| || |
Rand Paul for President in 2016?
March 7, 2013 - Andrea Johnson
I liked Sen. Rand Paul's 13 hour filibuster against President Barack Obama's nomination of John Brennan as CIA director.
There are a lot of things about the Kentucky Republican Senator's positions that I don't like, but anyone who stands up and says that the United States President does not have a right to use weaponized drones to assassinate American citizens on American soil is worthy of praise.
So here's to Rand Paul, Libertarian/Republican, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington-like hero of the hour. Paul only stopped talking because he had to use the facilities. Apparently he even considered using a catheter to prolong his speech, but ultimately decided that would be going too far.
The North Dakota House passed a bill last month that would require law enforcement to get a warrant before using unmanned drones to spy on private citizens in a criminal investigation. Our legislators apparently have more concern for the civil rights of the citizenry than the Presidential administration or Brennan do, at least on this particular issue.
Brennan, who was confirmed today anyway, apparently has failed to speak up against President Obama's policy regarding said drones or other unsavory government practices such as torture. According to Amy Davidson in a blog at The New Yorker, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder did send Paul a letter this morning answering a question Paul had asked during his filibuster. "Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?” The answer to that question is no," wrote Holder. That's good to know, since Holder had apparently been somewhat foggy on that point days earlier.
I don't know if Rand Paul's filibuster was all for naught, since it may well enhance Paul's Presidential chances in 2016. It certainly hasn't hurt.
What did you think of Rand Paul's filibuster?
Post a Comment
News, Blogs & Events Web