Okay, so here's the thing...I actually kind of share Rand Paul's concerns about drones. However, he's no hero for taking thirteen hours to ask a question. His filibuster was a political stunt. He was simply trying to put himself out there in the public arena and make a name for himself. None of my poor deluded libertarian friends believed me when I told them he's just another blowhard politician just grandstanding for attention. (Kinda like Ron Paul still accepting social security checks despite the good doctor saying they're illegal and unconstitutional.)
And then of course two days after his filabuster Rand announces he's considering a presidential run in 2016. SHOCKING!
His filabuster was meant to do the following...
1.) Get him name recognition to the public at large on a slow news day.
2.) Position himself as the leader of the Tea Party/Libertarian wing of the G.O.P..
3.) Make Obama look bad which always plays well with the wingnuts.
4.) Stir up paranoia about government overreach which always does well with the Tea Party nuts.
You see, drones are scary. Even the name sounds scary. Say it out loud...drones. Death robots raining fire from the sky. However, technically drones are just another weapon. The same legal principles apply to drones that apply to tanks or fighter jets or even CIA assassins. Drones are just extremely effective and limit American loss of life in top secret operations.
But if you question their morality then you have to question the whole national security apparatus. What's really the difference between a CIA hitman pulling the trigger and a drone operated by a man in a room pushing the button?
And Rand Paul even admitted he never had any intention of not voting for Brennan's confirmation. He just wanted to bring attention to an important question.
Whatevs!
He wanted to bring attention to himself. He already knew the answer to the question.
I'm not big fan of Holder but he totally pwned (google it if you don't know what it means) Paul. Paul took 13 hours to ask a question. Holder took one sentence to answer.
Here's how it went down.
Rand Paul: "Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?" blah blah blah blah (repeat for 13 hours)
Eric Holder: "The answer to that question is no."
Rand Paul: "I'm quite happy with the answer."
Next Day: In an interview with Politico Rand Paul says he is "seriously" considering a 2016 presidential run.
2016!!! Dude! By then it will be too late. Obama will have turned 'Merica into a socialistcommunistfascistislamicblackpanther regime run by drones programmed to mimic Van Jones's brain pattern! Dude!
