Perspectives on the Rand Paul Filibuster

I was trying to write an honest-to-goodness analysis of the filibuster (I meant to include links like this, this, this, this, this, and this in my discussion of how even though I don't agree with Rand on a number of things in general, I was overjoyed to see him "hack" politics and bust out of the business-as-usual DC opacity to engage a much wider audience ... When was the last time you watched C-SPAN in delight while social media exploded as a conversation about civil liberties took off?  Be honest.  Never), but in the end, my congenital inability to resist a joke has overpowered me.  You may enjoy a rather more visual explication, gentle reader?

How Twitter, Facebook, and social media responded:

How Rand Paul fans see him and the filibuster:

How John McCain and Lindsey Graham see Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and everybody else who rallied to Rand:

How McCain and Graham see themselves:

How Rand Paul fans see McCain and Graham:

How C-SPAN sees Rand Paul:

How libertarians hope this conversation about civil liberties, limits of executive power, and government overreach turns out:

How Mad Minerva treated the filibuster as it happened:

"Just the Beginning": Rand Paul on His Own Filibuster

The junior senator from Kentucky has a piece in the Washington Post. It's fascinating to see what he has to say as he looks back on that electrifying experience.  I'm working on a post on all that, but for now, do see what Rand Paul has to say for himself.  Goodness know it's more interesting than what John "Wacko Bird" McCain and his minion Lindsey "Senator from McCain" Graham have been (bitterly? even enviously?) squawking.

For our quote of the day, let's take a snippet from the Kentucky senator, shall we?

I hope my efforts help spur a national debate about the limits of executive power and the scope of every American’s natural right to be free. “Due process” is not just a phrase that can be ignored at the whim of the president; it is a right that belongs to every citizen in this great nation. I believe the support I received this past week shows that Americans are looking for someone to really stand up and fight for them. And I’m prepared to do just that.

Tweet of the Day on Raul Paul's Filibuster Against Drones

The spectacle of Rand Paul's filibuster today (still going as I type, with 10 Senators involved now!) has been eating up the news, so I'm not going to babble much about it here other than to say that it's pretty darn awesome.  It was high time somebody poked the establishment in the eye about this.  I think you all might also appreciate this observation that just appeared via Twitter:

That awkward moment when your Nobel Peace Prize-winning President won't promise not to kill US citizens. #StandwithRand
— Jary (@Jary798) March 7, 2013

Oh, heck with it. Here's the beginning of the whole thing: 

Watch More News Videos at ABC | Technology News | Celebrity News

“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, Ky., is an abomination. It is something that should not and cannot be tolerated in our country.”

John Yoo on Drone Policy

More interesting thoughts on the recent drone memo.  Previous thoughts here.

Quote of the Day: Deciding When a Citizen Becomes an Outlaw

A thought about designating targets:

I hear some people talking past each other on Obama's self-declared right to assemble a Kill List of Americans and order their deaths, sans any kind of external check or procedural safeguards.

Charles Krauthammer says that anyone who has taken arms against America has forfeited his right to citizenship.

I agree -- but agreeing that the power to declare such a person as forfeit[ing] his citizenship is a government power is very much not the same as saying that such power resides within a single person, the President, in his sole discretion.

Agreeing that such a power resides somewhere in the federal government is not the same as agreeing it rests within a single fallible man to decide whom to kill and whom to spare. 

Related: the "crazy bastards" standard, Michael Ramirez's latest political cartoon, and Dignified Rant's thoughts.

What Fresh Hell Is This? Let's Throw Due Process Under the Bus

Well, that's just great:

In his last official act of business in 2011, President Barack Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act from his vacation rental in Kailua, Hawaii. In a statement, the president said he did so with reservations about key provisions in the law — including a controversial component that would allow the military to indefinitely detain terror suspects, including American citizens arrested in the United States, without charge.

The legislation has drawn severe criticism from civil liberties groups, many Democrats, along with Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, who called it “a slip into tyranny.” Recently two retired four-star Marine generals called on the president to veto the bill in a New York Times op-ed, deeming it “misguided and unnecessary.”

Doesn't ANYBODY know what due process is?  Read the Fifth Amendment, please.  (You'll remember this related bit with the TSA.)  Between this and SOPA, I am starting off the year in a nasty mood indeed.  Hope and change?  Civil rights?  You're doing it wrong.  Once upon a time, it actually meant something to be a citizen!