Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(Washington Times)   "Mr. Paul goes to Washington" but Washington isn't IN THE CONSTITUTION   (washingtontimes.com) divider line 84
    More: Followup, Kentucky Republican, John O. Brennan, warrantless wiretapping, Potomac, war on terrorism, imminent threat, Fifth Amendment, lethal force  
•       •       •

1627 clicks; posted to Politics » on 08 Mar 2013 at 10:24 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-08 10:26:06 AM  
How long did that crazy bastard go on for? Did he beat the Strom Thurmond record?
 
2013-03-08 10:27:21 AM  
Subby an idiot or a fool?

Washington D.C. is in fact permitted by the constitution.
 
2013-03-08 10:28:20 AM  
"HURR DURR WHERE WUZ THE DIMOCRATZ ON THIS!!" says the party that marginalized, belittled, and villainized progressive Democrats at every turn since 2000, when that mysterious enigma whose name cannot be recalled was in office.

What, Joe Lieberman, Evan Bayh, Ben Nelson, and Blanche Lincoln didn't have anything positive to offer on this? Imagine that!
 
2013-03-08 10:29:34 AM  

Straight to doom: How long did that crazy bastard go on for? Did he beat the Strom Thurmond record?


The whole thing lasted 13 hours or so, though Paul only did 4 hours or so himself. Thurmond did 24 hours and change solo. Because he REALLY hated blacks a lot more than Paul hates drones
 
2013-03-08 10:30:16 AM  
Paul is the anti-Obama. This is why he is now the front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016.

Good luck with that.
 
2013-03-08 10:30:53 AM  
Sen. Rand Paul has lit a fuse, one that threatens to blow up President Obama's secret drone program.

It's always nice when the very first sentence shows that the column is complete and utter bullshiat.
 
2013-03-08 10:31:41 AM  
Angry McCain Ups Ante, Calls Paul, Cruz "Wacko Birds"

Watching the split on the GOP is much more fun.
 
2013-03-08 10:32:42 AM  

MyRandomName: Washington D.C. is in fact permitted by the constitution.

 
2013-03-08 10:32:49 AM  
The hyperbole, it's over 9000!
 
2013-03-08 10:33:33 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: Sen. Rand Paul has lit a fuse, one that threatens to blow up President Obama's secret drone program.

It's always nice when the very first sentence shows that the column is complete and utter bullshiat.


Yes, Holder came back and withdrew his original statements and told Rand that drone strikes on US soil are not constitutional.  But remember this.  If it were to happen in the next 4 years, we should all remember that Holder once said that it was not constitutional and see what lies this Imperial President will tell us when it does happen.
 
2013-03-08 10:34:45 AM  

NateGrey: Angry McCain Ups Ante, Calls Paul, Cruz "Wacko Birds"

Watching the split on the GOP is much more fun.


For the record, McCain is a RINO.  Horrible choice to be up against Obama.
 
2013-03-08 10:35:01 AM  

Straight to doom: How long did that crazy bastard go on for? Did he beat the Strom Thurmond record?


13 hours. Ron W. Paul didn't even come close to breaking Thurmond's record.
 
2013-03-08 10:35:17 AM  

PanicMan: Paul is the anti-Obama. This is why he is now the front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016.

Good luck with that.


Please proceed, Republicans.

/Remind me again, how well do Tea Partiers do outside of confederate and rural areas?
 
2013-03-08 10:36:06 AM  
Sen. Rand Paul has lit a fuse, one that threatens to blow up President Obama's secret drone program.

You mean the "secret" drone program that has been all over the news for the past couple of years?

That "secret" drone program?
 
2013-03-08 10:36:14 AM  

SithLord: NateGrey: Angry McCain Ups Ante, Calls Paul, Cruz "Wacko Birds"

Watching the split on the GOP is much more fun.

For the record, McCain is a RINO.  Horrible choice to be up against Obama.


At least 40% of the party agrees with him. That's more than probably agree with Paul on most issues
 
2013-03-08 10:37:05 AM  

SithLord: Philip Francis Queeg: Sen. Rand Paul has lit a fuse, one that threatens to blow up President Obama's secret drone program.

It's always nice when the very first sentence shows that the column is complete and utter bullshiat.

Yes, Holder came back and withdrew his original statements and told Rand that drone strikes on US soil are not constitutional.  But remember this.  If it were to happen in the next 4 years, we should all remember that Holder once said that it was not constitutional and see what lies this Imperial President will tell us when it does happen.


So you're chastising Obama for bad decisions he hasn't even made?  Wow, what's next? Calling him an anti-Semite for not celebrating Passover 2015 yet?
 
2013-03-08 10:37:57 AM  
MyRandomName (2013-03-08 10:27:21 AM: Subby an idiot or a fool? Washington D.C. is in fact permitted by the constitution.

This: "The Congress shall have Power [...] To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings." (Art. 1, s. 8)
 
2013-03-08 10:38:49 AM  
The same people who say that military intervention possibly involving drones would never under any circumstances be appropriate because Americans on American soil should have due process 100% of the time are the same people who cheer when a shoplifter gets killed by an American Hero with a concealed pistol.
 
2013-03-08 10:39:53 AM  

SN1987a goes boom: SithLord: Philip Francis Queeg: Sen. Rand Paul has lit a fuse, one that threatens to blow up President Obama's secret drone program.

It's always nice when the very first sentence shows that the column is complete and utter bullshiat.

Yes, Holder came back and withdrew his original statements and told Rand that drone strikes on US soil are not constitutional.  But remember this.  If it were to happen in the next 4 years, we should all remember that Holder once said that it was not constitutional and see what lies this Imperial President will tell us when it does happen.

So you're chastising Obama for bad decisions he hasn't even made?  Wow, what's next? Calling him an anti-Semite for not celebrating Passover 2015 yet?


The "Socialist" and "Commie"  labels aren't sticking, what with the Dow setting new records, so they needed to come up with a new pejorative.
 
2013-03-08 10:41:54 AM  
<a data-cke-saved-href="Mr. Paul's filibuster was necessary and heroic.

necessary is question begging and heroic is just stupid.

but hey a tea party guy took on Obama and that has to worth -- what really?
 
2013-03-08 10:42:31 AM  

highbrow45: The same people who say that military intervention possibly involving drones would never under any circumstances be appropriate because Americans on American soil should have due process 100% of the time are the same people who cheer when a shoplifter gets killed by an American Hero with a concealed pistol.



I've never seen a single instance of anyone of Fark cheering when a shoplifter got killed by a civilian with a concealed weapon.
 
2013-03-08 10:42:46 AM  

highbrow45: The same people who say that military intervention possibly involving drones would never under any circumstances be appropriate because Americans on American soil should have due process 100% of the time are the same people who cheer when a shoplifter gets killed by an American Hero with a concealed pistol.


They also cheer when a man stalks, then shoots and kills an unarmed, law-abiding blah teenager.
 
2013-03-08 10:43:27 AM  
Kuhner: "Hence, Mr. Obama thinks that he can order the execution of any American citizen in our country without due process - no charges, no trial and no verdict - simply if that person is suspected of being a terrorist or an "imminent threat" to national security. "

Holder: "No."
 
2013-03-08 10:44:02 AM  

give me doughnuts: You mean the "secret" drone program that has been all over the news for the past couple of years?


It's secret in that the Obama administration refuses to discuss it in court, repeatedly claiming before the court that disclosure of such a program would harm national security.
 
2013-03-08 10:44:25 AM  
damn. once again not previewing makes me look bad. bad Curious, bad.
 
2013-03-08 10:45:04 AM  
If Lincoln had drones, do you think he wouldn't have used them?
 
2013-03-08 10:45:09 AM  

highbrow45: The same people who say that military intervention possibly involving drones would never under any circumstances be appropriate because Americans on American soil should have due process 100% of the time are the same people who cheer when a shoplifter gets killed by an American Hero with a concealed pistol.


People forget that due process doesn't just mean the court system.  Legal police shootings happen every day.
 
2013-03-08 10:45:38 AM  

give me doughnuts: I've never seen a single instance of anyone of Fark cheering when a shoplifter got killed by a civilian with a concealed weapon.


is this some weird meta joke or something
 
2013-03-08 10:45:39 AM  

highbrow45: The same people who say that military intervention possibly involving drones would never under any circumstances be appropriate because Americans on American soil should have due process 100% of the time are the same people who cheer when a shoplifter gets killed by an American Hero with a concealed pistol.


They're also people who didn't want Gitmo detainees, including U.S. citizens, to be brought to trial in America because "ZOMG! FARTBAMBO'S SETTING US UP FOR ANOTHER ATTACK!"

But hey, they found another silver spoon Daddy's Boy to make them moist, so let em have their moment.
 
2013-03-08 10:45:39 AM  
Holder was never saying Obama could blow up Jim Bob in Alabama because he voted for Romney, he was saying in a very extreme hypothetical circumstance such as 9/11 or Pearl Harbor drones or other military assets could be deployed in the US.
The fact that the right wing dosent understand this and is trying to push the narrative that Obama will drone your ass because he can is not suprising at all.
 
2013-03-08 10:46:08 AM  

SithLord: NateGrey: Angry McCain Ups Ante, Calls Paul, Cruz "Wacko Birds"

Watching the split on the GOP is much more fun.

For the record, McCain is a RINO.  Horrible choice to be up against Obama.


Virtually every Republican is now deemed a RINO at some point or other.  Chris Christie is a poster-boy for Republican policies, including such wonderful actions as vetoing a bill for same sex marriage despite popular approval and a bill to set up the health care exchanges, yet because he dared to not vilify Obama at every opportunity, he's now a RINO.  I'm shocked Rubio hasn't been deemed a RINO because he dared to provide an immigration solution that didn't boil down to shooting brown-skinned people on sight and building a bigger wall.

McCain could only be considered a RINO when it comes to social policy.  Fiscally, economically, and militarily, he's firmly right-wing.
 
2013-03-08 10:46:21 AM  
Unitary Executive Theory is fun!
 
2013-03-08 10:48:37 AM  

Resin33: If Lincoln had drones, do you think he wouldn't have used them?


He would have conquered Canada
 
2013-03-08 10:48:43 AM  
Now the GOP suddenly cares about civil liberties being curtailed in the name of security?
 
2013-03-08 10:49:20 AM  
OMG

POTATO!
 
2013-03-08 10:50:42 AM  

SithLord: Philip Francis Queeg: Sen. Rand Paul has lit a fuse, one that threatens to blow up President Obama's secret drone program.

It's always nice when the very first sentence shows that the column is complete and utter bullshiat.

Yes, Holder came back and withdrew his original statements and told Rand that drone strikes on US soil are not constitutional.  But remember this.  If it were to happen in the next 4 years, we should all remember that Holder once said that it was not constitutional and see what lies this Imperial President will tell us when it does happen.


He didn't withdraw anything, there were two questions, both of which were answered before the filibuster.

1. When would a drone strike be used on american soil?  In an instance like Pearl Harbor or 9/11.
2. Would a drone strike be used against someone who is not an imminent threat? No.

The first was answered in a letter to Rand Paul on the 4th.  The second was answered on Wednesday in a testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee and then again in a letter to Rand Paul after his filibuster.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/05/politics/obama-drones-cia
Attorney General Eric Holder is not entirely ruling out a scenario under which a drone strike would be ordered against Americans on U.S. soil, but says it has never been done previously and he could only see it being considered in an extraordinary circumstance.


He began to winnow the list of those possible extraordinary circumstances Wednesday. In testimony Wednesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, pressed Holder whether he believed it would be constitutional to target an American terror suspect "sitting at a cafe" if the suspect didn't pose an imminent threat.


"No," Holder replied.

The authority to strike on American soil was given to the President by Congress after the President asked for the power to be removed from the bill.  This is all a farce to make the President look bad, same as Benghazi, Fast and Furious, the Birth Certificate and all of the other scandals that the Republicans are continually trying to dredge up.

The question that they should be asking is should the planes on 9/11 have been shot down?  If yes, then go onto the next farce.  If no, then pass a bill to remove the authority.
 
2013-03-08 10:50:50 AM  
If Paul wasn't happy with the guidelines he could just introduce a bill establishing guidelines he was happy with. Alas that would deprive him of the chance to attention whore.
 
2013-03-08 10:50:53 AM  
... And if submitter had bothered to give the matter a moment's thought, he'd have realized that in addition to the seat-of-government district's being provided for in the Constitution, even the word "Washington" is in, or at least on, the Constitution: "Go." may have abbreviated his first name when signing it, but he wrote out his last name in full.
 
2013-03-08 10:52:22 AM  
I wonder how much traffic the Washington Times gets from people thinking they are clicking on Washington Post links.
 
2013-03-08 10:52:48 AM  

highbrow45: The same people who say that military intervention possibly involving drones would never under any circumstances be appropriate because Americans on American soil should have due process 100% of the time are the same people who cheer when a shoplifter gets killed by an American Hero with a concealed pistol.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Holder's answer basically, "We could do this only to  prevent an imminent event like 9/11 or Pearl Harbor from happening?"  I honestly don't have a problem with this.  If jets had gotten there in time, I'm pretty sure Flight 93 would have been blown out of the sky by the USAF.  Is there a difference here that I'm missing, other than there's a different guy in the White House?

If it's just to rain Hellfire missiles on some random militia group for no reason?  Yeah, that I would have a severe problem with.  But that's not what Holder specified.
 
2013-03-08 10:53:38 AM  
It saddens me how many otherwise intelligent people fall for Paul's attention whore bait just because it "feels right". If Paul wanted to do something about the drone issue he'd introduce legislation about it; filibustering Brennan's appointment only advances his own repuation, scores more campaign contributions, and generally promotes himself while he does nothing to actually advance his stated agenda. He's already "backing off" of his objections to Brennan's appointment now that imbeciles are posting "Mr. Paul goes to Washington" stories all over the internet.

The Pauls are little more than IRL political Starscreams. Can't be trusted except to watch out for their own skins.
 
2013-03-08 10:55:14 AM  

give me doughnuts: I've never seen a single instance of anyone of Fark cheering when a shoplifter got killed by a civilian with a concealed weapon.


wat
 
2013-03-08 10:55:48 AM  

PanicMan: Paul is the anti-Obama. This is why he is now the front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016.

Good luck with that.


So the question becomes "who will republicans run in 2020 after losing to Hillary in 2016?"
 
2013-03-08 10:56:02 AM  

Inquisitive Inquisitor: Now the GOP suddenly cares about civil liberties being curtailed in the name of security?


Well, it's one thing to hand that kind of power to a wizened, learned student of humanity like George W. Bush, he could be trusted with that kind of power, there was just some intangible, something that needn't be said, that assured you he could be trusted. This Obama, though, he can't be trusted with that kind of dangerous, intoxicating power, I mean....you know...just...just look at him!
 
2013-03-08 10:57:48 AM  
BWhahahahahaha!

So where was the Republican outrage when Reagan illegal sold arms of hostages? Or when Bush ordered torture on prisoners of war, illegally imprisoned civilians, illegally imprisoned US citizens, or any of the other shiat done by a Republican president.

Sorry, theoretical drone strikes on US citizens on US soil do not worry us, call us if it actually happens and we will impeach the President, no matter which farking party is in power.
 
2013-03-08 10:58:47 AM  

The Bestest: give me doughnuts: I've never seen a single instance of anyone of Fark cheering when a shoplifter got killed by a civilian with a concealed weapon.

wat



Have you?

Jackson Herring: give me doughnuts: I've never seen a single instance of anyone of Fark cheering when a shoplifter got killed by a civilian with a concealed weapon.

is this some weird meta joke or something



No.
 
2013-03-08 10:59:31 AM  

The Bestest: give me doughnuts: I've never seen a single instance of anyone of Fark cheering when a shoplifter got killed by a civilian with a concealed weapon.

wat


He must be new.
 
2013-03-08 11:02:23 AM  
Resin33 (2013-03-08 10:45:04 AM) If Lincoln had drones, do you think he wouldn't have used them?

At least when it comes to due process, Lincoln probably isn't the best example of a champion of liberty and constitutional government:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Merryman
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Milligan
 
2013-03-08 11:03:02 AM  

Dog Welder: If it's just to rain Hellfire missiles on some random militia group for no reason? Yeah, that I would have a severe problem with. But that's not what Holder specified.


Yeah, its sad to see Fark and Reddit have become almost as bad as Fox News when it comes to knee jerk responses. Ugh, drones bad.... Its not that simple people.
 
2013-03-08 11:03:14 AM  

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: give me doughnuts: You mean the "secret" drone program that has been all over the news for the past couple of years?

It's secret in that the Obama administration refuses to discuss it in court, repeatedly claiming before the court that disclosure of such a program would harm national security.


threadjack

worse Obama has been classifying information that was in the public domain. because "national security". this isn't the one i had in mind but it's an example of classification run amuck.

/threadjack
 
Displayed 50 of 84 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 »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report