Tag Archive: Filibuster


Wendy Davis Admits To Fuzzy Facts In Bio

” Texas state Sen. Wendy Davis, who is running for governor of Texas, has admitted that some of the public details about her personal history are incomplete or inaccurate, according to a report in the Dallas Morning News.

  Davis, a rising Democratic star, has touted herself as a Texas success story. She has said she was a divorced teenage mother who went from living in a mobile home, juggling low-wage jobs and going to community college to graduating from Harvard Law School.

  The up-from-nowhere narrative, which emerged during an 11-hour filibuster she staged in June to oppose abortion restrictions, has been a central part of her candidacy and appeal, helping to boost her national profile and fundraising efforts.”

 

 

Read more here and here

 

 

 

 “Democrats Will Absolutely Rue The Day”

 

 

Krauthammer Nuke Option

 

 

 

” And the other part of it, as a conservative, I am extremely happy that the Democrats are doing this. The prospects are very strong that the Democrats are going to lose the Senate next year and there is an excellent chance of losing the White House. And the Democrats will absolutely rue the day because they not only are going to allow a Republican majority — which will come one day anyway — to get its nominees through, but Chuck Grassley has said that when Republicans come into you power, they’re going to include Supreme Court nominees, and that will be a devastating blow to the liberals on the Court and to the liberals in the country. So I don’t think Democrats will remember this day with any joy in the near future.”

 

 

    Only time will tell if Mr Krauthammer is correct in his assumption , and to be fair it is a very commonly held assumption at this point , one that common sense tells us should be undeniably true . The only problem with the assumption that the Democrats will live to regret establishing the “nuclear option” as the new standard is the natural tendency for the GOP to blow every opportunity for political gain that has ever been dropped in their laps .

   Incompetence is the only word that adequately describes the recent Republican caucuses and idiocy and fecklessness has a long and storied history in the party of Lincoln . If there is a way way to fail to score when you are feet from the end zone and all alone the Republicans are up to the task . The only fight the GOP seems capable of mounting is against their own upstart allies in the Tea Party . 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Daily Video 11.22.13

Chaos In Washington Senate – Democrats Strip GOP Of Power – The Kelly File W/ Megyn Kelly

 

 

Published on Nov 21, 2013

” Grassley: If The Democrats Are Bent On Changing The Rules, I Say Go Ahead! There A Lot More Scalia’s & Thomas’s Out That We Love To Put On The Bench! 
Democrats Go “Nuclear” Senate Severely Limits Power Of Minority
Chaos In Washington Senate – Democrats Strip GOP Of Power – The Kelly File W/ Megyn Kelly”

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reid’s Rule Change Would Silence GOP

 

” As a number of Senate Republicans take a stand against Barack Obama’s nomination of far left judges, the chamber’s top Democrat wants to find a way to stop them. In an announcement Thursday, Majority Leader Harry Reid voiced his support of a rule change that would curtail the practice of filibustering.

For the minority party, filibusters are one of a handful of tactics available to make its position heard. Reid, on the other hand, said that such allowances have resulted in a “broken” Senate.

“It’s time to change the Senate before the institution becomes obsolete,” Reid said, noting that the chamber has “wasted hours and wasted days between filibusters.”

 

 

   To think it was only one administration ago that the alleged “pederast” of the Senate was singing a different tune . Give a listen to Dingy’s explanation of why the filibuster rule is was an essential part of our republican , not democratic , form of government .

 

 

” Unfortunately, the Nevada senator seems to miss the point that debate on a particular issue is actually a congressional responsibility, not something that needs to be eradicated. Of course, leftist legislators rely on ramrodding laws and nominations that could not stand Republican scrutiny.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who many conservatives feel has been too moderate in his response to Reid regarding other issues, was emphatically opposed to his current proposal.”

 

 

Perhaps “Dingy Harry” could use a history lesson on the importance of the filibuster …

 

 

” While several leftist groups have joined in the push for this so-called “nuclear option,” McConnell explained that such support could backfire “a lot sooner than you think.”

 

 

    Mr Reid needs to be reminded that the purpose of the filibuster is to prevent the tyranny of the majority that our forefathers were rightfully so concerned about , to allow the minority to be heard and that it is one of the very features of government that make ours a republic and not a simple democracy(mob rule) . He would also do well to recognize that he won’t be Senate Majority Leader forever , perhaps not past 2014 as a matter of fact and thus he should very carefully consider the precedent he is threatening to set . We all know what they say : ” payback is a b**ch” .

 

 

” Though Republicans are currently the minority party in the Senate, Democrat support of the unpopular ObamaCare law has caused the approval rates of many legislators to plummet. Should the GOP regain power of the chamber after next year’s midterm elections, that party would benefit from Reid’s rule change.

Predictions of a Republican-led Senate are certainly encouraging to millions of Americans fed up with the current direction of the nation; however, the fight to end Reid’s proposal has far more immediate implications.”

 

 

   Why don’t we let Senator Reid himself explain to us the filibuster , it’s long history , it’s essential nature to the American form of governance and also regale us with a conversation that took place over two hundred years ago between George Washington and Thomas Jefferson on just why the filibuster is an absolute necessity for the protection of the republic .

   The following is a speech delivered by Harry on the floor of the Senate and recorded into the record on May 18th , 2005 : We’ll let Mr Reid do the rest of the talking :

 

 

” Mr. President, yesterday morning I spoke here about a statement the Majority Leader issued calling the filibuster a “procedural gimmick.”

The Websters dictionary defines “gimmick” as – – “an ingenious new scheme or angle.” No Mr. President, the filibuster is not a scheme. And it is not new.

The filibuster is far from a “procedural gimmick.” It is part of the fabric of this institution. It was well known in colonial legislatures, and it is an integral part of our country’s 217 years of history.

The first filibuster in the U.S. Congress happened in 1790. It was used by lawmakers from Virginia and South Carolina who were trying to prevent Philadelphia from hosting the first Congress.

Since 1790, the filibuster has been employed hundreds and hundreds of times.

Senators have used it to stand up to popular presidents. To block legislation. And yes – even to stall executive nominees.

The roots of the filibuster can be found in the Constitution and in the Senate rules.

In establishing each House of Congress, Article I Section 5 of the Constitution states that “Each House may determine the rules.”

In crafting the rules of the Senate, Senators established the right to extended debate – and they formalized it with Rule XXII almost 100 years ago. This rule codified the practice that Senators could debate extensively.

Under Rule XXII, debate may be cut off under limited circumstances.

– 67 votes to end a filibuster of a motion to amend a Senate rule.

– 60 votes to end a filibuster against any other legislative business.

A conversation between Thomas Jefferson and George Washington describes the United States Senate and our Founders Fathers vision of it.

Jefferson asked Washington what is the purpose of the Senate?

Washington responded with a question of his own, “Why did you pour that coffee into your saucer?”

“To cool it,” Jefferson replied.

To which Washington said; “Even so, we pour legislation into the senatorial saucer to cool it.”

And this is exactly what the filibuster does. It encourages moderation and consensus. It gives voice to the minority, so that cooler heads may prevail.

It also separates us from the House of Representatives – where the majority rules.

And it is very much in keeping with the spirit of the government established by the Framers of our Constitution: Limited Government…Separation of Powers…Checks and Balances.

Mr. President, the filibuster is a critical tool in keeping the majority in check. This central fact has been acknowledged and even praised by Senators from both parties.

In fact, my colleague from Georgia – Senator Isakson – recently shared a conversation he had with an official from the Iraqi government.

The Senator had asked this official if he was worried that the majority in Iraq would overrun the minority. But the official replied… “no….we have the secret weapon called the ‘filibuster.’”

In recalling that conversation, Senator Isakson remarked: “If there were ever a reason for optimism… it is one of [the Iraqi] minority leaders, proudly stating one of the pillars and principles of our government, as the way they would ensure that the majority never overran the minority.

And he was right.

I spoke yesterday about Senator Holt and his 1939 filibuster to protect workers’ wages and hours.

There are also recent examples of the filibuster achieving good.

In 1985, Senators from rural states used the filibuster to force Congress to address a major crisis in which thousands of farmers were on the brink of bankruptcy.

In 1995, the filibuster was used by Senators to protect the rights of workers to a fair wage and a safe workplace.

Now Mr. President, I will not stand here and say the filibuster has always been used for positive purposes.

Just as it has been used to bring about social change, it was also used to stall progress that this country needed to make. It is often shown that the filibuster was used against Civil Right legislation. But Civil Rights legislation passed – – Civil Rights advocates met the burden.

And it is noteworthy that today the Congressional Black Caucus is opposed to the Nuclear Option.

For further analysis, let’s look at Robert Caro, a noted historian and Pulitzer Prize winner.

At a meeting I attended with other Senators, he spoke about the history of the filibuster. He made a point about its legacy that was important.

He noted that when legislation is supported by the majority of Americans, it eventually overcomes a filibuster’s delay – as public protest far outweighs any Senator’s appetite to filibuster.

But when legislation only has the support of the minority, the filibuster slows the legislation …prevents a Senator from ramming it through…and gives the American people enough time join the opposition.

Mr. President, the right to extended debate is never more important than when one party controls Congress and the White House.

In these cases, the filibuster serves as a check on power and preserves our limited government.

Right now, the only check on President Bush is the Democrats ability to voice their concern in the Senate.

If Republicans rollback our rights in this Chamber, there will be no check on their power. The radical, right wing will be free to pursue any agenda they want. And not just on judges. Their power will be unchecked on Supreme Court nominees…the President’s nominees in general…and legislation like Social Security privatization.

Of course the President would like the power to name anyone he wants to lifetime seats on the Supreme Court and other federal courts.

And that is why the White House has been aggressively lobbying Senate Republicans to change Senate rules in a way that would hand dangerous new powers to the President over two separate branches – the Congress and the Judiciary.

Unfortunately, this is part of a disturbing pattern of behavior by this White House and Republicans in Washington.

From Dick Cheney’s fight to slam the doors of the White House on the American people…

To the President’s refusal to cooperate with the 9-11 Commission…

To Senate Republicans attempt to destroy the last check in Washington on Republican power…

To the House Majority’s quest to silence the minority in the House…

Republicans have sought to destroy the balance of power in our government by grabbing power for the presidency, silencing the minority and weakening our democracy.

America does not work the way the radical right-wing dictates to President Bush and the Republican Senate Leaders. And Mr. President, that is not how the United States Senate works either.

For 200 years, we’ve had the right to extended debate. It’s not some “procedural gimmick.”

It’s within the vision of the Founding Fathers of our country. They established a government so that no one person – and no single party – could have total control.

Some in this Chamber want to throw out 217 years of Senate history in the quest for absolute power.

They want to do away with Mr. Smith coming to Washington.

They want to do away with the filibuster.

They think they are wiser than our Founding Fathers.

I doubt that’s true. ” 

 

 

   We would say those were words to live by Mr Majority Leader , but then again everything from the democrats comes with an expiration date doesn’t it sir ? Even principles .

 

 

     What a difference an administration makes . To think that eight short years ago the filibuster was , according to the senator from Nevada , “part of the fabric of this institution” and that “the filibuster is a critical tool in keeping the majority in check” and anyone brazen enough to attempt to eliminate the people’s tool were on a “quest for absolute power” to this : 

 

 

” Without the option of a filibuster, Republican senators have precious few options through which to protect America’s courts.”

 

 

    They’ve done it . As we were putting this piece together the scalawags from the democratic caucus in the Senate broke the rules to change the rules and thereby have eliminated the one tool that a David representing the minority could use to great effect against the Goliath tyranny of the majority . Democrats … Party of the people ? Defender of the little guy ? Balderdash ! Oh yes , did we mention …. SQUIRREL !

    Does anyone have any idea why the appointment of judicial nominees is of such importance now , just as we are gearing up for the holiday recesses ? One word comes to our mind , well two actually , one (squirrel) that is what Mr Reid and Co are shouting today and the second word is Obamacare , the one word Mr Reid would love to knock off of the airwaves and out of people’s minds.

   Good luck with that Senator , although we think you have made a grave miscalculation . The people will never be able to forget about the S**t sandwich you and your cronies forced down their throats and now you’ve treated them to the ultimate display of hubris and hypocrisy with your invocation of your so-called “nuclear option” and along the way revealed yourself and your colleagues for the unprincipled mountebanks that you are .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rand Paul Plans Filibuster Of Fed Chair Nominee Janet Yellen Until “Audit The Fed” Bill Gets A Vote

 

 

 

” Janet Yellen likes printing money…lots of it! This self-professed Keynesian economist is slated to become Obama’s next chair of the Federal Reserve, but Rand Paul isn’t going to allow her confirmation to breeze through the Senate without a fight.  Reports from Capitol Hill indicate that Paul is planning to hold up her nomination until he can get a vote on a bill to audit the Federal Reserve.

from New York Post:

Republican Senator Rand Paul plans to put a “hold” on the nomination of Janet Yellen to be chair of the Federal Reserve, CNBC reported on Friday, a move that would force supporters to round up 60 votes in the 100 seat Senate to confirm her.

CNBC, citing a source close to the Kentucky lawmaker, said Paul was insisting on a vote on a bill he has sponsored to open up the U.S. central bank’s monetary policy decisions to congressional audit.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

AUDIT THE FED NOW !!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Who Else Does Ted Cruz’s Triumph Help?

 

 

 

” In the last hour, even as he said he grew “weary” as his time arguing against ObamaCare was coming to a close, he found himself in a debate with the able and smart Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin on the Congress’s generous health-care plan.

Durbin complained that Cruz wanted to deny health care to the uninsured; did he not, Durbin asked, enjoy the benefits of the generous congressional health-care package himself?

Cruz said he wouldn’t answer Durbin until Durbin first replied to three questions Cruz had posed. Durbin, with an “a-ha” gesture, responded by saying it was clear Cruz was simply refusing to answer his embarrassing question.

He’d walked into Cruz’s trap. For then Cruz said, no, Senator, I’m eligible for the congressional plan — but I’m not enrolled in it.

Durbin thought he had Cruz cornered by bringing up his reliance on the absurdly generous health package for Congress. But since Cruz doesn’t rely on it, Durbin humiliated himself in what was supposed to be his gotcha moment.

Despite his marathon of speaking and standing and arguing, after nearly a day on his feet, Cruz — there is no other term for it — squashed Durbin like a bug.

All in all, the Cruz performance was great political theater, and Cruz was astoundingly impressive both in demeanor and in the cogency and saliency of his arguments against ObamaCare. If there’d been any question before Tuesday about what a formidable presence he’s going to be in Washington and in the Republican party going forward, it has been laid to rest.”

 

 

    While Podhoretz rightfully acknowledges Cruz’s masterful performance he , as a fellow establishment GOPer , draws the wrong conclusions as to what and who Cruz and his fellow “wacko birds” are truly after . Podhoretz like David Brooks and Peggy Noonan owe their souls to the “company (GOP) store” and as such cannot see past the corrupt hand that has fed them all these years . 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here Is C-Span’s Live Feed Of Ted Cruz’s Filibuster

 

Ted Cruz Filibuster

 

Good luck Sen Cruz . We wish you well . Thank you for your efforts in stopping Obamacare.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filibustering Senators Under No Obligation To ‘Play Fair’ To Protect Gun Rights

 

 

 

 

” With at least 14 United States senators (all Republicans), including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), having vowed to filibuster any proposed unconstitutional gun legislation (and given the Constitution’s clear statement that the right to keep and bear arms is one that shall not be infringed, that would seem to indicate that all proposed gun legislation would be subject to filibuster), the forcible citizen disarmament advocates are growing louder and louder in their outrage.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), for example, speaking on the Senate floor Monday, said, “Shame on them,” in reference to the senators planning a filibuster. From Talk Radio News Service:

“There is simply no reason for the blatant obstruction except the fear of considering anti-violence proposals in full, public view. Yet now many Senate Republicans seem afraid to even engage in this debate. S[h]ame on them,” Reid said on the Senate floor.

 

Obama’s condemnation of any filibuster is an extension of his State of the Union Address, in which he dramatically and repeatedly thundered that, “They [survivors of shootings and loved ones of the slain] deserve a vote!” It was good political theater, got his supporters fired up, and it’s no wonder that he gets back to the theme at every opportunity.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mitch McConnell Joins Senate Gun Filibuster

 

 

 

” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said he would join a group of Senate Republicans threatening a filibuster to oppose a cloture vote if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid moves a gun bill to the floor this week.

Reid has promised to move a gun bill to the Senate floor this week, but it’s unclear which one. It depends on whether Democrats can strike a deal on background checks on gun sales — otherwise, they may settle for a less strict bill that includes some form of background checks, increase penalties for gun trafficking and increase school security. In order to get around the filibuster, Reid has indicated that he would file a cloture motion, which would require a 60-vote margin to move the bill.

“While nobody knows yet what Senator Reid’s plan is for the gun bill, if he chooses to file cloture on the motion to proceed to the Reid Bill (S. 649), Senator McConnell will oppose cloture on proceeding to that bill,” McConnell spokesman John Ashbrook said in a statement.”

 

 

 

 

MCCAIN: ‘I DON’T UNDERSTAND’ FILIBUSTERING GUN CONTROL

 

 

 

 

 

” Sen. John McCain (R-Sunday Shows) expressed bewilderment on CBS’ “Face the Nation” that GOP Sens. Cruz, Lee and Paul would filibuster gun control legislation. “I don’t understand it,” McCain said. “The purpose of the United States Senate is to debate and to vote and to let the people know where we stand.” With all due respect to Sen. McCain, that is almost completely backward.

“I don’t understand why United States senators want to block debate when the leaders said we could have amendments,” McCain noted.

If one believes a legislative proposal is, on its face, unconstitutional, the ability to offer amendments is of little solace. Sens. Cruz, Lee and Paul, among other Senators, believe legislation to limit gun rights is, by its nature, unconstitutional. Amending the legislation to make it slightly less unconstitutional is a fool’s game, and a large reason our federal government has grown so large. 

A filibuster against gun control legislation is upholding the greatest tradition of the Senate, i.e. acting as a bulwark against the federal government’s natural inclination to expand its power.”

 

 

It’s time to step aside Mr McCain . Thank you for your service . Enjoy some well-deserved R&R .

 

 

     PS: After adding the video we find ourselves much less sincere in our wishing the senator well . There is very little difference between John McCain and Charles Schumer . That is a very sobering thought . 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—-

Rand Paul: We Will Filibuster Any Gun Control Bills – Hannity 3/28/2013

“Senator Rand Paul joins Eric Bolling on Fox News’ Hannity to discuss President Obama’s proposed gun control measures and filibustering, along with Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee, the gun control bill expected to be brought up on the Senate floor by Majority Leader Harry Reid once the Senate reconvenes next month.”

 

Rand Paul And Ted Cruz Threaten Filibuster On Guns

 

 

 

 

 

” Sens. Rand Paul, Ted Cruz and Mike Lee are threatening to filibuster gun-control legislation, according to a letter they plan to hand-deliver to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s office on Tuesday.

“We will oppose the motion to proceed to any legislation that will serve as a vehicle for any additional gun restrictions,” the three conservatives wrote in a copy of the signed letter obtained by POLITICO.

Though they don’t use the word “filibuster” in the letter, the conservatives are leaving no doubt that they would filibuster on an initial procedural question — the motion to proceed.”

 

 

 

Rand Paul: Wins Day One of CPAC, Helping Rethink The War On Terror

 

 

” Rand Paul, post-filibuster, strides mightily atop the world of young-skewing conservative activism yesterday at the Conservative Political Action Conference.

“That filibuster was the best move by a politician I’ve ever seen,” a high school senior from Virginia with a swept bowl-cut (who has seen a lot of moves in his time) exclaimed when asked about his sticker.

When Paul himself took the stage inside, the audience roared in approbation and many stood for the duration of the speech to physically show their support. Paul played the hits right off the back, opening with a joke about his now iconic filibuster. “I was told I get 10 measly minutes, but I came prepared with 13 hours’ worth of material!” he said while holding up a stack of black binders. “Don’t drone me, bro!” a young man yelled approvingly from the crowd.

Paul offered a plea for a revamp. “The Republican Party has to change,” Paul said. It especially needs to appeal to young people by expanding its conception of limited government beyond taxes and regulation to things like drug policy, technology, and civil liberties, he explained, because the “Facebook generation” is the “core of the ‘leave me alone’ coalition.” “

 

 

 

 

If Anti-Drone Patriots Are “Wacko Birds” Then I’d Hate To Be What John McCain Is…

 

John McCain: New GOP Guard ‘Wacko Birds’

 

 

 

 

 

 

” (Breitbart) – John McCain may have finally lost it.  In an interview with Huffington Post he referred to Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) as “wacko birds.”

“They were elected, nobody believes that there was a corrupt election, anything else,” McCain said. “But I also think that when, you know, it’s always the wacko birds on right and left that get the media megaphone.” Asked to clarify, McCain said he was referencing ”Rand Paul, Cruz, Amash, whoever.”

In the long three decades McCain has served in Washington DC, we can’t find any time he’s referred to any other colleagues, past or present, as “wacko birds.”  Not Nancy Pelosi. Not Barbara Boxer. Not Al Franken. Not Robert Byrd.  Not Sheila Jackson Lee.  Not Hank Johnson.  Not Patrick Leahy.  Not Robert Menendez. Not Bernie Sanders.  Not Dennis Kucinich.  Not Jim Wright.  Not Anthony Weiner.  Not Alan Grayson. Not Carol Moseley Braun. Not Dick Durbin. Not Chuck Schumer. Not Harry Reid.”

 

 

   Thanks for your service John … It’s time for you to go home once and for all and take your RINO buddy Graham with you .

   If being men of principle makes the “wacko birds” we say let’s have some more .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Filibusted: Outreach Supper with Graham & McCain Leads to $600 Billion Tax Hike Proposal

 

For Shame 

 

” The price of Senators McCain and Graham attending an ‘outreach dinner‘ with the president may wind up costing taxpayers$600 billion more in taxes. And you thought the only price paid would be to their image.

The old guard acts like it hasn’t been notified of New Media yet; and is seemingly unfathoming of such things that #StandwithRand was the top Twitter trend in the world the previous night starting at 10:30 p.m., and had enough tweets at over 1 million (combined with a few other related hashtags) to rival the State of the Union address’ 1.3 million.”

 

 

 

John McCain and Lindsey Graham Declare War on Rand Paul

 

 

” The anti-Rand Pauls, Sen. John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, took to the Senate floor this morning to defend killing American citizens at presidential discretion. Graham is doing so live on C-SPAN2 right now, saying that everything you do is a danger to America no matter who or where you are, as long as the U.S. government has decided you have “joined al-Qaeda,” whatever the hell that means.”

 

 

 

 

 

Mr. Paul Goes To Washington

 

 

 

” Is it absurd to fear, as some of Paul’s colleagues charged, that the president will begin launching drone strikes on American soil? Probably. But the point is precisely that we live under an administration is so unwilling to acknowledge meaningful limits on what they may do in the name of national security that it was an exercise in tooth-pulling just to get a public disavowal of an absurd scenario that the government’s anemic targeted killing “standards,” taken to their logical extreme, would not appear to foreclose. The crucial message we should take from Paul’s marathon oration, then, may be this: If it’s absurd to pose the question that inspired his filibuster, surely it’s far more absurd that we’ve arrived, after a decade of complacency about government secrecy and unfettered executive discretion in the sphere of counterterrorism, at a point where the question would need to be posed.”

 

 

#StandWithRand: Rand Paul, Barack Obama, Drones, and Presidential Kill Lists

Demand An Apology From Senator McCain

 

 

 

” While Senator Rand Paul was filibustering John Brennan’s nomination for CIA Director over the Obama Administration’s implicit assertion that it can kill American citizens on American soil without charge or trial, Senator John McCain was schmoozing with President Obama over dinner.

Millions of people, from all political backgrounds, showed support for Rand Paul’s courageous filibuster on social media. Rand Paul was eventually joined by 14 senators, including Sens. Lee, Cruz, Toomey, and Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden.

Instead of joining this important filibuster, Senator McCain mocked Rand Paul and made condescending statements towards libertarian young people. “If Mr. Paul wants to be taken seriously he needs to do more than pull political stunts that fire up impressionable libertarian kids in their college dorms.” ”

 

 

At the link you can send a message to McCain and express your dissatisfaction with his derogatory remarks regarding Senator Paul’s principled stand against tyranny and statism . Principle being something that 40 years inside the cloistered environment of Washington seems to have wrung out of the honorable man that survived the Hanoi Hilton .

   Below is the text of the form letter … read it , if you agree with it give it your blessing and send it on . Senator Paul , although doomed to fail in preventing the vote on Brennan to take place , took a bold stand and showed the entire country just what leadership really is .

 

The text : 

 

” Senator Rand Paul’s filibuster on the Senate floor was not a political stunt to “fire up impressionable libertarian kids.” I am a full grown adult and I agree with Sen. Paul that the President of the United States does not have the authority to assassinate American citizens on American soil without due process.

Your criticism of Sen. Paul’s brave filibuster is shameful. No American statesman would support the assassination of an American without proper due process. The President can’t just suspend the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. Our founding fathers would not approve of President Obama’s unprecedented authority grab and neither should you.

While Senator Paul stood for liberty and the rights of all Americans, you dined with the President. I demand you apologize to the millions of Americans who support our right to not be killed by the President.”

 

    If you find yourself in agreement with the above sentiment click the link and follow the instructions to send your own protest .

 

 

 

 

3 Takeaways from Rand Paul’s #StandwithRand #Filibuster About Drone Strikes

 

 

 

” For all of the late-night punch-drunkiness that eventually ensued on Twitter (well, at least on my feed), yesterday’s 12-hours-plus filibuster led by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is among the most electrifying and insipiring events in recent political memory. The point of the filibuster – which derailed a confirmation vote on John Brennan as Barack Obama’s CIA head – was to call attention to the president’s insufficient answers to questions about his policy of targeted killings via drones and, one assumes, other methods.

Here are three takeaways from yesterday’s epic event:

 

1. It shows what one man can do to call attention to a hugely important issue that nonetheless is largley ignored by the mainstream media and the political establishment. “

 

 

 

Read the whole thing 

 

 

 

TRANSCRIPT: FIRST HOUR OF RAND PAUL’S FILIBUSTER

 

 

” In the first hour of his filibuster over the nomination of John Brennan, Sen. Paul spoke 9,024 words, enough to fill 15 pages as a standard Word document. A transcript of the first hour was provided by Sen. Paul’s office and appears below in its entirety:

 

I rise today to begin to filibuster John Brennan’s nomination for the CIA I will speak until I can no longer speak. I will speak as long as it takes, until the alarm is sounded from coast to coast that our Constitution is important, that your rights to trial by jury are precious, that no American should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court. That Americans could be killed in a cafe in San Francisco or in a restaurant in Houston or at their home in bowling green, Kentucky, is an abomination. It is something that should not and cannot be tolerated in our country. I don’t rise to oppose John Brennan’s nomination simply for the person. I rise today for the principle. The principle is one that as Americans we have fought long and hard for and to give up on that principle, to give up on the bill of rights, to give up on the Fifth Amendment protection that says that no person shall be held without due process, that no person shall be held for a capital offense without being indicted. This is a precious American tradition and something we should not give up on easily. They say Lewis Carroll is fiction. Alice never fell down a rabbit hole and the White Queen’s caustic judgments are not really a threat to your security. Or has America the beautiful become Alice’s wonderland? ‘No, no, said the queen. Sentence first; verdict afterwards. Stuff and nonsense, Alice said widely – loudly. The idea of having the sentence first? ‘Hold your tongue, said the queen, turning purple. I won’t, said Alice. Release the drones, said the Queen, as she shouted at the top of her voice.

Lewis Carroll is fiction, right? When I asked the President, can you kill an American on American soil, it should have been an easy answer. It’s an easy question. It should have been a resounding and unequivocal, “no.” The President’s response? He hasn’t killed anyone yet. We’re supposed to be comforted by that. 
The President says, I haven’t killed anyone yet. He goes on to say, and I have no intention of killing Americans. But I might. Is that enough? Are we satisfied by that? Are we so complacent with our rights that we would allow a President to say he might kill Americans? But he will judge the circumstances, he will be the sole arbiter, he will be the sole decider, he will be the executioner in chief if he sees fit. Now, some would say he would never do this. Many people give the President the – you know, they give him consideration, they say he’s a good man. I’m not arguing he’s not. What I’m arguing is that the law is there and set in place for the day when angels don’t rule government. Madison said that the restraint on government was because government will not always be run by angels. This has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with whether the President is a Democrat or a Republican. Were this a Republican President, I’d be here saying exactly the same thing. No one person, no one politician should be allowed to judge the guilt, to charge an individual, to judge the guilt of an individual and to execute an individual. It goes against everything that we fundamentally believe in our country.

This isn’t even new to our country. There’s 800 years of English law that we found our tradition upon. We founded it upon the Magna Carta from 1215. We founded it upon Morgan from Glamorgan and 725 A.D. We founded upon the Greeks and Romans who had juries. It is not enough to charge someone to say that they are guilty.

 

 

Click the link to read the rest …

 

 

 

 

 

 

—-

 

    Breitbart offers an Insta/blog devoted to Rand Paul’s Filibuster . The blog is just loaded with posts by everyone from John Nolte to Iowahawk to Ace … Great job producing this and getting it online so quickly .

 

 

Here’s a sample … Paul fighting for us all 

The Democratic Whip Just Announced That the Democratic Party Objects to a Resolution That the President Can’t Murder American Citizens

 

” by ACE OF SPADES Mar 6, 2013 4:51 PM PT11

In response to This Is What A Republic Looks Like:

 

 

The left doesn’t really bother hiding it, does it?

It occurred to me that the president won’t simply agree to the rather reasonable proposition that he’s not permitted to murder people because of the psychology of the weakling.

The weaker a man is, the less heroic he is, the more he finds it necessary to put on the airs of heroism and pantomime the muscle-flexing of the strong.

Obama is a weak man, and certainly a weak president. Thus it becomes deadly to him to simply confess what is so obvious as to not need confessing:  That he’s not allowed to murder people.

A strong man could confess this without even thinking about it. The strong man does not need to ask himself things like Does this trivial acknowledgment of limitations of my power make me “look weak”?  The strong man knows he’s strong, and doesn’t worry much about “looking weak.”

But Obama is a weak man, and is presidency is one catastrophe piled upon another crisis, the whole disaster sustained only by his unrelenting posturing as a Hero before adoring liberals and TV news anchors (but I repeat myself).  The weak man simply cannot admit what the strong man can.  Weakness, after all, imposes limitations, and strength grants freedom of action.

To “yield” to Rand Paul would show the weakling for what he is, which is why he dares not do so.  The strong man would agree with a laugh.  But the weakling must continue to posture.”

 

 

More: Texas Sen. Ted Cruz Joins Rand Paul Filibuster

 

” Senator Rand Paul is not only exposing President Obama’s breathtaking hypocrisy on the issue of drones, he’s also giving a Master Class on the U.S. Constitution.”

 

 

 

EXCLUSIVE: ACLU BACKS PAUL’S FILIBUSTER

 

 

 

“It’s certainly a courageous and historic effort by Senator Rand Paul and his colleagues, who are now increasing in numbers and coming to the fore in support of his filibuster,” said Anders. “The information Senator Paul is looking for goes to the very core of what the US is and who Americans are as a people.” Anders pointed out that the information Paul seeks is easy for the administration to hand over – it “ought to be a no-brainer,” he said. “It ought to be upsetting for everyone, all Americans of both parties, to not be able to get a straight answer to what is a very straightforward question from Senator Paul.”

 

 

 

 

 

—-