Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Soul Crusher on March 07, 2013, 10:37:08 AM
-
http://www.businessinsider.com/rand-paul-drones-filibuster-lindsey-graham-chart-2013-3
F both of these RINO turds. ]
-
Why do you want the government to have the power to kill you or your family without a trial or even charges presented to a court? What part of the Constitution (that, by the way, we ALL are supposed to agree to abide by to even be considered an American) don't you agree with? Without due process you for all intents and purposes have an authoritarian government. If they have the power to arbitrarily take your life why does ANYTHING else matter? People have fought and died for our freedoms and you want to treat then as so much used toilet paper to be casually tossed aside without even a whimper. If you don't understand why liberty and justice are vital to a democratic republic you should not even be allowed to be a citizen of this country!
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/rand-paul-drones-filibuster-lindsey-graham-chart-2013-3#ixzz2Msf4h0mM
-
Number of people killed by an Iranian nuclear bomb: 0
Therefore worrying about such a thing is ridiculous and immature.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/rand-paul-drones-filibuster-lindsey-graham-chart-2013-3#ixzz2MsfmG7J4
;D
-
IT'S WAR: John McCain And Lindsey Graham Just Ripped Into Rand Paul On The Senate Floor
Grace Wyler|Mar. 7, 2013, 12:27 PM|16,232|82
inShare.2
Email
More
.
Courtesy of CSPAN
U.S. Sen. John McCain blasted fellow Republican Rand Paul on the Senate floor this morning for his 13-hour filibuster to block John Brennan's confirmation as CIA Director.
"Calm down, Senator," McCain said, in an apostrophe to Paul. "The U.S. government cannot randomly target U.S. citizens."
In his filibuster Wednesday, Paul criticized the White House over its drone policies, and for refusing to rule out military strikes against U.S. citizens on American soil.
McCain, a staunch foreign policy hawk, said Thursday that Paul's warnings that the U.S. could target "Jane Fonda" or "people in cafes" bring the debate into the "realm of the ridiculous."
"If Mr. Paul wants to be taken seriously he needs to do more than pull political stunts that fire up impressionable libertarian kids," McCain said, adding: "I don't think what happened yesterday is helpful to the American people."
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) echoed these criticisms, adding that he was "disappointed" in the 13 Republican Senators who supported Paul's filibuster last night.
Graham later told reporters that he will vote to confirm Brennan as a result of the filibuster.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/mccain-slams-rand-paul-filibuster-2013-3#ixzz2MsglcAxZ
Gramm and McCain also supported the NDAA too remember?
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/07/lindsey-graham-john-brennan_n_2829348.html?ref=topbar
Unreal. This is the bullshit we have in Govt.
-
IT'S WAR: John McCain And Lindsey Graham Just Ripped Into Rand Paul On The Senate Floor
Courtesy of CSPAN
U.S. Sen. John McCain blasted fellow Republican Rand Paul on the Senate floor this morning for his 13-hour filibuster to block John Brennan's confirmation as CIA Director.
"Calm down, Senator," McCain said, in an apostrophe to Paul. "The U.S. government cannot randomly target U.S. citizens."
In his filibuster Wednesday, Paul criticized the White House over its drone policies, and for refusing to rule out military strikes against U.S. citizens on American soil.
McCain, a staunch foreign policy hawk, said Thursday that Paul's warnings that the U.S. could target "Jane Fonda" or "people in cafes" bring the debate into the "realm of the ridiculous."
"If Mr. Paul wants to be taken seriously he needs to do more than pull political stunts that fire up impressionable libertarian kids," McCain said, adding: "I don't think what happened yesterday is helpful to the American people."
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) echoed these criticisms, adding that he was "disappointed" in the 13 Republican Senators who supported Paul's filibuster last night.
Graham later told reporters that he will vote to confirm Brennan as a result of the filibuster.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/mccain-slams-rand-paul-filibuster-2013-3#ixzz2MsglcAxZ
Gramm and McCain also supported the NDAA too remember?
pay attention 333 - McCain is talking about you
yes, RP is making ridiculous statements and yes, there are plenty of libertarian dopes who will buy it hook like and sinker without taking half a second to give it any thought
-
McCain is an idiot as well as anyone else who isn't troubled by Holder's memo.
-
McCain is an idiot as well as anyone else who isn't troubled by Holder's memo.
Liberals all need a drone up their ass to wake them up to this insanity. The only reason they support it is because its their messiah doing it.
-
Liberals all need a drone up their ass to wake them up to this insanity. The only reason they support it is because its their messiah doing it.
Exactly. If it were Bush they would thru the roof by now.
-
Liberals all need a drone up their ass to wake them up to this insanity. The only reason they support it is because its their messiah doing it.
Hard to disagree here.
-
yes, RP is making ridiculous statements and yes, there are plenty of libertarian dopes who will buy it hook like and sinker without taking half a second to give it any thought
What, specifically, Straw?
-
What, specifically, Straw?
U.S. could target "Jane Fonda" or "people in cafes"
it's pretty clear that Holder/Obama are talking about people engaged in act of terror on US soil and not Jane Fonda (wtf kind of reference is that in 2013) or "people in cafes"
-
it's pretty clear that Holder/Obama are talking about people engaged in act of terror on US soil and not Jane Fonda (wtf kind of reference is that in 2013) or "people in cafes"
Bullshit - was Alaki's 16's son engaged in combat who was killed in a seperate strike than the father?
-
Bullshit - was Alaki's 16's son engaged in combat who was killed in a seperate strike than the father?
was he killed on US soil
Don't forget he was killed along with 8 other people
feel free to post all the evidence that all those people were totally innocent and that the son specifically targeted and willfully murdered for no reason at all
-
was he killed on US soil
Don't forget he was killed along with 8 other people
feel free to post all the evidence that all those people were totally innocent and that the son specifically targeted and willfully murdered for no reason at all
The argument that Obama Admn has been advancing is that the world is a battlefield and they determine who is an enemy combatant is w no oversite and that imminence does not even matter. This is why this has become an issue.
-
The argument that Obama Admn has been advancing is that the world is a battlefield and they determine who is an enemy combatant is w no oversite and that imminence does not even matter. This is why this has become an issue.
in other words you have no response to my questions and apparently love to make apologies for terrorists
-
in other words you have no response to my questions and apparently love to make apologies for terrorists
LOL 4000 people have been killed in drone strikes so far - you think all have been terrorists and not one has been in error?
Face it - your Nobel Peace Prize Messiah is nothing but a murderer.
-
LOL 4000 people have been killed in drone strikes so far - you think all have been terrorists and not one has been in error?
Face it - your Nobel Peace Prize Messiah is nothing but a murderer.
of course not
no doubt some have not been terrorist
since when did you start to YOU GIVE A SHIT ?
Aren't you the guy who has wished for mass murder of his own fellow citizens on many different occasions ?
STFU
-
feel free to post all the evidence that all those people were totally innocent and that the son specifically targeted and willfully murdered for no reason at all
Straw, it's all about evidence, bro. That's the point.
-
in other words you have no response to my questions and apparently love to make apologies for terrorists
So why is it so hard for the Obama admin to say that non combatant Americans won't be killed by drones on US soil? ???
-
Yeah, the Jane Fonda quip was weird. I'd like to hear his explanation. Maybe he wanted to stir up memories of Jane Fonda protesting Vietnam, or something.
-
Attorney General Eric Holder has responded to questions on the President’s authority to use drone strikes on U.S. soil in response to concerns about an overreach against civil liberties.
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney on Thursday announced that Holder had written to Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) to clarify the administration’s stance on the use of armed drones to kill U.S. citizens on American soil. In the letter, Holder acceded to Paul’s request that he place in writing of what he told the Senate Judiciary Committee in a meeting before the panel on Wednesday, that a drone strike against an American citizen who is not an imminent threat would be unconstitutional:
CARNEY: Does the president have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil? The answer is no. The answer to that question is no.
Paul spent the majority of Wednesday filibustering John Brennan’s nomination as CIA Director to obtain Holder’s answer. A previous letter sent from Holder to Paul had not done enough to clarify the administration’s stance in Paul’s eyes.
Holder’s response to Paul was direct and to the point:
Dear Senator Paul:
It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: “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.
Sincerely,
Eric H. Holder, Jr.
Fox News’ Megyn Kelly read Holder’s letter to Sen. Paul on-air, as the Senator had yet to receive it. “Hooray,” Paul responded. “For 13 hours yesterday we asked him that question and so there is a result and a victory under duress, and under public humiliation, the White House will respond and do the right thing.” He then told CNN’s Dana Bash that he was “happy” with the answer and would be dropping his hold on Brennan’s nomination.
-
So why is it so hard for the Obama admin to say that non combatant Americans won't be killed by drones on US soil? ???
you mean like this
The U.S. government cannot target an American citizen who is not engaged in combat on American soil, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Thursday during his daily press briefing
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) had on Thursday asked the administration if the president has the authority to use a mechanized drone against an American on U.S. soil who is not engaged in hostile activities. "The answer to that question is no," Carney said, reading from a new a letter from Attorney General Eric Holder addressed to Paul.
.
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/carney-affirms-limits-to-governments-authority-to-use
-
What is "combat"?
-
To be fair, I'd love to have quotes from some of the guys who are now on this board, to reveal what they said about the GWB lurch toward fascism, and stolen power.
-
you mean like this
.
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/carney-affirms-limits-to-governments-authority-to-use
It took a lot to get this out of them. Kind of bizarre
-
It took a lot to get this out of them. Kind of bizarre
Especially after trying to keep the drome legal memos secret and even now they are playing games with that.
-
Especially after trying to keep the drome legal memos secret and even now they are playing games with that.
Yeah, why not just make it clear from the start?
Why not?
-
Lindsey Graham: “Those American citizens thinking about helping al-Queda, please know what will come your way. Death, detention, prosecution. And when they say, I want my lawyer, you tell them shut up, you don’t get a lawyer.”
-
Absolute POS
-
I wish they would use the drones to take out Romney and his wife.
-
Lindsey Graham: “Those American citizens thinking about helping al-Queda, please know what will come your way. Death, detention, prosecution. And when they say, I want my lawyer, you tell them shut up, you don’t get a lawyer.”
Let me get this straight. "Someone" may determine that a person is linked with Al Qaeda, and when the person attempts to show that he is not linked with Al Qaeda, he will not be given the opportunity to defend himself.
-
I wish they would use the drones to take out Romney and his wife.
Romney has nothing to do w this - its on Holder / Obama and his drones
-
"Graham later told reporters that he will vote to confirm Brennan as a result of the filibuster. "
Voting out of spite...now that gives me confidence. ::)
-
"And when they say, I want my lawyer, you tell them shut up, you don’t get a lawyer.” -- Lindsey Graham, United States Senator
-
Yeah, why not just make it clear from the start?
Why not?
Exactly the point. Nothing, and I mean N-O-T-H-I-N-G is worth giving absolute power. Absolutely WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, on every level.
When a person breaks it down, it becomes a case of manipulated mass-hysteria. At some point, the hysteria and stupidity over 911 will begin to run out...then what?
-
So we've come down to a "trust us" method of government. Is that it? Hmm?
-
Lindsey Graham: “Those American citizens thinking about helping al-Queda, please know what will come your way. Death, detention, prosecution. And when they say, I want my lawyer, you tell them shut up, you don’t get a lawyer.”
This is a fiscal version of Gitmo. Saving tax dollars by sacrificing what separates the US from dictator countries.
-
Romney has nothing to do w this - its on Holder / Obama and his drones
I know it was wishful thinking.
We are on the same page here.
Obama= Bush or worse on this.
I usually support Obama mostly because i think republicans are a disaster but he has crossed the line here. Fuck him.
-
Yeah, why not just make it clear from the start?
Why not?
is this not pretty clear to you
-
Trust us. We're officials.
-
Trust us. We're officials.
this
-
Has it really come to this? Has it?
-
Has it really come to this? Has it?
With people of the mindset Straw Man has, it will go much further than this...
-
With people of the mindset Straw Man has, it will go much further than this...
Remember WACO?
-
With people of the mindset Straw Man has, it will go much further than this...
I know, and he needs to wake the fuck up.
But to be fair, I'd bet anything that many of the guys that are criticizing the current violators, were all for the GWB scam that Americanized the whole thing. Let's get real.
-
So this is what it's come to.
-
"you tell them shut up, you don't get a lawyer"
This person needs to be removed from office.
-
Remember WACO?
you mean the place where a bunch of religious nuts had a stockpile of illegal weapons and murdered 4 ATF Agents trying to serve a warrant
what about it ?
-
With people of the mindset Straw Man has, it will go much further than this...
I read the text of Holder letter of March 4th and I see nothing that makes me worried at all
I'm not planning any attacks like the examples holder gave in the letter....are you ?
Are you concerned that the government might decide to kill you
If the government wanted to kill you would they need a drone to do it ?
-
I'd bet anything that many of the guys that are criticizing the current violators, were all for the GWB scam that Americanized the whole thing. Let's get real.
Oh yeah, no question. For the record, I was attacking the Bush admin every chance I got on here. 8)
What's worse, is the people that didn't criticize Bush or Obama.... :-X
-
I read the text of Holder letter of March 4th and I see nothing that makes me worried at all
I'm not planning any attacks like the examples holder gave in the letter....are you ?
Are you concerned that the government might decide to kill you
If the government wanted to kill you would they need a drone to do it ?
I'm not doing anything wrong, so I guess you're right... I don't have anything to worry about.
-
I'm not doing anything wrong, so I guess you're right... I don't have anything to worry about.
What part of Holders March 4th letter makes you think it likely a drone strike would ever happen.
what part of the letter makes you think he "left the door open" to kill a civilian, say for example Jane Fonda or just some people sitting in a cafe.
Myaybe i just missed that part
-
What part of Holders March 4th letter makes you think it likely a drone strike would ever happen.
what part of the letter makes you think he left the door open" to kill a civilian, say for example Jane Fonda or just some people sitting in a cafe.
Myaybe i just missed that part
Fast n Furious
Marc Rich pardon
"banks are too big to prosecute"
WACO
Holder is not to be trusted on snyhthning. He is a thug and traitor.
-
I'm not doing anything wrong, so I guess you're right... I don't have anything to worry about.
Obviously, under the circumstances we've come to expect, if someone wrongly accused you of doing something sufficiently offensive, you'd have the ability to defend yourself in a courtroom, in order to show that you weren't guilty of the charge. There would be the protection of a structure, with a record, which wouldn't allow someone's ego to be the deciding factor in your freedom.
-
These are the differences we're talking about. It's like night and day.
-
This is what happens, when absolute power weasels its way in. This is what it looks like.
-
Sometimes, I just can't believe it.
-
Fast n Furious
Marc Rich pardon
"banks are too big to prosecute"
WACO
Holder is not to be trusted on snyhthning. He is a thug and traitor.
when I want the moronic retard point of view I will let you know
If you can't address the specific question then STFU
-
mccain is really becoming a mess in his senior years.
his position seems to change daily with whatever FOX or ROve or advisors put on his note cards.
Rand is the future of the GOP. If mccain doesn't like it, he should say nothing at all.
-
mccain is really becoming a mess in his senior years.
his position seems to change daily with whatever FOX or ROve or advisors put on his note cards.
Rand is the future of the GOP. If mccain doesn't like it, he should say nothing at all.
If Rand is the future of the party then they are even more fucked than they were in the last election
-
If Rand is the future of the party then they are even more fucked than they were in the last election
Rand is better than Romney on all issues.
But the GOP will never nominate Rand. Thats what people dont get.
Rand and other libertarians greatest enemy is not the dem but the GOP itself.
-
Elder Sen. John McCain, who this week engaged in friendly fire when he launched his "maverick" missiles at fellow Republicans seeking clarification on the administration's drone policies, has upped the ante, deriding Tea Party-backed GOP lawmakers as "wacko birds."
McCain, who hit the Senate floor Thursday to belittle Sen. Rand Paul's filibuster, which succeeded in getting an answer from President Obama that drones won't be used to kill Americans on U.S. soil, even suggested that the Kentucky senator and his allies, like Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Michigan Rep. Justin Amash, don't represent the GOP mainstream.
"It's always the wacko birds on right and left that get the media megaphone," McCain told Huffington Post's Jon Ward in a story titled "John McCain: Getting Back To Maverick, With An Eye On Retirement."
He added, "I think it can be harmful if there is a belief among the American people that those people are reflective of the views of the majority of Republicans. They're not."
Ward wrote: "I asked McCain to clarify who, specifically, he was talking about."
McCain said, "Rand Paul, Cruz, Amash, whoever."
Despite McCain's view, several GOP leaders, including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, praised Paul's efforts. McConnell even said he was "proud" of Paul, further proof of a growing divide in the Senate Republican caucus.
Conservatives have expressed outrage at McCain's hit on Paul, raising anew the charges in the 2008 presidential campaign that he is too much of a maverick for the GOP.
"He showed his true colors. He has now attacked Senator Cruz and Senator Paul for basically leading and keeping promises they made to their constituents not too mention their oath to uphold the Constitution," said one activist.
But the clash also put on display the fight between the old bulls and the new turks for control of the party, other said.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/angry-mccain-ups-ante-calls-paul-cruz-wacko-birds/article/2523661
-
Rand is better than Romney on all issues.
But the GOP will never nominate Rand. Thats what people dont get.
Rand and other libertarians greatest enemy is not the dem but the GOP itself.
This is a good post.
-
Rand is better than Romney on all issues.
But the GOP will never nominate Rand. Thats what people dont get.
Rand and other libertarians greatest enemy is not the dem but the GOP itself.
Romney is horrible and Rand is about as electable to a national office as his father
Christie or Huntsman would have a much better chance on a national stage but the real problem for Repubs is that they are basically two parties or maybe even three parties. You've got the fundie morons, the libertarian morons and the (scant few) true moderate conservatives
-
Romney is horrible and Rand is about as electable to a national office as his father
Christie or Huntsman would have a much better chance on a national stage but the real problem for Repubs is that they are basically two parties or maybe even three parties. You've got the fundie morons, the libertarian morons and the (scant few) true moderate conservatives
Whereas the Democrat party has one unifying theme - grow govt, put more people on welfare, lgbt/abortion 24/7, gun control, et, socialism, communism, etc
-
Whereas the Democrat party has one unifying theme - grow govt, put more people on welfare, lgbt/abortion 24/7, gun control, et, socialism, communism, etc
when I want the retarded moron point of view I will let you know
-
when I want the retarded moron point of view I will let you know
So what does the Democrat party stand for? Really? You have holder saying banks are too big toprosecute, obama arguing for more police state powers, feinstein trying to ban semi auto;s, etc
-
when I want the retarded moron point of view I will let you know
This seems like a statement someone who can not deny anything that was written in the previous post would say.
I don't think there's anything wrong with trying to support the constitution of the united states.
Do you think that Rand Paul did something inappropriate?
-
So we are allowing an unrestrained ego, with unchecked information, to be the deciding factor in someone's freedom and/or life.
We have become so hysterical, that we would somehow allow something so wrong to become the way. This is what it's come to.
-
So what does the Democrat party stand for? Really? You have holder saying banks are too big toprosecute, obama arguing for more police state powers, feinstein trying to ban semi auto;s, etc
banks were bailed out by Bush
If you want to know what Dems or Repubs stand for then read their party platforms
This thread is about Rand Paul
-
So we are allowing an unrestrained ego, with unchecked information, to be the deciding factor in someone's freedom and/or life.
We have become so hysterical, that we would somehow allow something so wrong to become the way. This is what it's come to.
This does seem the case.
-
This seems like a statement someone who can not deny anything that was written in the previous post would say.
I don't think there's anything wrong with trying to support the constitution of the united states.
Do you think that Rand Paul did something inappropriate?
yeah like I'm supposed to take seriously that the Dems want to put more people on welfare, are communist, etc...
give me a break
333 is a fucking mental patient and I am not going to waste my time entertaining his delusions
-
yeah like I'm supposed to take seriously that the Dems want to put more people on welfare, are communist, etc...
give me a break
333 is a fucking mental patient and I am not going to waste my time entertaining his delusions
Do you not believe that there are SOME democrats who are on the far far far left (Including having communist leanings) just as there are SOME republicans who are far far far right kooks who want it to be all about the baby jesus?
-
Do you not believe that there are SOME democrats who are on the far far far left (Including having communist leanings) just as there are SOME republicans who are far far far right kooks who want it to be all about the baby jesus?
Bernie Sanders is about as far left as I can think and he's not a communist
Seriously, I'll entertain most wacky posts of this site and even engage them but I have no more patience for certified idiots
-
This does seem the case.
I'd like someone to say otherwise. Maybe that person would know something that we don't.
It would be much nicer to believe that we haven't come to such hysterics, than to believe we have.
Myself, sometimes I just can't believe what's happened to us.
-
Bernie Sanders is about as far left as I can think and he's not a communist
Seriously, I'll entertain most wacky posts of this site and even engage them but I have no more patience for certified idiots
I do believe that there are some far left people... Such as Nancy Pelosi who have said that the government should be able to take 99% of your income in taxes.
That is certainly a communist attitude.
-
Funny, how no one can deny.
-
I do believe that there are some far left people... Such as Nancy Pelosi who have said that the government should be able to take 99% of your income in taxes.
That is certainly a communist attitude.
please post that quote
if she actually said that I'd like to the know the context
-
please post that quote
if she actually said that I'd like to the know the context
"We have to pass the bill so we can see what is in it"
-
please post that quote
if she actually said that I'd like to the know the context
We do know that many ppl who are in favor of higher taxes are not absolutely opposed to it as when they are asked to give a percentage that they feel would enough they refuse to answer.
I think we've asked you that numerous times and you've never given an answer.
-
We do know that many ppl who are in favor of higher taxes are not absolutely opposed to it as when they are asked to give a percentage that they feel would enough they refuse to answer.
I think we've asked you that numerous times and you've never given an answer.
This is always the way.
-
"We have to pass the bill so we can see what is in it"
that's the Pelosi quote
I can't find the quote where she said "the government should be able to take 99% of your income in taxes."
hasn't that been offered as evidence of communism?
where is the quote ?
-
To be fair, I'd love to have quotes from some of the guys who are now on this board, to reveal what they said about the GWB lurch toward fascism, and stolen power.
Sadly, many of those earlier posts have mysteriously been deleted. :'(
I do know Aaron Russo's documentary "From Freedom to Fascism" was posted, and was laughed at, ridiculed, and got numerous eye rolls by certain people.
Many of the staunchest GWB supporters are now silent, ...either that or have changed their names.
-
Sadly, many of those earlier posts have mysteriously been deleted. :'(
I do know Aaron Russo's documentary "From Freedom to Fascism" was posted, and was laughed at, ridiculed, and got numerous eye rolls by certain people.
Many of the staunchest GWB supporters are now silent, ...either that or have changed their names.
I left the GOP in 2005 because of W. Jorge Arbusto El Segundo is the reason for O-Twink in the first place.
-
I left the GOP in 2005 because of W. Jorge Arbusto El Segundo is the reason for O-Twink in the first place.
They lost me around 2003 or so.
-
I left the GOP in 2005 because of W. Jorge Arbusto El Segundo is the reason for O-Twink in the first place.
OMG!!! Heaven Help Me, ...I actually understood that. :D
The fact that I was able to decrypt your shorthand is a sign that I'm either going insane or have been here too long.
-
I really like the dialogue in this thread.
Real discussion & communication without resorting to attempts at pwnage. Very nice. :)
The cherry to top it off would be if Prime Muscle showed up with a pearl or two of sage wisdom. I like him. :)
-
It's two old guard politicians who have lost sight (McCain) or are so squishy (Graham) that they can't see outside of the bubble and the status quo.
This is what happens when you don't have term limits and motherfuckers gerrymander the shit out of the localities to maintain position of power for too long.
-
Still waiting for that Nancy Pelosi quote
-
Still waiting for that Nancy Pelosi quote
I tell you what... I'll find that quote when you answer the percentage that should be completely acceptable for the country to take.
-
I tell you what... I'll find that quote when you answer the percentage that should be completely acceptable for the country to take.
sure thing
I think the current brackets in place for 2013 are acceptable
now let's see the full quote and link to source
-
Can't find it.
I know it was said, but oh well.
-
Can't find it.
I know it was said, but oh well.
I oculdn't find it either and I doubt it exists
I assume since you can't find the quote that you will eliminate that "proof" as part of your belief that Pelosi is a communist (refer back to my original post about not wanting to entertain 333"s delusions)
-
Can't find it.
I know it was said, but oh well.
Thats just weak Holmes.
-
Yeah, the Jane Fonda quip was weird. I'd like to hear his explanation. Maybe he wanted to stir up memories of Jane Fonda protesting Vietnam, or something.
A bit further on this...yes, he was referring to activities associated with Jane Fonda's protest of the Vietnam War.
If you look into it, you'll understand the point he was making.
-
A bit further on this...yes, he was referring to activities associated with Jane Fonda's protest of the Vietnam War.
If you look into it, you'll understand the point he was making.
They don't want to understand. Hey just want glib insults as te by their comedians in the media.
-
A bit further on this...yes, he was referring to activities associated with Jane Fonda's protest of the Vietnam War.
If you look into it, you'll understand the point he was making.
He wasnt making any valid point at all.
just providing an absurd and hysterical example that had no basis whatsoever in reality.
-
He wasnt making any valid point at all.
just providing an absurd and hysterical example that had no basis whatsoever in reality.
If you read the white papers odrone is relying its not outlandish at all.
-
He wasnt making any valid point at all.
just providing an absurd and hysterical example that had no basis whatsoever in reality.
If there isn't oversight, how can we be sure it doesn't have basis in reality?
Do we use our trust, or what?
-
I hope you come back to this, Straw. I want to settle this thing, right here.
Maybe you can tell me something I don't know--and I am 100% sincere in that.
-
I'm here to learn.
-
...not fight.
-
If there isn't oversight, how can we be sure it doesn't have basis in reality?
Do we use our trust, or what?
Was Paul filibustering for oversight?
Did you read Holder memo from March 4th?
After reading it did it seem as though he left the door open for the administration to kill protestors or just random people in cafes?
thats apparentlty what Rand thought after he read it which was why he said he decided to filibuster
-
I read the text of Holder letter of March 4th and I see nothing that makes me worried at all
I'm not planning any attacks like the examples holder gave in the letter....are you ?
Are you concerned that the government might decide to kill you
If the government wanted to kill you would they need a drone to do it ?
It should make everyone worried. When they can envision a scenario of removing the policing authority to replace it with using the military against civilians, it's problematic. Even with the example Holder cited, it would be much more preferable for the DOJ to make the call and have the military serving them...especially considering that counter-intelligence falls right within their scope.
Civilian policing agencies have Constitutional protections ingrained within their work (even though in my opinion, that's becoming more and more eroded). Military institutions typically do not...excepting perhaps National Guardsman...but I'm not familiar with them having drones (though I don't know).
-
Was Paul filibustering for oversight?
Please let me know what you would interpret his filibuster to be for, and whether it would include what is a lack of oversight and process in killing.
Did you read Holder memo from March 4th?
Yes, I read it when you posted it.
After reading it did it seem as though he left the door open for the administration to kill protestors or just random people in cafes?
Absolutely, yes. It would leave the door open for conceivably anything that would be done without oversight.
Please give me a sincere answer, even if you don't agree. I want to know why.
-
It should make everyone worried. When they can envision a scenario of removing the policing authority to replace it with using the military against civilians, it's problematic. Even with the example Holder cited, it would be much more preferable for the DOJ to make the call and have the military serving them...especially considering that counter-intelligence falls right within their scope.
Civilian policing agencies have Constitutional protections ingrained within their work (even though in my opinion, that's becoming more and more eroded). Military institutions typically do not...excepting perhaps National Guardsman...but I'm not familiar with them having drones (though I don't know).
March 4th memo is on page 1
I cant repost because Im on my phone.
Holder specifically says civilian LE would be by far the most likely response to a terrorist attack and there is nothing in that memo that could lead anyone to the absurd conclusions of RP
-
By the way, as a very unamusing little side-note, we're playing along as though it is merely coincidental that such an ability is something that would lend itself, perfectly, to an entity that would seek absolute power. It would be a necessity for such a thing, in fact.
-
Come on, guys. Now's the time to join together. We're Americans, and we stand against absolute power, more than anything else. Right?
All the Republicans who backed the GWB administration, now claim to have learned their lesson. So it's time to loosen up on the Democrats, whose initial instinct told them to give Obama the benefit of the doubt.
Let's put our differences aside, and call this for what it is.
-
By the way, as a very unamusing little side-note, we're playing along as though it is merely coincidental that such an ability is something that would lend itself, perfectly, to an entity that would seek absolute power. It would be a necessity for such a thing, in fact.
I will try to remember to your prior posts when i get home tonight.
in my opinion if the federal government wanted to kill one it citizens on US soil a drone or anything similar is probably the last thing they would use. Its far more likely they would do it in a way that would never cause any kind of attention.
I dont believe for a second that RP truly believes the examples he gave.
It was all political theater or he would still be doing it.
-
:D
-
Please let me know what you would interpret his filibuster to be for, and whether it would include what is a lack of oversight and process in killing.
Yes, I read it when you posted it.
Absolutely, yes. It would leave the door open for conceivably anything that would be done without oversight.
Please give me a sincere answer, even if you don't agree. I want to know why.
I guess I have to take Rand Paul at his word (though I don't believe his sincerity, either that he is just stupid)
He gave his reason for the filibuster
“I can’t ultimately stop the nomination, but what I can do is try to draw attention to this and try to get an answer ... that would be something if we could get an answer from the president ... if he would say explicitly that noncombatants in America won’t be killed by drones. The reason it has to be answered is because our foreign drone strike program does kill noncombatants. They may argue that they are conspiring or they may someday be combatants, but if that is the same standard that we are going to use in the United States, it is a far different country than I know about.”
-
Lawmakers ask Obama to detail drone policy
By JOSH GERSTEIN |
3/11/13 1:21 PM EDT
Eight Democratic lawmakers are urging President Barack Obama to declassify documents detailing the legal basis for his administration's use of drones, both against U.S. citizens and foreign nationals.
In a letter sent to Obama Monday, the lawmakers say they're "deeply concerned" about legal claims in a leaked Justice Department white paper that appear to be "overly broad."
"Every American has the right to know the underlying legal rationale that ensures due process," says the letter, organized by Rep. Barbara Lee of California and joined by the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, John Conyers (D-Mich.)
"Authorizing the killing of American citizens and others has profound implications for our Constitution, the core values of our Nation, our national security and future international practice. The executive branch's claim of authority to deprive citizens of life, and to do so without explaining the legal bases for doing so, sets a dangerous precedent and is a model of behavior that the United States would not want other nations to emulate," the lawmakers write.
The letter, posted here, goes on to lay out several questions about the leaked policy, including how it is determined when capture of a terrorist suspect is "feasible" and how the term "imminent threat" is defined "in a way that strays significantly from its traditional legal meaning."
The other signers of the letter are Keith Ellison of Minnesota, Raul Grijalva of Arizona, Donna Edwards of Maryland, Mike Honda of California, Rush Holt of New Jersey and James McGovern of Massachusetts.
A White House spokeswoman had no specific comment on the new letter, but noted that Obama committed in his State of the Union address in January to work with Congress to make anti-terrorism programs more transparent.
"In the months ahead, I will continue to engage Congress to ensure not only that our targeting, detention and prosecution of terrorists remains consistent with our laws and system of checks and balances, but that our efforts are even more transparent to the American people and to the world," Obama said.
The letter came five days after Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) drew international attention for a 13-hour speaking filibuster demanding assurances from the Obama administration that the government would not use drones to kill Americans on U.S. soil if they are not engaged in combat. Attorney General Eric Holder provided such an assurance on Thursday.
The attention demonstrates significant concern about the issue at both ends of the political spectrum. The extent of interest in the subject from moderate Democrats and Republicans remains to be seen.
CORRECTION (Monday, 1:35 P.M.): This post has been corrected to reflect Conyers's position as ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee.
-
Number of people killed by an Iranian nuclear bomb: 0
Therefore worrying about such a thing is ridiculous and immature.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/rand-paul-drones-filibuster-lindsey-graham-chart-2013-3#ixzz2MsfmG7J4
;D
Its quite interesting to me that this issue used to be a so called "liberal" one and now some Republicans are jumping on board. I see a lot of that happening lately where Republicans are now taking more "liberal" positions.
-
Its quite interesting to me that this issue used to be a so called "liberal" one and now some Republicans are jumping on board. I see a lot of that happening lately where Republicans are now taking more "liberal" positions.
I think its more people saw the excesses of W, the continuation under Obama, and sort of backlash against the creeping leviathon state that places all power in unaccountable politicians.
Sort of - "LEAVE US ALONE"
-
I think its more people saw the excesses of W, the continuation under Obama, and sort of backlash against the creeping leviathon state that places all power in unaccountable politicians.
Sort of - "LEAVE US ALONE"
Took a while for Republicans to wake up. I personally don`t have a problem with drone strikes on enemy combatants if it can be demonstrated that they have committed an act of war.
-
I guess I have to take Rand Paul at his word (though I don't believe his sincerity, either that he is just stupid)
He gave his reason for the filibuster
I have to hope he's being sincere. Everyone should hope he is sincere. But if you're suspicious of a politician's sincerity, it becomes hard to blame you.
Looks to me as though he wanted to force the Obama-Holder gang to better reveal their intentions.
-
Took a while for Republicans to wake up. I personally don`t have a problem with drone strikes on enemy combatants if it can be demonstrated that they have committed an act of war.
That's what it's all about. There's absolutely no reason to carry forward as though everything needs to be hidden.
If we've come to the point where there can be no explanation, then we have gone too far. We have jumped the shark.
-
So we're talking about granting a cloak of secrecy to the entity that has stolen our privacy.
Nice, huh?
-
Nope. Nothing wrong, here.
Move along!
-
Nope. Nothing wrong, here.
Move along!
^^^
-
Interesting times we're in, no doubt about it.
Too interesting, in fact.
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/12/democrats-drone-policy_n_2862544.html#comments
Now some demos are catching on
-
I think most people have an issue with the number of civilian casualties
I don't recall hearing a peep out of Repubs as we were killing thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of innocent civilians in Iraq