6 thoughts on “Rand Paul Filibusters Brennan, Condemns Obama’s Drone War”
Rand Paul for a change is doing the right thing. Brennan needs to be stopped.
Jacob Lew has already had a free ride to become a monstrous danger to the USA as the new Geithner.
I don't think Rand would have a problem is a Republican president was doing it.
"The drones are there to protect our freedoms."
Wouldn't have a problem if a Republican president was doing it? I don't know, maybe. But he is taking a stand on this issue, not 100 issues that most Republicans make central if they just want to criticize Obama, but this very critical issue, and how many Democrats are? Wait are *any* Democrats willing to do this? Good for Rand Paul.
He’s not trying to stop Brennan’s nomination, though. It’s great that someone is taking a pointed stand – although I would be far more impressed if the objection extended beyond Americans on American soil to targeted killings as a whole – but there are several solid reasons Brennan should not be nominated and I don’t believe Rand is simply trying to stop that entirely. I have no clue whether Rand supports him or not or how he’ll vote in the end. But what isn’t being address is important matters like Brennan’s close relationship with Saudi Arabia and the now defunct secret drone base set up there – good coverage on that topic can be found both by Marcy Wheeler at emptywheel.net and over at the Moon of Alabama blog.
Dammit Rand make up your mind.
so he’s against drone killings of americans on us soil, but
only without due process. what about killings of americans
offshore?
and why the drone fetish? a manned aircraft, a helicoptor,
an icbm, a cruise missile? do those count? how about a
real live marine? would it be a problem if an american
were targeted by a marine sniper….if ordered by the
president without due process?
Rand Paul for a change is doing the right thing. Brennan needs to be stopped.
Jacob Lew has already had a free ride to become a monstrous danger to the USA as the new Geithner.
I don't think Rand would have a problem is a Republican president was doing it.
"The drones are there to protect our freedoms."
Wouldn't have a problem if a Republican president was doing it? I don't know, maybe. But he is taking a stand on this issue, not 100 issues that most Republicans make central if they just want to criticize Obama, but this very critical issue, and how many Democrats are? Wait are *any* Democrats willing to do this? Good for Rand Paul.
He’s not trying to stop Brennan’s nomination, though. It’s great that someone is taking a pointed stand – although I would be far more impressed if the objection extended beyond Americans on American soil to targeted killings as a whole – but there are several solid reasons Brennan should not be nominated and I don’t believe Rand is simply trying to stop that entirely. I have no clue whether Rand supports him or not or how he’ll vote in the end. But what isn’t being address is important matters like Brennan’s close relationship with Saudi Arabia and the now defunct secret drone base set up there – good coverage on that topic can be found both by Marcy Wheeler at emptywheel.net and over at the Moon of Alabama blog.
Dammit Rand make up your mind.
so he’s against drone killings of americans on us soil, but
only without due process. what about killings of americans
offshore?
and why the drone fetish? a manned aircraft, a helicoptor,
an icbm, a cruise missile? do those count? how about a
real live marine? would it be a problem if an american
were targeted by a marine sniper….if ordered by the
president without due process?