Total Posts:110|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Rand Paul Filibuster

lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 2:56:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Is anyone else watching this? Paul has been talking for four hours, good stuff, I've never seen a filibuster like this before. He's got democrats and republicans helping him out. Apparently others can speak if they form their speech as a question.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com...

Livestream
http://www.c-span.org...
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 3:03:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 2:56:40 PM, lewis20 wrote:
Is anyone else watching this? Paul has been talking for four hours, good stuff, I've never seen a filibuster like this before. He's got democrats and republicans helping him out. Apparently others can speak if they form their speech as a question.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com...

Livestream
http://www.c-span.org...



Mike Gravel did this with The Pentagon Papers in the 60s.
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 3:16:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
It's one thing to be against drone strikes against US citizens not currently engaged in combat and under a designation allowing for assassination, but for f*cks sake should our position REALLY be that we can't stop a terrorist act mid-process if the terrorist is a US citizen?

We don't even hold county police up to that standard when it comes to killing US citizens.

Even when it comes to foreign countries, the Geneva Convention allows deadly force to be used to stop an imminent attack if the host country refuses to provide the target country with assistance.

Domestic use of Drones should be treated the same way we treat other weapons that increase power asymmetry (e.g. piloted planes, tanks, missiles, etc). You can't use a surface to air missile against an American flying a plane because he's on a most wanted list, but if he's piloting a plane into a building, the action may be warranted.

The congress should be focused on legislation forcing the executive revamp their drone practices overseas, not blithering about whether the head of the CIA will shoot a hellfire missile into Los Angeles.

Does Rand Paul HONESTLY think that, if the CIA wants to get rid of a domestic terrorist, their preferred option is an open air strike? The CIA has been around a lot longer than cheap drones, and they've been "doing their thing" to domestic targets since then.

It's a political ploy.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 3:22:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Wnope, you're wrong. It's so serious he's being assisted by Democrat Senator Wyden. It's not politically expedient for a Democrat.

"I will speak today until the president responds and says, "No, we won"t kill Americans in cafes. No, we won"t kill you at home at night,"" Mr. Paul said early on in the filibuster, which began at 11:47 a.m. and by early afternoon showed no signs of slowing down."

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

Obama won't say he won't bomb Americans in cafes.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 3:36:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 3:22:42 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Wnope, you're wrong. It's so serious he's being assisted by Democrat Senator Wyden. It's not politically expedient for a Democrat.


"I will speak today until the president responds and says, "No, we won"t kill Americans in cafes. No, we won"t kill you at home at night,"" Mr. Paul said early on in the filibuster, which began at 11:47 a.m. and by early afternoon showed no signs of slowing down."

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

Obama won't say he won't bomb Americans in cafes.

There are legitimate concerns with the CIA.

Whether or not Obama will use a drone in America is not one of them. Drones are only used for non-immiment (what any sane person would call non-immiment) threats when capture and (let's be honest) ordinary assassination techniques) are not feasible.

That's why a majority of CIA strikes are in countries where the US cannot "legally" engage in combat with infringing of sovereignty (e.g. Pakistani tribal areas).

Talking about using drones on an American commercial area is as nonsensical as talking about using a nuclear weapon on an american commercial area. I don't recall the President explicitly ruling that out.

Serious dialogue about drones is needed, but senseless fear mongering only further polarizes the environment.

Talking about using drones on American soil is senseless fear mongering.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 3:37:14 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I don't know how the hell we're supposed to convince people that we're serious when idiots are puppeting the claim that the CIA will use drones against Los Angeles starbucks.
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 3:37:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I watched a 3 min bit on the filibuster, does a decent job of justifying libertarian-ism in general, and how we should never put our security before our liberty.
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 3:38:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 3:37:14 PM, Wnope wrote:
I don't know how the hell we're supposed to convince people that we're serious when idiots are puppeting the claim that the CIA will use drones against Los Angeles starbucks.

I don't know how the hell we're supposed to convince people that we're serious when we preach freedom and rights but then allow our leader to stomp on these things like they mean nothing.

)
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 3:39:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I know, right?
John Brennan just has to so 'no, I won't assassinate Americans on American soil without due process'
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 3:41:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 3:39:17 PM, lewis20 wrote:
I know, right?
John Brennan just has to so 'no, I won't assassinate Americans on American soil without due process'

Finally, we find common ground.

Ironic that it took two libertarians this long to find it though.

lol

Also, John Brennan said this, when we did use drones already in America?

Sounds a lot like a certain president when he said "I am not a crook".

LOL
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 3:43:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 3:37:14 PM, Wnope wrote:
I don't know how the hell we're supposed to convince people that we're serious when idiots are puppeting the claim that the CIA will use drones against Los Angeles starbucks.

Are you saying the govt. shouldn't rule that out? All they have to do is say they won't do it.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 4:14:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 3:43:11 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 3/6/2013 3:37:14 PM, Wnope wrote:
I don't know how the hell we're supposed to convince people that we're serious when idiots are puppeting the claim that the CIA will use drones against Los Angeles starbucks.

Are you saying the govt. shouldn't rule that out? All they have to do is say they won't do it.

Again, there are two questions here:

1. Drone use against immiment threats like airplanes flying into buildings.
2. Drone use against non-immiment threats.

Unless you can tell me how we can reach situation 1 at a cafe, then the only relevant issue is 2.

Brennan's response was the drones would be used in situations like 9/11 and Pearl Harbor. Neither events were targeted killings.

NOW, if the question had been directed by someone interested in actually cornering Brennan and not making political fluff, he would have pushed aside that defense by simply asking whether Americans could be targeted for a strike after an attack has occurred. Screw geography.

If he says "yes" then he has explicitly endorsed breaking the law. If he says "no" then Anwar's assassination counts as murder.

Instead, Rand Paul left Brennan with a believable defense that will be backed up by a sizable portion of counter-terrorist experts. All Rand Paul had to do was be REALISTIC in his question.

He's either ignorant of politics or fear mongering. Take your pick.
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 4:29:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 4:14:02 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 3/6/2013 3:43:11 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 3/6/2013 3:37:14 PM, Wnope wrote:
I don't know how the hell we're supposed to convince people that we're serious when idiots are puppeting the claim that the CIA will use drones against Los Angeles starbucks.

Are you saying the govt. shouldn't rule that out? All they have to do is say they won't do it.

Again, there are two questions here:

1. Drone use against immiment threats like airplanes flying into buildings.
2. Drone use against non-immiment threats.

Unless you can tell me how we can reach situation 1 at a cafe, then the only relevant issue is 2.

Brennan's response was the drones would be used in situations like 9/11 and Pearl Harbor. Neither events were targeted killings.

NOW, if the question had been directed by someone interested in actually cornering Brennan and not making political fluff, he would have pushed aside that defense by simply asking whether Americans could be targeted for a strike after an attack has occurred. Screw geography.

If he says "yes" then he has explicitly endorsed breaking the law. If he says "no" then Anwar's assassination counts as murder.

Instead, Rand Paul left Brennan with a believable defense that will be backed up by a sizable portion of counter-terrorist experts. All Rand Paul had to do was be REALISTIC in his question.

He's either ignorant of politics or fear mongering. Take your pick.

al Alwaki spoke out against the American government. He never made a move to hurt anyone, and as an American citizen, he was assassinated.

See - Slippery Slope for more details.
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 4:33:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 4:14:02 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 3/6/2013 3:43:11 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 3/6/2013 3:37:14 PM, Wnope wrote:
I don't know how the hell we're supposed to convince people that we're serious when idiots are puppeting the claim that the CIA will use drones against Los Angeles starbucks.

Are you saying the govt. shouldn't rule that out? All they have to do is say they won't do it.

Again, there are two questions here:

1. Drone use against immiment threats like airplanes flying into buildings.
2. Drone use against non-immiment threats.

Unless you can tell me how we can reach situation 1 at a cafe, then the only relevant issue is 2.

Brennan's response was the drones would be used in situations like 9/11 and Pearl Harbor. Neither events were targeted killings.

NOW, if the question had been directed by someone interested in actually cornering Brennan and not making political fluff, he would have pushed aside that defense by simply asking whether Americans could be targeted for a strike after an attack has occurred. Screw geography.

If he says "yes" then he has explicitly endorsed breaking the law. If he says "no" then Anwar's assassination counts as murder.

Instead, Rand Paul left Brennan with a believable defense that will be backed up by a sizable portion of counter-terrorist experts. All Rand Paul had to do was be REALISTIC in his question.

He's either ignorant of politics or fear mongering. Take your pick.

Note that a citizen is someone who hasn't committed a serious felony. They might have been accused, but they are innocent until proven guilty. So either our nominee for the CIA position agrees that you should have the right to be blown to bits without due process, or he is a bad politician who doesn't pay close attention to wording.

http://voices.yahoo.com...
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 5:05:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Rand Paul has already addressed and refuted everything you said Wnope. Listen to it. I've been listening for 2 1/2 hours straight.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Koopin
Posts: 12,090
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 5:12:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 5:05:43 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Listen to it. I've been listening for 2 1/2 hours straight.

Yeah, I have been on for about an hour.
kfc
DoubtingDave
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 5:22:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 2:56:40 PM, lewis20 wrote:
Is anyone else watching this? Paul has been talking for four hours, good stuff, I've never seen a filibuster like this before. He's got democrats and republicans helping him out. Apparently others can speak if they form their speech as a question.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com...

Livestream
http://www.c-span.org...



Rand Paul 2016!!
The Great Wall of Fail

"I have doubts that anti-semitism even exists" -GeoLaureate8

"Evolutionists think that people evolved from rocks" -Scotty

"And whats so bad about a Holy war? By Holy war, I mean a war which would aim to subdue others under Islam." -Ahmed.M

"The free market didn't create the massive wealth in the country, WW2 did." -malcomxy

"Independant federal regulators make our capitalist society possible." -Erik_Erikson
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 7:39:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Paul going on hour 8.

Invoked Milton Friedman and Hayek.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 8:37:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 7:39:06 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Paul going on hour 8.

Cool.

Invoked Milton Friedman and Hayek.

Oh, brother.

Sometimes, it's better to quit while you're ahead.
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 9:31:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Ted Cruz just affirmed that Paul cannot sit or even go to the restroom, makes it that much more impressive.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 9:32:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 9:31:10 PM, lewis20 wrote:
Ted Cruz just affirmed that Paul cannot sit or even go to the restroom, makes it that much more impressive.

I really hope Rand Paul runs for president in 2016.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 9:32:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 9:31:10 PM, lewis20 wrote:
Ted Cruz just affirmed that Paul cannot sit or even go to the restroom, makes it that much more impressive.

O.O

DAAAAYYYYUUUUUMMMM.

The record for a filibuster is something like 24-25 hours, for the civil rights act. Wonder if he can hold out long enough...
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
thett3
Posts: 14,356
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 9:48:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 9:32:43 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 3/6/2013 9:31:10 PM, lewis20 wrote:
Ted Cruz just affirmed that Paul cannot sit or even go to the restroom, makes it that much more impressive.

I really hope Rand Paul runs for president in 2016.

He will. Unless something really unforeseen happens he surely will
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 9:54:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 9:31:10 PM, lewis20 wrote:
Ted Cruz just affirmed that Paul cannot sit or even go to the restroom, makes it that much more impressive.

It was Utah senator Mike Lee who affirmed it, not Ted Cruz. They are both helping by talking on the floor.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
YYW
Posts: 36,328
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 10:10:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 9:48:07 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 3/6/2013 9:32:43 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 3/6/2013 9:31:10 PM, lewis20 wrote:
Ted Cruz just affirmed that Paul cannot sit or even go to the restroom, makes it that much more impressive.

I really hope Rand Paul runs for president in 2016.

He will. Unless something really unforeseen happens he surely will

Oh, I'm quite sure he'll throw his name in the ring. Rand Paul, Santorum, Palin perhaps, I'd half expect something from Mitch McConnell and Eric Cantor. I think it will come down to either Santorum or Paul Ryan, though. (For what it's worth, Bobby Jindal probably will have a go and so will the colorful lot of fools from the West). I think it will come down to Paul Ryan and Rick Santorum. The GOP will loose again, and that will be the end of it...

I don't expect to see Christie run, or Rubio.

This is all, of course, my own speculation... nothing more.

But as James Carville said, "Whenever there is more Sarah Palin [running for office in the GOP] than Chris Christie, it's a good day for James Carville." And he's right...

The way it will play out is predictable though. Both Ryan and Santorum play/appeal to the people who vote in the GOP primary (who, oddly enough, do not share the same political values as younger voters, non-white voters, or independents). The GOP's process of reorganization won't be easy, and it could keep the party out of power for a LONG time.

There are competing political visions: moderate reason and insane tea-bagging lunacy.

My dream ticket, nevertheless, is Chris Christie (Prez) and Jeb Bush (Veep). But this is my dream... and only my dream.
Tsar of DDO
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 10:20:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 10:15:26 PM, Agent_Orange wrote:
I'm confused. What's happening?

About which part?
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
YYW
Posts: 36,328
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 10:21:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 10:15:26 PM, Agent_Orange wrote:
I'm confused. What's happening?

The waters of the apocalypse are rising on our shores. The four horsemen have cast their shadows on the horizon. The clouds are converging and shadows are cast so thick that they block the sun. This is the end...

Or, in the words of the great philosopher Adele (who barely beat out the Smashing Pumpkins for this special occasion):

This is the end
Hold your breath and count to ten
Feel the earth move and then
Hear my heart burst again
For this is the end
I've drowned and dreamt this moment
So overdue, I owe them
Swept away, I'm stolen

Let the sky fall, when it crumbles
We will stand tall
And face it all together
Let the sky fall, when it crumbles
We will stand tall
And face it all together
At sky fall
At sky fall
Tsar of DDO
Agent_Orange
Posts: 2,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 10:23:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 10:20:56 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 3/6/2013 10:15:26 PM, Agent_Orange wrote:
I'm confused. What's happening?

About which part?

This filibuster
#BlackLivesMatter