Breaking: Old School Filibuster

Wow...No prompter !...Then we know that Mitt-Flop wouldn't have been able to do it...

"Dick Durbin of Illinois objected to Paul's request that the Senate take up a non-binding sense of the Senate resolution stating that the U.S. government cannot target "noncombatants" with drones on American soil."

That one sentence made it worthwhile. How could anyone object to that?

towermonkey wrote: "Dick Durbin of Illinois objected to Paul's request that the Senate take up a non-binding sense of the Senate resolution stating that the U.S. government cannot target "noncombatants" with drones on American soil."

That one sentence made it worthwhile. How could anyone object to that?

I believe he said it required study.

He is just

[youtube:38c6708z][/youtube:38c6708z]

Rand didn't make it a Paul-nighter(groan) but he did bring attention to domestic drone strikes. Well done Senator.

:thumbsup: I'd like to hear how anyone could disagree with that.

I agree with archer....This is the way it should be done.
No pain....no gain.
The problem is that even if he got the assurance from the president.....it is hollow because the president is a chameleon who changes his POV to suit his needs. today....no drone stikes on US soil.....tomorrow morning.....dead Americans.

towermonkey wrote: "Dick Durbin of Illinois objected to Paul's request that the Senate take up a non-binding sense of the Senate resolution stating that the U.S. government cannot target "noncombatants" with drones on American soil."

That one sentence made it worthwhile. How could anyone object to that?

Evidently up to this point... the Obama administration objects to that.

I also agree that this is the way it should be done, instead of hiding behind anonymous holds, and phoned-in filibusters...And it would be nice if EVERY SINGLE piece of legislation, including filling vacancies for judges and DoJ personnel, and orders for paper-clips for the Senate office-supplies, weren't filibustered by the GOTP "just because."

On the other hand:

Rand Paul Slammed By WSJ Editorial Page Over Epic Filibuster On Drones

The conservative Wall Street Journal editorial board slammed Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) Thursday for his almost 13-hour filibuster against John Brennan, the nominee for CIA director, over the fact that Attorney General Eric Holder said the U.S. government had the legal authority to kill an American citizen on U.S. soil.

"Calm down, Senator," wrote the editors. "Mr. Holder is right, even if he doesn't explain the law very well. The U.S. government cannot randomly target American citizens on U.S. soil or anywhere else. What it can do under the laws of war is target an "enemy combatant" anywhere at anytime, including on U.S. soil. This includes a U.S. citizen who is also an enemy combatant."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... oveLEFTTop

Whoa... The conservative WSJ editorial board trying to calm down the loose-cannon.... Reminds me of Rosanna Rosannadanna on Saturday Night Live.

The point was to draw attention to an issue. mission accomplished.
In your paint brush world....do you expect all conservatives to agree on every issue?
If so....how naive of you.
Conservatives tend to actually have independent thought as opposed to.....well.....you finish that sentence.