Heh. Poe's law.


A democrat and republican co-authored legislation?  Not even Poe's law can escape Poe's law.
 
2013-03-07 06:22:49 PM

Warlordtrooper: What in The: Doesn't the Posse Comitatus Act prohibit these types of federal government behaviors?

Yes  The military cannot be used on US soil.


In theory. In practice it's a moot point since we've militarized local PD's to the point where they are defacto military forces.
 
2013-03-07 06:23:21 PM
Angry AND concerned, subby. Very concerned.
 
2013-03-07 06:23:45 PM

ghare: DarnoKonrad: A rare occasion where I agree with Republicans.  Rand has his head up his ass.  There is no god damned program to bring drone warfare to the United States.  It's patently absurd.

Yes but his use of the filibuster was gold


I preferred Bernie Sanders', but that one didn't get any media attention.  That's what really pisses me off about this.  The media treated Sanders like some old delusional geezer for the outdated talking fillibsuter, and Rand is now some kind of folk hero.   When from a factual and substantive stance, Sanders had a much better case to make over a much more important issue.  It's days like this where I get the most cynical about this nation's future.
 
2013-03-07 06:28:02 PM

DarnoKonrad: A rare occasion where I agree with Republicans.  Rand has his head up his ass.  There is no god damned program to bring drone warfare to the United States.  It's patently absurd.


The executive branch should be challenged on these things constantly. If someone had filibustered the Patriot act, and got what was actually in it, we would never have had a Patriot act. When it came out Russ Feingold was the ONLY senator with the balls to state that it was a bad thing and vote a against it. I wish he had taken thirteen hours to stand against it. As far was the Republicans and there new found hatred of fearmongering.....FARK EM.
 
2013-03-07 06:29:14 PM
This particular controversy is something I don't really understand.

American citizens are killed on American soil without trial every farking day.  If some psychopath decides to shoot up a mall, do you really expect them to hold a criminal trial before the cops gun them down?   If not, then why does it matter if the guy pulling the trigger is sitting behind a computer screen?

Obviously the situations where this is applicable will be few and far between.  Exploding a person with hellfire missiles isn't really a good option when collateral damage is a concern, which it almost always is in these situations.  But if that once in a blue moon situation does arise, I'd rather the government use whatever delivery mechanism is most available to them.

If the government wanted to use drones to assassinate dissidents, they'd already be assassinating dissidents the old fashion way.  And if they had already gone that far off the deep end, then a pesky law banning the use of drones on targets on American soil isn't going to stop them from doing just that.  So it's harmless if the government is using them only in situations where lethal force is already justified, and pointless if the government decides to start wantonly killing it's own citizens.
 
2013-03-07 06:35:42 PM

Non-evil Monkey: do you really expect them to hold a criminal trial before the cops gun them down?


If the guy surrenders and puts his guns down then Yes I expect them to have a criminal trial before punishment.
 
2013-03-07 06:36:36 PM

Warlordtrooper: Non-evil Monkey: do you really expect them to hold a criminal trial before the cops gun them down?

If the guy surrenders and puts his guns down then Yes I expect them to have a criminal trial before punishment.


THIS. FOR THE LOVE OF LIBERTY, this.
 
2013-03-07 06:38:16 PM

globalwarmingpraiser: DarnoKonrad: A rare occasion where I agree with Republicans.  Rand has his head up his ass.  There is no god damned program to bring drone warfare to the United States.  It's patently absurd.

The executive branch should be challenged on these things constantly. If someone had filibustered the Patriot act, and got what was actually in it, we would never have had a Patriot act. When it came out Russ Feingold was the ONLY senator with the balls to state that it was a bad thing and vote a against it. I wish he had taken thirteen hours to stand against it. As far was the Republicans and there new found hatred of fearmongering.....FARK EM.


Constantly?  Rand's whole premise is basically the fallacy of many questions.  There are any number of things in Washington that need debate besides non-existent programs cooked up by paranoid conspiracy theorists.   The patriot act was at least real.
 
2013-03-07 06:42:13 PM

Xythero: potterydove: I'm pretty sure at least 1 US citizen was killed by drones.

Yes, but it wasn't on US soil.  That is important for some reason.


Listen, you exceptionalists need to pay attention to the history of the country based on actual facts. We've done it for 200 years. On American soil.
 
2013-03-07 06:45:17 PM

fusillade762: All I got from that was that McCain was cranky. Isn't McCain always cranky?


"Your notification is the buzz of propellers on the drone as it flies overhead in the seconds before you're killed. Is that what we really want from our government?" Paul asked.

For someone so concerned about drones he really doesn't understand how they operate. Sorry Rand, you ain't gonna hear shiat before that Hellfire blows you to smithereens.


Some have propellers.  But most of those aren't weaponized.  Still he's right, and it's not a precedent we want to see happen.
 
2013-03-07 06:47:46 PM

LookForTheArrow: Warlordtrooper: Non-evil Monkey: do you really expect them to hold a criminal trial before the cops gun them down?

If the guy surrenders and puts his guns down then Yes I expect them to have a criminal trial before punishment.

THIS. FOR THE LOVE OF LIBERTY, this.


Not going to disagree, but that's another matter because at that point he is no longer shooting up a mall and there is no immediate danger.  When I say lethal force is justified against someone who is shooting up a mall, I am assuming they are still in the process of shooting up said mall at the time lethal force is used.
 
2013-03-07 06:54:08 PM

DarnoKonrad: globalwarmingpraiser: DarnoKonrad: A rare occasion where I agree with Republicans.  Rand has his head up his ass.  There is no god damned program to bring drone warfare to the United States.  It's patently absurd.

The executive branch should be challenged on these things constantly. If someone had filibustered the Patriot act, and got what was actually in it, we would never have had a Patriot act. When it came out Russ Feingold was the ONLY senator with the balls to state that it was a bad thing and vote a against it. I wish he had taken thirteen hours to stand against it. As far was the Republicans and there new found hatred of fearmongering.....FARK EM.

Constantly?  Rand's whole premise is basically the fallacy of many questions.  There are any number of things in Washington that need debate besides non-existent programs cooked up by paranoid conspiracy theorists.   The patriot act was at least real.


Between the NDAA and the Patriot ACT, I worry that these things are possible. If you are not worried about the next President saying well you know I think we need to do this, your missing the way things happen. We are slowly allowing our rights to be taken away. The Fourth and Fifth are being evicerated. That being said I am pretty sure they are not going to be be quartering troops in houses soon.
 
2013-03-07 06:55:41 PM

Infernalist: Interesting little schism there.  Rand Paul, darling of the Tea Party, getting smacked around by McCain and Graham, a couple of establishment GOPers.

I suspect Boehner's unity meeting is looking a bit shaky already...


If McCain and Lindsay Graham are pissed, then I'm happy.
 
2013-03-07 06:58:09 PM
Nice sub subby
 
2013-03-07 07:01:08 PM

globalwarmingpraiser: DarnoKonrad: globalwarmingpraiser: DarnoKonrad: A rare occasion where I agree with Republicans.  Rand has his head up his ass.  There is no god damned program to bring drone warfare to the United States.  It's patently absurd.

The executive branch should be challenged on these things constantly. If someone had filibustered the Patriot act, and got what was actually in it, we would never have had a Patriot act. When it came out Russ Feingold was the ONLY senator with the balls to state that it was a bad thing and vote a against it. I wish he had taken thirteen hours to stand against it. As far was the Republicans and there new found hatred of fearmongering.....FARK EM.

Constantly?  Rand's whole premise is basically the fallacy of many questions.  There are any number of things in Washington that need debate besides non-existent programs cooked up by paranoid conspiracy theorists.   The patriot act was at least real.

Between the NDAA and the Patriot ACT, I worry that these things are possible. If you are not worried about the next President saying well you know I think we need to do this, your missing the way things happen. We are slowly allowing our rights to be taken away. The Fourth and Fifth are being evicerated. That being said I am pretty sure they are not going to be be quartering troops in houses soon.



The next president has nothing to do with this. You can't protect America from democracy.  If Americans vote for some authoritarian nut, they'll get an authoritarian nut.  That has nothing to do with a memo from Obama's attorney general to a paranoid Senator.

This nation has real issues it needs to deal with, and this not it.  I can not express how distressing this manipulation by Paul is.  Abhorrent and unconscionable.
 
2013-03-07 07:01:20 PM

TimonC346: Democrats would make this front page news (as they should) if there was a Republican president.


Ron Wyden and some other Democrats HAVE been hammering the president for his legal justification for the strikes for some time now.


dehehn: fusillade762: All I got from that was that McCain was cranky. Isn't McCain always cranky?


"Your notification is the buzz of propellers on the drone as it flies overhead in the seconds before you're killed. Is that what we really want from our government?" Paul asked.

For someone so concerned about drones he really doesn't understand how they operate. Sorry Rand, you ain't gonna hear shiat before that Hellfire blows you to smithereens.

Some have propellers.  But most of those aren't weaponized.  Still he's right, and it's not a precedent we want to see happen.


I was referring to the fact that they fly so high there's no way you can hear them.
 
2013-03-07 07:04:12 PM

DarnoKonrad: globalwarmingpraiser: DarnoKonrad: globalwarmingpraiser: DarnoKonrad: A rare occasion where I agree with Republicans.  Rand has his head up his ass.  There is no god damned program to bring drone warfare to the United States.  It's patently absurd.

The executive branch should be challenged on these things constantly. If someone had filibustered the Patriot act, and got what was actually in it, we would never have had a Patriot act. When it came out Russ Feingold was the ONLY senator with the balls to state that it was a bad thing and vote a against it. I wish he had taken thirteen hours to stand against it. As far was the Republicans and there new found hatred of fearmongering.....FARK EM.

Constantly?  Rand's whole premise is basically the fallacy of many questions.  There are any number of things in Washington that need debate besides non-existent programs cooked up by paranoid conspiracy theorists.   The patriot act was at least real.

Between the NDAA and the Patriot ACT, I worry that these things are possible. If you are not worried about the next President saying well you know I think we need to do this, your missing the way things happen. We are slowly allowing our rights to be taken away. The Fourth and Fifth are being evicerated. That being said I am pretty sure they are not going to be be quartering troops in houses soon.


The next president has nothing to do with this. You can't protect America from democracy.  If Americans vote for some authoritarian nut, they'll get an authoritarian nut.  That has nothing to do with a memo from Obama's attorney general to a paranoid Senator.

This nation has real issues it needs to deal with, and this not it.  I can not express how distressing this manipulation by Paul is.  Abhorrent and unconscionable.


Well, I worry about these things, because they can happen. Look at it like this. He has pissed off every authoritarian in congress, and has formed an alliance with Widen. Maybe we can at least see an attempt to end the AUMF.
 
2013-03-07 07:07:09 PM

fusillade762: All I got from that was that McCain was cranky. Isn't McCain always cranky?


"Your notification is the buzz of propellers on the drone as it flies overhead in the seconds before you're killed. Is that what we really want from our government?" Paul asked.

For someone so concerned about drones he really doesn't understand how they operate. Sorry Rand, you ain't gonna hear shiat before that Hellfire blows you to smithereens.


Which is about the only reason he'd obstruct since he's worried about being the first target.  If anything, he and his fellow obstructionists have moved up a few notches for getting in the way of hunting down terrorists without regard to jurisdiction.
 
2013-03-07 07:09:23 PM

dehehn: fusillade762: All I got from that was that McCain was cranky. Isn't McCain always cranky?


"Your notification is the buzz of propellers on the drone as it flies overhead in the seconds before you're killed. Is that what we really want from our government?" Paul asked.

For someone so concerned about drones he really doesn't understand how they operate. Sorry Rand, you ain't gonna hear shiat before that Hellfire blows you to smithereens.

Some have propellers.  But most of those aren't weaponized. McCain's right, and it's a precedent we need to see happen if we want to be able to get rid of terrorists.


FTFY.
 
2013-03-07 07:29:28 PM
Just so I'm clear on this, are Republicans for or against trials for accused terrorists now?
 
Displayed 50 of 65 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report