Rand Paul’s proposed non-binding resolution on the use of drones that the Senate Democrats refuse to bring to a vote.


Readers!
 
For many reasons, mostly political but partly ethical, I do not use Google, Facebook, Twitter. They practice corrupt business policies, while targeting conservative websites for censoring, facts repeatedly confirmed by news stories and by my sense that Facebook has taken action to prevent my readers from recommending Behind the Black to their friends.
 
Thus, I must have your direct support to keep this webpage alive. Not only does the money pay the bills, it gives me the freedom to speak honestly about science and culture, instead of being forced to write it as others demand.

 

Please consider donating by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar below.


 

Regular readers can support Behind The Black with a contribution via paypal:

Or with a subscription with regular donations from your Paypal or credit card account:


If Paypal doesn't work for you, you can support Behind The Black directly by sending your donation by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman, to
 
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652

 

You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage. And if you buy the books through the ebookit links, I get a larger cut and I get it sooner.

Rand Paul’s proposed non-binding resolution on the use of drones that the Senate Democrats refuse to bring to a vote.

Read it and I dare you to tell me that the Democrats still believe in civil rights and the Constitution.

Share

7 comments

  • Jim

    Bob, we are on the same side on this, although I would encourage you to think slightly differently about one part.

    Rand Paul was exactly right. And he is, and would have been, consistent on this issue. He cares about the civil rights of American citizens as well as the rule of law. I have little doubt that in the case of Padilla during the last administration he would have been outspoken about denying an American citizen his rights to due process. And when you are consistent, you garner bi-partisan support (see Sen. Wyden’s (D) support of Sen. Paul).

    I have the feeling that if the vote was taken in the Senate, it would gather support from other Democrats other than Wyden. More Democrats than you might believe would agree with Rand Paul on this issue. Alas, so far that is only my opinion because Senator Reid once again does not allow a vote to take place. Regardless, this issue will not go away. Shame on Senator Reid for not allowing a vote on the resoltion. And as Wodun said in a previous post, lets hope Congress keeps up its efforts.

  • Jim

    By the way, the headline over at the Huffington Post is “Drone Stand: 14 Republicans and 1 Democrat.” Maybe they agree with you, Bob, but give them credit…they are calling out their fellow Democrats.

  • jwing

    The typical low information voter won’t care about Obama’s power grab which is similar to FDR’s court packing stunt. The average american idolized FDR as if he were their kindly grandpa. Today, as long as low information voters have their Obama phone, food stamps and a flat screen TV, they would be just a content reclining on a chair of the Titanic. Captain Obama will steer the ship of state clear of that huge berg ahead on the starboard quarter.

  • wodun

    I think you are right that a lot of elected Democrats and the Democrats who do the electing are unhappy with what is going on but I think they overlook it out of party loyalty. It certainly didn’t stop anyone from voting for Obama again.

    It is the very nature of politics where we overlook in our preferred politicians what we despise of the other. Everyone is guilty of it at some point or another.

    The other option people take is two hate both groups in our two party system thinking they are somehow more pure but they cant deny their own human nature, they are just like the rest of us and will exhibit the same behavior noted above in other ways.

  • Jim

    Yes, its why Wyden was the only Democrat to join in with Paul. It was easy not to, and to remain “loyal.” But if Reid had allowed a vote, then they would have had to stand on conscience, the Constitution, and even the next election. I think more would have come out of the woodwork with a vote, and that is probably one of the reasons Reid did not allow it. Shameful.

  • Pzatchok

    So far the WH has not defined the circumstances in which it would use a kill drone.

    Its only said it would not use them on non combatants.

    It has not defined combatants or the situations.

    Nor has it defined why it couldn’t send in the cops or other law enforcement agencies first.

    Its not like they are just going to be flying drones around and mysteriously see someone installing a bomb then positively identify it as a bomb and then shoot a missile at them.

    If they have the knowledge to watch a person, they have the knowledge to use a law enforcement agency to do it.
    And the law enforcement agency will just arrest that person when they get/build the bomb.
    Just like they have been doing for years already.

    If we let them set precedent in using/flying armed drones over the US to watch people inside the US then they will eventually use them to save the lives of police and just missile bad guys who are shooting back at cops.

    The difference between a terrorist and a common criminal as nil unless you have prior knowledge to who the target is. And if you have prior knowledge then just arrest him. Otherwise he has right and those can not be taken away by presidential writ.

    Unless they are planning for America to turn into Iraq and people will be planting IED’s on the sides of the road.
    If that’s their plan then we are screwed. Its sort of like a self fulfilling prophecy.

  • Pzatchok

    Here is a kick in the nads.

    We are over here arguing if we can use armed drones against American Citizens and they announce this move.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/07/lawmaker-bin-laden-spokesman-caught-in-jordan/?test=latestnews

    All the time effort and money to pull this move and none to make sure an Americans rights are protected before assassinating them.

    Lets just call it what it is. assassination.

    Now just how was this buy captured? Jordanian police officers or our special forces.
    Obviously it wasn’t by drone strike.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *