Holy batcrap...what is Rand Paul talking about?

such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil,

Pakistan is US. Soil? Who knew!

Rand Paul. Super Genius.

I'm reminded of when Wile E. Coyote deployed the ACME radio-controlled explosive rockets against the Roadrunner and they kept coming back at him and blowing up in his face.

I'm reminded of when Wile E. Coyote

Compared to Rand Paul - Wile E. Coyote is a rocket scientist!

This moron fell out of the "stoopid" tree and hit every branch of dumb ass on the way down!

Ky. pastor wants snakes confiscated in Tenn. Published - Feb 13 2013 03:29PM CST Associated Press LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) —

Pastor Jamie Coots insists he wasn't trying to wriggle out of anything or rattle anyone's cage when he drove five snakes through Tennessee. He just wanted to get the serpents to church in Kentucky.

Coots handles snakes as part of worship services at Full Gospel Tabernacle in Jesus Name Church in Middlesboro. In this case, the five snakes confiscated last month by Tennessee wildlife officials were bought in Alabama for $800 and intended for use at the religious service.

Now, in addition to fighting a police citation, Coots wants the state to return the three rattlesnakes and two copperheads he purchased in Eastaboga, Ala., along with the boxes used to transport the venomous creatures.

Rand Paul better intervene......This kook wants his rattlesnakes and copperheads returned in time for Church service!

Off topic, I would like to Thank Mayor Corey Booker for standing up with outrage in the brutal beating of a boy in Newark. They have arrested the young men and I hope they throw the book at them. Thank you Corey.

Paul said he's willing to hold Brennan's nomination until he receives sufficient answers to two letters of inquiry he sent to Brennan regarding the use of drones.

That may take awhile. First, you have to understand what you are asking. We have seen how the younger Paul operates during the Hilary Clinton/Benghazi hearing. Not exactly a sharp one there.

Well.....................Kiss my grits and make me smile.

Rand Paul, representing one of the most Bass-Ackwards States in the country, ( I know cuz I have lots of relatives there), wants answers about drones? Have any drone strikes happened in the US?

What are YOU worried about Mr. Paul?

Kentucky, is that the state where if a man and woman decide to get a divorce, they are still brother and sister? I can imagine the voters that picked Rand Paul to be a little less then proficient in critical thinking?

Fuzzy44 & Johntho, being a Resident of KY, I could also say a few Unflattering Comments about Michigan (johntho) & whereever Fuzzy44 resides, but i'll Refrain. Each State has there share of Idiots, so don't associate KY, with being Exclusive to this type of Behavior!

Capeche!!!!!!

Unfortunately here in KY, we're stuck with Sen. Paul for at least 4 more years. My hope is the Idiot Thinks he's Presidential material & decides Not to run again for Senator & chooses to run a TeaPotty Presidential Campaign. After the ClownCar Comedy Tour of last years Republican Primarys, 2016 should be a Doozy!

I'ma hopeing that Maybe, just Maybe, Leader Reid has finally grown a Set & will Shut this TeaPotty Idiocy Down, once & for All!

You Betcha!

Occupy SoggyBottom!

Gee Rick, didn't mean it personally, know what I mean? I actually heard that on my CB radio, as I ditty bopped across Tn on 40. Load of dog food, had to be there on time or my dispatcher would be in real trouble, know what I mean?

Rand Paul must be what John Engler was to us. Hoped he would run for president, I would have even voted for him just to get him the hell out of Michigan. ( - ;

Actually the whole brother /sister still being related after Divorce is an Alabubber thing . Just saying .

"But Reid's office will not honor the hold. Reid also refused to honor holds on Chuck Hagel's nomination to be defense secretary."

I hope that the Democrats recognize that the favor will be returned when the Republicans take control of the Senate in the future.

Rand Paul is out of his mind.

I think it's a legitimate question, so why doesn't the nominee answer the question?

Bev said,

"Rand Paul is out of his mind."

Bev, with you being a low information voter you are not qualified to make that statement!!

Good for Senator Reid; don't honor the "holds" these wing-nut senators place for no good reason except to delay, deny and obstruct. The GOPTPers should have spent their time asking their questions of Mr. Brennan during the nomination hearing instead of giving grandstanding, accusatory speeches, they would have the answers they pretend to seek. Nah, they'd just think up more outrageous questions and accusations. What a bunch of irresponsible, ignorant fools the GOP has in their caucus.

MaxMoocher, why didn't he ask the question during the hearing instead of preaching?

Very Well Mr. Reid, You want to ignore the rules of historical precedent,so be it, You have the power, for now, but in so doing, You have now established a new precedent, where the Party in power can do pretty much as it pleases, make up rules as it pleases, ignore rules as it pleases, and with the next election only a very short 21 months away, imagine the possibilities if you should lose, especially You Mr. Reid, what if, just as an example, a Republican controlled Senate wants to go back and investigate What Your Mafia Boss meant when he was caught on an FBI tape bragging about having a ,"Clean Face" in his pocket,(that was YOU he was talking about, in case you forgot), or, just exactly how have You been able to amass such wealth since then?(That's a good question for You and Your Family Too Ms. Pelosi), Inquiring minds want to know, and thanks to You,Mr.Reid, They may get a chance. What's that You say? Statutes of Limitations? Silly boy! Now Who is it that makes up those rules for Congress? Oh yes, That's right, CONGRESS!, or at least WHOEVER it is that's in charge of Congress at that time, according to YOUR new rules, right Mr. Reid? The Ethics Committee and Special Prosecuters will be having a field day!,(Mr. Menendez, sorry for you Bud, Pedophiles do not do extremely well in prison, enjoy the cover provided by Your Democratic, Marxist-Socialist-Progressive Colleagues while You can), Yup, these new rules from the radicals could be very interesting indeed.

Good for you Harry. Give them hell and don't honor any of the NUT job holds!!!

@J.D.Still

Reid isn't ignoring "the rules of historical precedent." Did you not read the article or research the Senate rules online? If you had, you may have noticed that the Senate majority leader is under no obligation to honor a request for a hold, and if you look into the history of its usage, you might notice that many a majority leader before Reid, regardless of party, has received and ignored requests for holds in the past.

Before you get all up in arms, I'm not defending Reid, nor am I speaking to anything else you mentioned in your post, just pointing out a pretty basic fact you seem to have missed or possibly blithely ignored.

@Jody, Iowa

You make a very good point. If Mr. Paul was so concerned about having his questions answered, why DIDN'T he ask them during the hearing??? Political grandstanding indeed...

Bet you wasn't so worried about George W. Bush and his side kick decided that torture was just fine. Was you now. Be honest, er, republican never mind.

SteveR- well said but look at imbeciles like "sane" who are all for anything that blocks the President's proposals or appointments. The far right have become like small children who stamp their feet and hold their breath to get their way. They can hold their breath forever - might be a good idea!

Why doesn't Rand Paul read the information everyone has been provided in regards to the use of drones against Americans for his answer. By the way, if we were going to use drones on American soil don't we all think that Christopher Dorner, the murderer gone wild guy, would have been the recipient of a drone up his ass? And, there was overwhelming evidence on that dude to warrant a drone spreading his bad ass self all over Southern Cali.

This is just another attempt by Rand Paul to be relevant and to test the waters for a possible run in 2016. Sorry, Rand, we didn't want your crack pot father and we sure as hell don't want you, or the sweaty ass water boy!

or the sweaty ass water boy!

Careful AG,

I called Marco a "water boy" on a previous thread and boy howdy did it ever set the uptight righties follicles on fire...

The POUTRAGE crowd was putting in some serious O/T!

"F" em, if they can't take a joke! lol

HaHa! Funny you should say that, I was thinking it when I typed it that it may get a response! I am sure they called you the worst kind of racist! Isn't it racist in itself to hone in on "water boy" being a racist comment? I think they call that hypocritical?

Come on, Republicans, I know you don't want to admit it, but your boy sucked the big one last night! The water thing nearly had me falling off the couch when I saw him thinking about it and then doing it! Classic!

I am sure they called you the worst kind of racist!

Yup!

But it was the usual right wing loons who walk around with a perpetual "wedgie", so no biggie!

The water thing nearly had me falling off the couch when I saw him thinking about it and then doing it

The way Marco was stammering and a sweating before making the water grab, you would think he was rolling on "E"! lol

*glow sticks* anyone?

You need to have proper hydration If you want to be a Senator!

Signed,

THE Water Boy

I wonder if the against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil statement was Paul's or the reporter's error. Or if it was an error at all. From what I understand the bone of contention appears to be strikes against US citizens in foreign countries.

The question of drone usage is legitimate. I do not believe the nomination/ confirmation process is the appropriate forum to have that discussion, however.

AlaskaGirl,

What a shocking and tragic story the whole Christopher Dorner affair has been. It has received massive media coverage down here, both in print and on screen. There are so many facets to the story, the fallout is going to be far-reaching. A drone strike certainly seems appealing but at times there were hostages involved, and a lot of close-in engagement by law enforcement personnel that would have posed an unacceptable risk of collateral damage. Dispatching a drone against someone, such as the in the case of Dorner, is tantamount to an execution. Overwhelming evidence is determined in a court of law and an execution should never be ordered without a proper trial. When armed law enforcement confront a suspect the intent is to capture, not kill. There is no chance of surrendering to a drone.

Mark in SoCal, blah, blah, blahblah, blah. Big words for you there, execution, proper trial, blah, blah, blah, and court. This may be an execution in your eyes, but somebody that kills four people because his pantie's are in a bunch and wants to kill more, is already beyond the shadow of a doubt guilty. I trust the government a little more then you, I guess. I don't think they are going to start popping innocent people just because they disagree with it. Its almost as bad as calling a blob of cells a baby.

Johntho,

Pardon my usage of the language to express my thoughts on this matter - I think I put forth a fairly rational argument. You are welcome to disagree, I'd be happy to answer you but you didn't give me much to respond to.

Most of what I wrote shows a lack of respect, right Mark. You are saying its is not ok for our government to make a decision on what is right and what is wrong to protect us. I don't respect your opinion at all, Drones used for surveillance on our borders, armed if necessary, may be a thing you need to get used too. Mark there are people out there that will kill you, good thing is you won't hear the bang. These time's call for a lot of things to be necessary, that are not necessarily pretty. But Necessary. You see we are on the opposite end of the spectrum, I think we should protect as America as best we can, and you believe we shouldn't.

Johntho,

Thanks.

Peter Jennings made a statement on a newscast shortly after 9/11 that struck me at the time, and has not lost its power. He said "the very thing that makes us great makes us vulnerable."

My post above was strictly theoretical, obviously, a drone was not launched against Christopher Dorner. But AlaskaGirl's statement got me thinking, and some of those thoughts made it into my post. It is indeed a dangerous world and there are people who want to kill you and me. But could Americans rest easy knowing their government could order a drone, or some other remote, impersonal, fatal strike on an individual, on American soil, without a trial and conviction? Are we willing to significantly compromise the very core of our American values - the things that make us truly great - in order to provide an illusion of safety? And I say illusion, all sides have killing technology.

I believe protecting America involves a lot more than just hardware, economic and social factors weigh heavily into our safety. We can not betray who we are.

Situations such as the Dorner thing tend to create more questions than solutions. I certainly don't have the answers. Just sad, and thinking. There was something odd about this one that I just can't put my finger on.

Mark, you may not even see this, but I do want you to know that I always respect your posts. They are always thoughtful and without rancor. My comments in regards to Christopher Dorner( I agree, this is a very troubling issue, to say the least) and drones were really tongue-in-cheek. For the most part(just being honest) I would not have condoned a drone attack on him or anyone else in this country. We have laws and a justice system that handles these issues. I do however part company with anyone who believes that drone attacks against American citizens on foreign soil during a war, believed to have become enemies of the state, and are participating in attacks against our country, is wrong. My opinion is if an American is doing these things against his own country, then he is no longer an American citizen, but an enemy engaged in the war against our country, a treasonous person, and he/she gets what is deserved.As I've stated many times before, I would rather drones than thousands of boots on the ground being blown up and riddled with bullets. To me, all bets were off after Sept. 11th. Yesterday's rules of engagement don't seem to apply to today's modern world.

I agree that we cannot betray who we are, but if we don't keep up with our enemies, we will suffer the consequences. I would rather our moral fabric be frayed a bit in order to keep this country safe, and to keep our military personnel safe, as they are truly the ones fighting the battle every single day while people like you and I are sitting in a chair tapping out comments on our keyboards.

"Mark there are people out there that will kill you, good thing is you won't hear the bang. These time's call for a lot of things to be necessary, that are not necessarily pretty. But Necessary. You see we are on the opposite end of the spectrum, I think we should protect as America as best we can, and you believe we shouldn't."

Funny how this sounds exactly like the Bush Administration before Iraq. We need to do this and if you don't agree well you are not American or don't want to protect America from WMD's! You are not at all concerned about the misuse of these drones by the government? They have misused every other authority they have granted themselves, Bush and Obama alike. Do you think these drones will really stop anyone from killing you?

I don't see what is so hard for Brennan to answer the question. Seems like it'd be a simple "No I don't support that".

"I do however part company with anyone who believes that drone attacks against American citizens on foreign soil during a war, believed to have become enemies of the state, and are participating in attacks against our country, is wrong."

My only concern with this AG is the "believed". That is a very loose and potentially abused justification to kill someone. I think it should have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, as our justice system does.

"My opinion is if an American is doing these things against his own country, then he is no longer an American citizen, but an enemy engaged in the war against our country, a treasonous person, and he/she gets what is deserved."

Couldn't agree more, but it has to be proven.

"Believed" is my word. I don't "believe" that the Defense Dept. goes on belief before they use a drone. They have stated that their decision to strike is based on the best intel that they receive and evidence gathering.

AlaskaGirl,

Had a couple of minutes so I thought I'd check back here, and much to my pleasure read your response. Thanks! I certainly did recognize the tongue-in-cheek aspect of what you posted, but it set me thinking anyway. Believe me, just about everyone in SoCal was at the do-whatever-it-takes-to-stop-this-guy point this past weekend.

I tend to agree about hitting combatants on foreign soil, regardless of citizenship. The difficulty I see in those instances are the ramifications in regards to the country in which the target is located. Tough diplomacy. Just think about how we might react to a foreign assassination on US soil, were the instrument was a missile, drone, or some other remotely controlled weapon.

Mark, I think I understand what you are saying. I guess that's why neither of us is in the pentagon! Well, at least I don't think you are! I know I'm not! LOL

The difference I see is that we are engaged in a declared war on foreign soil. There is no war on our soil, so unless a country declares war on us and invades our country, I would expect us to react and act accordingly should some country send a missile or drone our way, and then use the excuse that they were killing a "bad" guy. At the end of the day, we(the public) are not privy to everything that goes on in our country or in regards to what is going on in other countries, so we never really know everything in order to really form an informed response. It would be fascinating to be on the inside, wouldn't it?!

Hey, hope to see you tomorrow for Friday cocktails on First Read!

eric - wow! The words ignorant moron being posted by you is laughable. Let's see - pot calling the kettle black! You would have to stretch to even reach an IQ of 60! But go ahead - keep posting your nonsense. You're almost good for a laugh - if you weren't so pitifully stupid!

@ Eric

I'm only guessing that the 1976 is the year of birth. If that's the case you actually missed the lsd that wasn't tainted

SeekingSanity

what about you!. most of what you post has no substance but full of personal attacks.

@eric,

America, let's not forget about Iraq, Bush and his inability to be a leader caused the damage, dismemberment and deaths of untold thousands.

@Bali Bob......

I'll see eric-###s statement about Benghazi and Sec Clinton.....and raise him to Iraq and Sec Rice and that entire group of unindicted war criminals!

Speaking of Iraq and Bush.......A reminder to all that Rachel Maddow is presenting an extremely interesting documentary on Monday night of next week on MSNBC. This documentary is ALL about Iraq and the WMD story that was presented to America. I for one am extremely interested in this. I believe it will be very enlightening.

I wonder if any Republicons will dare to watch, or does the truth hurt too much?

I wonder if any Republicons will dare to watch, or does the truth hurt too much?

They will say they won't/didn't watch, but they will. They will be in full revolt by Tuesday morning, if not before......Yup, the truth hurts...they can't handle the truth.

Hubris: The Selling of the Iraq War.......watch it on Monday evening with Rachel Maddow!

Well let me be the first, not only did I watch Rubio I liked what he had to say. Now having said that, I will admit that it was very uncomfortable to watch him struggle with cotton mouth.

I am glad he took that drink, the man was parched.

Liars and dopers get cotton mouth, which one is Rubio?

i don't watch or listen to rachel, chris, rush, sean, piers, or any other party hacks. i won't miss anything

Lil Marco, with the water, reminded me of Lyin Ryan during the VP debate......Ryan kept drinking, sipping, drinking, non-stop, water, water.....

Lying makes you real thirsty!

Have a great evening everyone.

Johntho,

You can also get cotton mouth when your nervous, curtain medications will also have the same effect. Not to surprising that you went with liars and dopers. Headline, Rubio slip in a sip of water, oh the horror of it.

Grown a@@ adults acting like children.

johntho and chilled

I thought the vine required adults to be register, have to be at least 13 years
of age. YOu two are in violation.

Picking on a guy because he was thirsty, Really.

Both of you FS.

valwayne - we survived Bush. We will survive and prosper under President Obama's leadership - as we are now doing. So, whiner and sore loser - go pout somewhere else!

Ahhhh , Bless Your Heart .