Breaking: Old School Filibuster

Does the fact that the question was asked not bother you even a teensy bit? What if Pres. Bush had asked it?

LadyJazzer wrote: He wasn't asked that 6 weeks ago... They didn't know that information to ask the question 6 weeks ago.

"It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question:..."

But thanks for playing.

He's been asking these kind of questions for months...

National Security: The junior senator from Kentucky seeks to protect the Fourth Amendment from the advance of technology and require that all forms of surveillance by law enforcement require a warrant from a judge.

Does the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures include aerial surveillance of your house and property? Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., thinks so.

He introduced the Preserving Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act, which would require the government to get a warrant before using aerial drones to surveil U.S. citizens.

"Like other tools used to collect information in law enforcement, in order to use drones a warrant needs to be issued," Paul said Tuesday. "Americans going about their everyday lives should not be treated like criminals or terrorists and have their rights infringed upon by military tactics."

We live in an age awash with cameras in stores, banks, parking lots, and most public places. Many cities have red light cameras at intersections to catch scofflaws and cameras on neighborhood corners to monitor gangs and other bad guys lurking in high-crime neighborhoods. Police cars are constantly on patrol.

The operative word here is public and in these situations the expectation of privacy does not apply. Certainly as we fight an ongoing war on terror we tolerate, despite the excesses, an invasion of our privacy in the form of body scans, luggage searches and the like.

We accept these actions because they aid law enforcement in its legitimate duty and help protect us from the dangerous and the criminal.

The argument is that if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear. Yet we know the store is looking for shoplifters, the camera on that pole is looking for people running red lights or gangbangers

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2896616/posts

The above article was posted 6 weeks ago... oops... I mean on July 16, 2012.

Thank you... I guess they forgot to send LJ the memo.

It's not about the truth, it's about bashing the other side. Who gives a hamsters heiney about the country and our Consitiution? If your guy is doing it, it's all good,if it's the other guy, evil is afoot. Sheesh.

Gee, sorry I can't type fast enough...But I'm always grateful that there are the usual wingnuts here to tell me what I think.....

I think it was a question that needed to be answered. I was also sure that the answer would be "NO." ... Imagine that. I was right.

Now, forget drones and "Hellfire missiles" and Jane Fonda, and the rest of the bat-crap-craziness of Rand Paul, and let's consider the Times Square Bomber. Fortunately, they were able to take him alive, and disarm the crude IED in the car...But for the sake of argument, what if they found out what he was going to do, and couldn't arrest him "in the act", but knew where/when he was going to set off a "dirty bomb" or something that could have wiped out NYC...

He was a U.S. citizen... I don't know about you, but I'm okay with a "KILL" order to take out a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil in order to save a city.

How about you? (Not a "trick question"... I hope it's not a "Lib" vs. "Neocon" question...) I just heard that hypothetical put forth, and I had to think about it for a minute... And for me, the answer is YES...I'd issue that order.

As McCain pointed out, the drone program started under Bush...I don't remember hearing any of the GOTP rushing to the Senate decrying the fact it might be used against combatants that we might not agree with....

Pot/Kettle/Black?

Oh, and did I mention....Breaking: US Senate confirms John Brennan as CIA Director by a vote of 63-34.

Graham questioned why members of his party suddenly have problems with the armed drone program.

“I don’t remember any of you fellow Republicans coming down here and saying President [George W.] Bush was going to kill anyone with a drone,” Graham said. “But we had a drone program back then ... so what is it that’s got you so spun up now?” - Sen. Lindsay Graham

Apparently some lefties have a backbone about this topic...

If a GOP prez implied he could kill US citizens on US soil without due process, we liberals would be marching down street #ConsistencyCounts

— Van Jones (@VanJones68) March 7, 2013

The point is not whether OBAMA would abuse that kind of authority. The NEXT prez might. So we must be vigilant now & #consistent. #NoDrones

— Van Jones (@VanJones68) March 7, 2013

http://weaselzippers.us/2013/03/07/flyi ... ne-policy/

Hey... 285 Bound lefties... it's OK to agree with Rand Paul... even your president caved.

LadyJazzer wrote:
[snip]

As McCain pointed out, the drone program started under Bush...I don't remember hearing any of the GOTP rushing to the Senate decrying the fact it might be used against combatants that we might not agree with....

Get over it... Bush is gone... this issue was about Obama and drones... and Obama caved... works for me.

The sweetest thing about this is Rand Paul is a teabagger ... Obama caved in to a Teabagger... I wonder how it tasted?

President Obama, did or did you not kill Anwar al-Awlaki?
By David Cole,February 08, 2013

There are plenty of problems with President Obama’s targeted killings in the war against terrorism: The policy remains secret in most aspects, involves no judicial review, has resulted in the deaths of innocent civilians, has been employed far from any battlefield and has sparked deep anti-American resentment in countries where we can ill afford it.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013 ... ppearances

yes....it is bothersome that we even have to ask the question.
A 16 year old innocent American citizen was killed.

Here is what the Obama admins had to say about his death.

Top Obama Adviser: Awlaki’s 16-Year-Old Son Should Have Had a More Responsible Father If He Wanted Us Not to Kill Him
Robert Gibbs said if US citizen Abdulrahman al-Awlaki didn't want to be killed he "should have a far more responsible father"

maybe that is why we have to ask the question.

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

LadyJazzer wrote:
[snip]

As McCain pointed out, the drone program started under Bush...I don't remember hearing any of the GOTP rushing to the Senate decrying the fact it might be used against combatants that we might not agree with....

Get over it... Bush is gone... this issue was about Obama and drones... and Obama caved... works for me.

Yep LJ....Bush is gone......get over it.