Rand Paul vs. Washington DC on the USA Freedom Act

posted at 5:01 pm on May 31, 2015 by Taylor Millard

Today is an important day for the U.S. Constitution.

The U.S. Senate is expected to start debating around 4 p.m. Eastern this afternoon on whether to pass the USA Freedom Act. It’s not a bad bill, but has major problems.

It still allows for the collection of bulk metadata, just by the phone companies instead of the government. It doesn’t sound bad, but the Justice Department can easily subpoena a corporation for the information under the legal definition of corporate personage. It’s considered the Citizens United definition, but the U.S. Supreme Court has been arguing on whether corporations are people since 1818 and the Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward case.

The bill also extends the Patriot Act another four years. It’s an attempt by the House and Senate to avoid another full re-authorization in June. It slightly makes sense because Congress and the President extended the Patriot Act for four years in 2005 and 2011. There was also a one year extension in 2010. But Josh Withrow over at FreedomWorks points out the four-year extensions are a a problem:

The entire point of a sunset is so that new Congresses are forced to periodically review the effects of a controversial policy, and to make modifications as needed. Given the justly heightened controversy surrounding the surveillance of Americans, a shorter sunset is necessary.

Withrow’s piece looks at other problems with the USA Freedom Act. It’s worth a read.

Kentucky Republican Senator Rand Paul isn’t in favor of the USA Freedom Act and is promising to run out the clock. It’s a big hill to die on, and kudos to Paul for being willing to do it.

It almost seems like he’s opposed by everyone except Oregon Democrat Senator Ron Wyden, but that may not be the case. Utah Republican Mike Lee supports the USA Freedom Act, but joined Paul’s filibuster earlier this month because he’s in favor of amendments to the bill. It’s the exact same reason why Paul filibustered in the first place. He was angry at Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for not wanting any amendments.

Will Paul end up speaking for hours on end again? Maybe, maybe not. It’s possible Paul and Wyden will take the floor and speak for hours on the issue. But Roll Call points out Paul will have multiple opportunities to delay everything:

But without Paul’s consent the programs in question would go dark because McConnell would still have to file a cloture motion to end Paul’s filibuster of the bill itself. And that vote, under the rules, wouldn’t occur until 1 a.m. Tuesday at the earliest.

Under the rules, cloture motions must sit through an intervening day, which would be Monday if McConnell were able to move to cut off debate on a bill on Sunday.

Following that 1 a.m. Tuesday cloture vote, again assuming all possible speed, Paul would be entitled to chew up another hour talking on the floor.

It’s political theater at its finest with the Constitution at stake.

So why is this important? From the Fourth Amendment of the Bill of Rights:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

It’s more than just the Bill of Rights, it’s everyone right to privacy. It’s no one’s business to know who you talk to. The government can solicit a warrant for phone records if they have probable cause to suspect you of criminal activity. But the government has to show warrants to people and hold public hearings.

FISA courts aren’t doing this. They’re all conducted in secret, all in the name of national security. The federal government is allowing itself to run a court without proper representation of those being investigated. Without any publicity of it, especially to the person they may be investigating.

Per the Foreign Intelligence Act of 1978 (emphasis mine):

Whenever a court or other authority is notified pursuant to subsection
(c) or (d), or whenever a motion is made pursuant to subsection (e), or whenever any motion or request is made by an aggrieved person pursuant to any other statute or rule of the United States or any State before any court or other authority of the United States or any State to discover or obtain applications or orders or other materials relating to electronic surveillance or to discover, obtain, or suppress evidence or information obtained or derived from electronic surveillance under this Act, the United States district court or, where the motion is made before another authority, the United States district court in the same district as the authority, shall, notwithstanding any other law, if the Attorney General files an affidavit under oath that disclosure or an adversary hearing would harm the national security of the United States, review in camera and ex parte the application, order, and such other materials relating to the surveillance as may be necessary to determine whether the surveillance of the aggrieved person was lawfully authorized and conducted. In making this determination, the court may disclose to the aggrieved person, under appropriate security procedures and protective orders, portions of the application, order, or other materials relating to the surveillance only where such disclosure is necessary to make an accurate determination of the legality of the surveillance.

All done in the idea of “national security.” This is unconstitutional and needs to stop.

This is why Rand Paul’s actions are so important. If he can stop the Patriot Act, it’s the first time in a long time someone can say, to quote William F. Buckley, they stood athwart history, yelling “Stop!” and actually succeeded.

Taylor Millard is the co-founder of Vigilant Liberty Radio. He hosts Saturday Night Cigar Lounge at 9pE on Saturdays and co-hosts Right War w/Liz Harrison on Wednesday and Thursday at 11pE on FTR Radio.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

It’s all kabuki.

myiq2xu on May 31, 2015 at 5:05 PM

And he’ll be joined by all the big brave freedom-loving conservatives, I hope…and all the Republicans who actually care about going against Democrats…

LawfulGood on May 31, 2015 at 5:11 PM

Paul is right to force a change to this bill. The problem is that we have corrupt politicians afraid to do what’s right because their Handlers will be upset.
The only real solution is lots of GOP Primary Candidates against incumpent Senators and Congressmen. Get the SOB’s out of our government.

SayNo2-O on May 31, 2015 at 5:14 PM

It’s all kabuki.

myiq2xu on May 31, 2015 at 5:05 PM

“Indeed, it is” — for my friend V7

Schadenfreude on May 31, 2015 at 5:17 PM

The Freedom Act? LMAO.

Ayn Rand was a prophet …

ShainS on May 31, 2015 at 5:19 PM

Nice narrative, Taylor, but how many here think that Uncle Sugar doesn’t have a few hundred thousand other ‘laws’ they will use to bend it all around again?

I love the ideals of the constitutionalists, but at my age I’ve come to realize that the Feds are truck, and we are the deer in the headlights.

Good luck to the young. You are going to need it.

Limerick on May 31, 2015 at 5:19 PM

CSPAN reported Rand cut some kind of deal on amendments with Harry Reid on Saturday.

HopeHeFails on May 31, 2015 at 5:25 PM

#standwithrand

JohnGalt23 on May 31, 2015 at 5:26 PM

MAKE

IT

EXPIRE

TX-96 on May 31, 2015 at 5:29 PM

The entire point of a sunset is so that new Congresses are forced to periodically review the effects of a controversial policy, and to make modifications as needed.

…well!…there’s the problem right there!…that is not in the Congress vernacular!

JugEarsButtHurt on May 31, 2015 at 5:32 PM

My post from another thread…

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

~ Benjamin Franklin

kakypat on May 31, 2015 at 5:32 PM

#cantstandrand

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 5:33 PM

The GOP should expel Rand Paul. This lunatic shouldn’t be anywhere near of the White House or the Congress.

Falz on May 31, 2015 at 5:41 PM

The Patriot Act needs to be staked through the heart & its data erased.

After that, we can renegotiate a replacement bill that strikes a better balance between essential liberty and temporary safety.

OhioCoastie on May 31, 2015 at 5:29 PM

Schadenfreude on May 31, 2015 at 5:42 PM

The GOP should expel Rand Paul. This lunatic shouldn’t be anywhere near of the White House or the Congress.

Falz on May 31, 2015 at 5:41 PM

I’m no fan of Paul, but I welcome the debate and anyone that can light a fire under the GOPs ass. If Paul forces the other candidates to take a stand on anything then I applaud him.

Limerick on May 31, 2015 at 5:50 PM

I’m no fan of Paul, but I welcome the debate and anyone that can light a fire under the GOPs ass. If Paul forces the other candidates to take a stand on anything then I applaud him.

Limerick on May 31, 2015 at 5:50 PM

You can always go to the democratic party.National security isn’t something to mae politics.

Falz on May 31, 2015 at 5:55 PM

The GOP should expel Rand Paul. This lunatic shouldn’t be anywhere near of the White House or the Congress.

Falz on May 31, 2015 at 5:41 PM

Big government nutjob alert. I stand with Rand against people like you, who want to live in a totalitarian state.

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 5:56 PM

You can always go to the democratic party.National security isn’t something to mae politics.

Falz on May 31, 2015 at 5:55 PM

You’re the one who is standing with the Democrats, against the Constitution. In case you hadn’t noticed.

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 5:58 PM

It’s all kabuki.

myiq2xu on May 31, 2015 at 5:05 PM

“Indeed, it is” — for my friend V7

Schadenfreude on May 31, 2015 at 5:17 PM

LOL! I think it is, they will just find another way to get what they want, probably through the private sector or another way that won’t need any oversight. I could see the government doing something truly stupid like empowering a foreign entity like the British MI6 with the tools that it has acquired to sniff around everyone hard drive and let them have at it. I wouldn’t have thought they could be that stupid but…

You are the best, Schadenfreude.

V7_Sport on May 31, 2015 at 6:00 PM

The GOP should expel Rand Paul. This lunatic shouldn’t be anywhere near of the White House or the Congress.

Falz on May 31, 2015 at 5:41 PM

And yet he was the most in-demand campaigner for GOP candidates in the 2014 cycle, and a top contender for the GOP nomination.

Hmmmmm.

Perhaps you aren’t as in touch with the mainstream of GOP sentiment as you like to imagine…

JohnGalt23 on May 31, 2015 at 6:04 PM

I am no big fan of Rand Paul but he’s picked the right hill to die on. He’s killing the root of the federal threat. What is the most likely reason John Roberts switched his O’Care ruling on the very last day – because his opinion changed, or because his phone or email secrets could be leaked?

Rix on May 31, 2015 at 6:06 PM

It’s not a bad bill, but has major problems.

Then it’s a bad bill.

No brainer.

Mommys Little Darling on May 31, 2015 at 6:08 PM

Perhaps you aren’t as in touch with the mainstream of GOP sentiment as you like to imagine…

JohnGalt23 on May 31, 2015 at 6:04 PM

You think he’ll still be after the the entire world that the GOP made ISIS?

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 6:08 PM

You can always go to the democratic party.National security isn’t something to mae politics.

Falz on May 31, 2015 at 5:55 PM

You have no room to talk.

Mommys Little Darling on May 31, 2015 at 6:10 PM

You think he’ll still be after the the entire world that the GOP made ISIS?

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 6:08 PM

Questionable grammar aside, I sure as hell don’t remember no ISIS taking no root in Iraq before GWB decided to invade the place in order to make the Middle East safe for democracy…

JohnGalt23 on May 31, 2015 at 6:11 PM

You think he’ll still be after the the entire world that the GOP made ISIS?

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 6:08 PM

It was an ugly turn of phrase, and I don’t like Rand Paul’s foreign policy platform. Obama was one who created ISIS, for his own nefarious reasons (of course, with some help from Graham, McCain and other usual suspects), and that should be message because it’s factually true. But unfortunately, it was Ronald Reagan himself who laid the foundation upon which ISIS is being built today.

Rix on May 31, 2015 at 6:13 PM

My post from another thread…

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

~ Benjamin Franklin

kakypat on May 31, 2015 at 5:32 PM

What essential liberty did you (or anyone else) give up under the Patriot Act?

JannyMae on May 31, 2015 at 6:15 PM

Questionable grammar aside, I sure as hell don’t remember no ISIS taking no root in Iraq before GWB decided to invade the place in order to make the Middle East safe for democracy…

JohnGalt23 on May 31, 2015 at 6:11 PM

ISIS has plenty of root space in Afghanistan before spreading to Iraq after the invasion. It also had money base, thanks to the ongoing war on drugs that made opium growing so profitable.

Rix on May 31, 2015 at 6:16 PM

What essential liberty did you (or anyone else) give up under the Patriot Act?

JannyMae on May 31, 2015 at 6:15 PM

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated. “Effects” covers my emails and the content of my phone calls.

Rix on May 31, 2015 at 6:18 PM

Lets get this straight. The Orwellian named so-called “Freedom Act”, like the Orwellian named so-called “Patriot Act” is the very opposite of its name. No one who is for freedom and/or patriotism could possible be in favor of either one.

VorDaj on May 31, 2015 at 6:18 PM

What essential liberty did you (or anyone else) give up under the Patriot Act?

JannyMae on May 31, 2015 at 6:15 PM

coming from one of the omg-gay-marriage-will-doom-us-all mouthpieces that’s some funny stuff jan

zoicite on May 31, 2015 at 6:21 PM

Lets get this straight. The Orwellian named so-called “Freedom Act”, like the Orwellian named so-called “Patriot Act” is the very opposite of its name. No one who is for freedom and/or patriotism could possible be in favor of either one.

VorDaj on May 31, 2015 at 6:18 PM

Some people here confuse the state’s duty to protect us with the state clerks’ privilege to spread anyone’s ass cheeks at will.

Rix on May 31, 2015 at 6:21 PM

What essential liberty did you (or anyone else) give up under the Patriot Act?

JannyMae on May 31, 2015 at 6:15 PM

The Declaration of Independence speak of liberty, not “essential liberty”. By your way of reasoning if someone robbed you, you would have no complaint whatsoever unless they robbed you of essential money.

VorDaj on May 31, 2015 at 6:22 PM

What essential liberty did you (or anyone else) give up under the Patriot Act?

JannyMae on May 31, 2015 at 6:15 PM

I was once ignorant like you are now.

Edumacation I:

Amendment 4 – Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Edumacation II:

Amendment 5 – Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Edumacation III:

Amendment 6 – Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses. Ratified 12/15/1791.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Read it and learn, oh Padawan.

Mommys Little Darling on May 31, 2015 at 6:29 PM

Questionable grammar aside,

Without a doubt…!!! My apologies…!!!??? You never, with any of your screen names …typo…!!!???? Or leave bad grammar.

I sure as hell don’t remember no ISIS taking no root in Iraq before GWB decided to invade the place in order to make the Middle East safe for democracy…

JohnGalt23 on May 31, 2015 at 6:11 PM

First, grammar … but …

At least you’re one of the few who Paultards won’t beat around the bush and go straight for the GOP throat. I’m not even GOP anymore and I’m still a more staunch supporter. You go with issues. If supporting obama promotes your agenda, you’re on his ass like a big kid on cake.

Thanks for giving him a pass. But first time Paul and Hillary meet, I hope the first question for him is, “Where were you and what were you doing while your party was supporting ISIS.”

McCain thought he could act in a anti-GOP manner that would garner media support too. lol

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 6:30 PM

Thanks for giving him a pass. But first time Paul and Hillary meet, I hope the first question for him is, “Where were you and what were you doing while your party was supporting ISIS.”

McCain thought he could act in a anti-GOP manner that would garner media support too. lol

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 6:30 PM

And Paul will say, “I was openly opposing their support for arming ISIS against Assad, because it was just as stupid as what Hillary did in Libya.”

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 6:39 PM

We have a President who sends drones to kill people, at his discretion, around the world. It is illegal for the IRS to target conservatives, but they do it anyway. It is against the law not to deport illegals but they are allowed to stay. Paul knows that the NSA is going to spy on whoever it wants to, regardless of whether or not the Patriot Act is reinstated or repealed. This is political theatre, nothing more, nothing less.

fight like a girl on May 31, 2015 at 6:41 PM

Paul knows that the NSA is going to spy on whoever it wants to, regardless of whether or not the Patriot Act is reinstated or repealed. This is political theatre, nothing more, nothing less.

fight like a girl on May 31, 2015 at 6:41 PM

And that’s why Paul needs to be President. Only then will all the illegality stop, and our Constitution will regain its meaning.

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 6:46 PM

And Paul will say, “I was openly opposing their support for arming ISIS against Assad, because it was just as stupid as what Hillary did in Libya.”

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 6:39 PM

Good luck with that. The entire GOP was responsible for the “Culture of Corruption” during the investigation of Mark Foley. As we speak they’re tying Dennis Hastert to every serving GOP leader.

It’ll be funny because Paul did this to himself. No different than McCain. Well, I think McCain calculated that the liberal media really did consider him a “Maverick” champion of the center and would treat him differently if he got the nod. Paul flew off the handle with his comments because he was pissed at the comments about himself.

It’ll be the same results.

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 6:51 PM

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 6:30 PM

And Paul will say, “I was openly opposing their support for arming ISIS against Assad, because it was just as stupid as what Hillary did in Libya.”

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 6:39 PM

BTW, what branch of the military did you serve in?

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 6:52 PM

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 6:46 PM

No, that’s why Ted Cruz needs to President. He doesn’t pick and choose what parts of the constitution he wants to defend, like Paul does. Cruz also doesn’t change positions for political gain, like Paul has on too many occasions.

fight like a girl on May 31, 2015 at 6:53 PM

fight like a girl on May 31, 2015 at 6:53 PM

The man I’m currently sending my hawkbucks to.

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 6:56 PM

No, that’s why Ted Cruz needs to President. He doesn’t pick and choose what parts of the constitution he wants to defend, like Paul does. Cruz also doesn’t change positions for political gain, like Paul has on too many occasions.

fight like a girl on May 31, 2015 at 6:53 PM

Are you joking? Ted Cruz has chosen NOT to defend the 4th Amendment today.

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 6:58 PM

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 6:30 PM

At least you’re one of the few who Paultards won’t beat around the bush and go straight for the GOP throat. I’m not even GOP anymore and I’m still a more staunch supporter.

And I’m still GOP. I’m down in the trenches trying to bring victories to this party,the right-wing party. And as such, I recognize that this party owes this nation a big ol’ act of contrition for the Iraqi follies it imposed on our land. And if that means handing the Left a stick with which to beat those who were snookered, so be it.

If supporting obama promotes your agenda, you’re on his ass like a big kid on cake.

Thanks for giving him a pass.

Obama’s time is coming to an end. He is one of the lamer lame-ducks we have seen. Sen Paul’s concern, as should be the concern of any of the GOP’s potential standard bearers, is fighting the next war, not the last war.

And the next war is extremely likely to be with Hillary Clinton.

And if Rand is bearing our my party’s standard, it will be very interesting to see just who the hawks stand with. Very interesting indeed.

But first time Paul and Hillary meet, I hope the first question for him is, “Where were you and what were you doing while your party was supporting ISIS.”

And he’ll say “I was calling them out on the entire Iraqi expedition that they, and you Frau Pantsuit, were foolish enough to vote for and to fund”.

Checkmate…

JohnGalt23 on May 31, 2015 at 6:58 PM

I can’t wait for the massive OPENESS OF GOVERNMENT ACT that will be kept secret from the public.

profitsbeard on May 31, 2015 at 7:00 PM

I am disgusted with people who are reliably blasé over the real anti-American activities that have been going on in the GOP, then spend their days grousing about Rand Paul. Where were you people and your wrath over those Republicans who supported the Syrian intervention, the Libyan intervention, the Arab Spring, the administration’s Egypt policy, etc.? Where was your outrage when it was revealed in the last couple of days that they knew that the Syrian rebels were mostly radicalized, yet proceeded to aid them anyway, and at the same time and up to a year later claimed to the public that these forces were mostly moderate? Where are your calls for an investigation? Where were you to declare that any Republican found involved should go to jail, and any GOP politician who accorded with their position can never be President, in the Republican Party, etc.? Yet you say you are concerned about ISIS. Even now, more than half of you agree with Rand Paul’s actions on the NSA metadata collection, but some of you gratuitously attack him at the very moment when that battle for YOUR freedom and that of your children will be decided.

You do not care about this country or your children. You say you do, but you don’t.

Observation Post on May 31, 2015 at 7:05 PM

Seems Rand Paul is about the only one up on the Hill acting as the plebeian tribune…I wish him luck.

Parts of the Patriot Act (an Orwellian name if ever there was one)make sense, such as not requiring a warrant to intercept foreign cellular or digital communications that happen to be routed thru US space that originated in hot spots like Iraq. But, and it’s a major but, as with all laws passed you have to pass it to find out what’s in it because no one reads the damned things beforehand. There’s a lot in there that is ripe for abuse and the whole thing should be scrapped and redone if needed with a far more limited scope.

Unfortunately people like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz don’t have the same veto power the plebeian tribunes did in Rome. Probably keeps them from being beaten to death by their fellow politicians.

Severian on May 31, 2015 at 7:11 PM

BTW, what branch of the military did you serve in?

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 6:52 PM

I haven’t served. I wasn’t blessed with a well-functioning body. Though, my brother (who agrees with me on foreign policy) served 4 years in the Navy before switching over to be a grunt in the army reserve. He’s an infantry Sergeant now.

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 7:14 PM

And I’m still GOP. I’m down in the trenches trying to bring victories to this party,the right-wing party. And as such, I recognize that this party owes this nation a big ol’ act of contrition for the Iraqi follies it imposed on our land. And if that means handing the Left a stick with which to beat those who were snookered, so be it.

What … GOP victories? pfft You sound like a campaign manager for Renee Ellmers to her constituents.

Your opinion that the war in Iraq was folly is fuel for everything the Donks turn on us. And you’re wrong about the war. But if you’re that in step with Democrats and liberals over the Iraq war, join them and try to make them more drug-freindly and more fiscally responsible. Because except for supporting the Paul family, I don’t see a gigantic amount of GOP support coming from you. You demonize anyone in the GOP that opposes the Paul clan on anything. Not just respectfully oppose, but attack in a manner that helps destroy people. You demonize anyone in the GOP that isn’t lock step with your pro-abortion, pro-gay rights advocacy. Then you whine like a little girl about any appropriate critique of the Pauls until, you end up saying that you agree with them finally.

Obama’s time is coming to an end. He is one of the lamer lame-ducks we have seen. Sen Paul’s concern, as should be the concern of any of the GOP’s potential standard bearers, is fighting the next war, not the last war.

And the next war is extremely likely to be with Hillary Clinton.

And if Rand is bearing our my party’s standard, it will be very interesting to see just who the hawks stand with. Very interesting indeed.

“Our my”, cute. Aren’t you a big advocate of trying to help pass policy and issues in the GOP to garner Independents and even a certain group that makes up less than 2 percent of the entire population with radical concessions? But it’s your party today. You only have critiques about obama where it is in opposition to Paul. To you, the only person in the GOP. obama is more responsible for the current state of ISIS than anyone on the planet and you give him a pass for Paul.

And he’ll say “I was calling them out on the entire Iraqi expedition that they, and you Frau Pantsuit, were foolish enough to vote for and to fund”.

Checkmate…

JohnGalt23 on May 31, 2015 at 6:58 PM

I’m sure John McCain was thinking “checkmate” when the liberal media starting calling him the “Maverick”. Mitt Romney was a clear middle of the road candidate and as respectful in campaigning as they come and Candy Crowley still convinced the world with one question obama and hillary weren’t responsible for Benghazi. Oh, sorry. I forgot. You blamed Bush for that too.

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 7:31 PM

I haven’t served.
TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 7:14 PM

Then never, ever question my dedication to Liberty. Never. You say any fvcking thing you want about my typos or opinion, but you shut your fvcking mouth about my dedication to the Liberty of my fellow Americans.

You understand that?

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 7:33 PM

Then never, ever question my dedication to Liberty. Never. You say any fvcking thing you want about my typos or opinion, but you shut your fvcking mouth about my dedication to the Liberty of my fellow Americans.

You understand that?

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 7:33 PM

I don’t think I said anything about your commitment to liberty.

As far as I can recall while checking back on these threads, it looks like my biggest disagreement with you has been over whether Paul’s attack on his own party’s hawks was warranted or inappropriate.

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 7:43 PM

http://blogs.rollcall.com/wgdb/senate-usa-freedom-act-patriot-act-rand-paul/?dcz=

The Senate voted 77-17, far above the 60-vote threshold to advance the bill. Several more steps are required, however, before a vote on final passage, which wouldn’t happen until Tuesday at 2 a.m. at the earliest in the face of maximum obstruction from Paul.

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 7:56 PM

I don’t think I said anything about your commitment to liberty.

As far as I can recall while checking back on these threads, it looks like my biggest disagreement with you has been over whether Paul’s attack on his own party’s hawks was warranted or inappropriate.

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 7:43 PM

hawkdriver on May 29, 2015 at 7:35 PM

And here is where you prove that you just hate liberty, you disgusting RINO. GTFO of the party. We don’t need or want imperialist neoconservatives like you.

TBSchemer on May 29, 2015 at 10:51 PM

I’m almost more insulted at being called a RINO. You and JohnGalt23 are Republicans In Name Only in the sense that a particular family joined the Republican Party. And that was only because the Libertarian Party never had a chance at the Oval Office.

Anti-War, Anti-Semite, Pro-Drug, Pro-Abortion, Isolationist Libertarians that almost hate the GOP more than they hate liberal Democrats.

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 8:01 PM

I don’t think I said anything about your commitment to liberty.

As far as I can recall while checking back on these threads, it looks like my biggest disagreement with you has been over whether Paul’s attack on his own party’s hawks was warranted or inappropriate.

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 7:43 PM

hawkdriver on May 29, 2015 at 7:35 PM

And here is where you prove that you just hate liberty, you disgusting RINO. GTFO of the party. We don’t need or want imperialist neoconservatives like you.

TBSchemer on May 29, 2015 at 10:51 PM

Sorry. Make more sense like this.

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 8:02 PM

USA Patriot Act, USA Freedom Act.. You gotta love the titles they keep coming up with. Bastards.

DisneyFan on May 31, 2015 at 8:03 PM

As far as I can recall while checking back on these threads, it looks like my biggest disagreement with you has been over whether Paul’s attack on his own party’s hawks was warranted or inappropriate.

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 7:43 PM

The idea that just ignoring them will make them go away is what’s at issue. Islamic terrorists have been at it longer than Bush, longer than the GOP, longer than the USA, longer than the European discovery of North America….
Turning over a oil rich country in the heart of the middle east (the Heartland theory in reverse) is a catastrophy and blaming the GOP because Obama didn’t lift a finger to get a SOFA agreement is stupid. It’s in keeping with other stupidities and pandering that have come from Rand and Ron… and reasonable people can conclude that this is something that disqualifies Rand Paul from assuming higher office.

V7_Sport on May 31, 2015 at 8:04 PM

V7_Sport on May 31, 2015 at 8:04 PM

I’m in the awkward position of finding myself in an exchange where I can’t disagree with a single comment of yours.

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 8:06 PM

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 8:02 PM

Well for that, I apologize, but when you fight the people who are fighting for liberty, how can we tell where you stand?

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 8:07 PM

I’m almost more insulted at being called a RINO. You and JohnGalt23 are Republicans In Name Only in the sense that a particular family joined the Republican Party. And that was only because the Libertarian Party never had a chance at the Oval Office.
Anti-War, Anti-Semite, Pro-Drug, Pro-Abortion, Isolationist Libertarians that almost hate the GOP more than they hate liberal Democrats.
hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 8:01 PM

THANK YOU hawkdriver! Thank you for your service and for saying what I have been saying for a while. The libertarians are as bad as the GOPe. They are not conservatives.

fight like a girl on May 31, 2015 at 8:14 PM

I’m in the awkward position of finding myself in an exchange where I can’t disagree with a single comment of yours.

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 8:06 PM

Just remind yourself that a stopped clock is right twice a day and I’m still the same old bastard I always was and you will be able to persevere. ;-)

V7_Sport on May 31, 2015 at 8:14 PM

V7_Sport on May 31, 2015 at 8:04 PM

Rand Paul isn’t proposing doing nothing. That’s a strawman argument.

The idea that reinvading the Middle East and nation-building will work is what’s at issue. What Bush, Graham, Walker, and Rubio have proposed is like if Reagan had proposed reinvading Vietnam. It’s insane. None of these people belong in the White House.

Paul and Cruz BOTH support a much more rational approach: Encourage the regional powers to step up and take control of their borders. Arm the Kurds. Support them with airstrikes.

These two have an approach to dealing with ISIS that actually makes sense, preserves American lives, and avoids repeating the mistakes made by George W. Bush.

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 8:18 PM

And here I was waiting for all the “Taylor be crazy” comments…

Jazz Shaw on May 31, 2015 at 8:23 PM

Well for that, I apologize, but when you fight the people who are fighting for liberty, how can we tell where you stand?

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 8:07 PM

Then it’s forgotten as quickly. As if never said. My apologies for making an issue of it.

For me, I know the war wasn’t folly. To get to the point where you think it was and support all of this other nonsense, you have to be almost lock-step with the liberal meme. My God, they were bigger supporters of the idea of invading Iraq over the course of the Clinton years than anyone.

It’s not as simple as dismissing the entire war over the false notion of WMDs that people claim … only the Bush Administration was asserting and never found. After the Iran-Iraq War, after Halabja, there was proof to the tune of literally a hundred thousand dead, or more, he had and used Nerve Agents. More than a 10K dead just in one Kurdish City, Halabja. Saddam Hussein was in violation of scores of UN sanctions and violated the boundries of Operation Northern and Southern Watch and fired on our aviators and planes/helicopters.

You can argue whether any of “that” was worth it, but those issues existed. Argue that. You cannot just characterize it with the liberal media meme that is was folly or illegal and only about WMDs that they claim were never found.

I was there. I was with the Kurds. I saw a country vote on a national referendum for their own constitution after living under a despot that terrorized his neighbors.

The war wasn’t folly and it wasn’t what gave rise to ISIS.

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 8:24 PM

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 8:18 PM

Rand Paul isn’t proposing doing nothing. That’s a strawman argument.

Not sure what he is proposing as he tries to be on all sides of the issue…

The idea that reinvading the Middle East and nation-building will work is what’s at issue

Actually I thought it was him blaming the GOP for giving them arms indiscriminately. That was the issue as far as I could tell. It’s up there in the story and everything.

What Bush, Graham, Walker, and Rubio have proposed is like if Reagan had proposed reinvading Vietnam.

Another war we abandoned… Here’s an idea, lets finish what we start. Especially when all the heavy lifting was done and the country was bought and paid for by the sacrifice of the best that this country is still allowed to produce.

None of these people belong in the White House.

Well, I doubt any of them will get there so there is that…

Encourage the regional powers to step up and take control of their borders. Arm the Kurds. Support them with airstrikes.

Encouragement. That ought to stop truck bombs.

V7_Sport on May 31, 2015 at 8:32 PM

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 8:24 PM

I do feel for the Iraqis, and I do think our troops over there were doing their best to save these people. I think it’s a good cause- I supported it for years -but I have since learned that it’s not our place for our government to save the Iraqis, and we’re not very effective at it. It’s not because we’re not strong enough, but because we’re not Iraqis. We are outsiders, and our involvement there has become a recruiting tool for the jihadists.

Even if we assume that the world is a better place without Saddam, Paul was specifically responding to Graham and McCain, who supported giving arms to ISIS in order to topple Assad. Those two, and everyone who supported them on that, are the “Republican hawks” he was talking about. We cannot allow that brand of conservative to dominate the party, or we will end up destabilizing the Middle East even further.

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 9:26 PM

Encouragement. That ought to stop truck bombs.

V7_Sport on May 31, 2015 at 8:32 PM

Think about what happened with Jordan. They were providing limited support, but after their pilot got burned, they committed to the whole package. Diplomacy can get other bordering countries in there doing the job they should be doing to contain and defeat ISIS.

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 9:30 PM

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 9:26 PM

Then fairly, he’d have been more presidential to confine his remarks to them and not give fuel to the fire. People keep blaming Bush. When obama started talking about early timelines, he warned the US and future leaders. Almost point by point, Bush warned specifically about an entity such a s ISIS.

Bush Warned of ISIS like AQ in Iraq if withdrawal occurred too fast.

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 9:37 PM

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 9:30 PM

Think about what happened with Jordan. They were providing limited support, but after their pilot got burned, they committed to the whole package.

Yes they did. For an entire 2 weeks.

Diplomacy can get other bordering countries in there doing the job they should be doing to contain and defeat ISIS.

Bordering countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran? They are already in there doing the job they think they should be doing.

V7_Sport on May 31, 2015 at 9:38 PM

V7_Sport on May 31, 2015 at 9:38 PM

I’m in bizarroland here looking at your comments. WTF did we even disagree on before?

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 9:47 PM

TBSchemer on May 31, 2015 at 7:14 PM

Then never, ever question my dedication to Liberty. Never. You say any fvcking thing you want about my typos or opinion, but you shut your fvcking mouth about my dedication to the Liberty of my fellow Americans.

You understand that?

Then I’ll say it. I noticed that you attacked TBSchemer for questioning your dedication to Liberty, shortly after my post. It’s like my post spooked you, you couldn’t handle the truth and projected your anger over it onto another target.

You claim ISIS is a threat. I gave proof that the DoD, which really means members of the GOP, aided and abetted ISIS. You then proceeded to spend an awful lot of time attacking people more liberty-oriented than you.

You don’t really love this country. In fact, I think a part of you hates it.

Observation Post on May 31, 2015 at 10:28 PM

Observation Post on May 31, 2015 at 10:28 PM

You’d be wrong on nearly every point you made.

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 10:57 PM

PS, I never read your comment above. I looked at it now trying to figure out wtf you were talking about. You think highly of yourself in a creepy kind of way. Your comment “spooked me”?

Didn’t even read it. Sorry.

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 11:12 PM

I’m in bizarroland here looking at your comments. WTF did we even disagree on before?

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 9:47 PM

A joke I made that you thought crossed the line, the lack of patience I showed for the “let it burn” crowd and thinking that the shortest way to power for conservatives is through working to re-take the GOP.
On my end it’s all OK. We are going to probably differ on the details but I suspect the principals are similar even if the strategy isn’t always the same.

V7_Sport on May 31, 2015 at 11:20 PM

V7_Sport on May 31, 2015 at 11:20 PM

I seem to recall now. Along the lines of not really supportive of Conservatism because I was disappointed in the GOP.

If it’s difficult to remember, it’s necessarily remembered as a small thing.

Cheers.

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 11:30 PM

Observation Post on May 31, 2015 at 10:28 PM

You claim ISIS is a threat. I gave proof that the DoD, which really means members of the GOP, aided and abetted ISIS.

1) The DOD does not equal the GOP. They are separate entities.
2) the “proof” that you posted is by “INSURGE INTELLIGENCE[sic], a new crowd-funded investigative journalism project” whose sole author is Nafeez Ahmed. It’s a conspiracy blog created to exonerate muslims by blaming the atrocity dejour on the west and keep Nafeez Ahmed in hummus. Alex Jones would be embarrassed to link to this.
3) The Middle East is predominantly Arab Sunni vs. Persian Shiite. (There is a third category called “victims” which means anyone else.) Giving arms or money to one group isn’t an endorsement of all the members in that group. Trying to supply some Syrian rebels to fight Assad isn’t an endorsement of Isis any more than staying out is an endorsement of Hizbullah.

You don’t really love this country. In fact, I think a part of you hates it.

Because all you need to do to show the love is proclaim your devotion to Rand Paul.

V7_Sport on May 31, 2015 at 11:35 PM

If it’s difficult to remember, it’s necessarily remembered as a small thing.

Cheers.

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 11:30 PM

Cheers- (hope you don’t mind Mexican beer)

V7_Sport on May 31, 2015 at 11:36 PM

Observation Post on May 31, 2015 at 10:28 PM

Here’s a link to Christopher Hitchens spanking Nafeez Ahmed over his previous conspiracy mongering on 9/11, because fire does melt steel.

On reflection and on a rereading of his “book,” I would change my original article and remove the word “risible.” A more apposite term for both the author and his illiterate pages would be “contemptible.”

V7_Sport on May 31, 2015 at 11:47 PM

You can always go to the democratic party.National security isn’t something to mae politics.

Falz on May 31, 2015 at 5:55 PM

You realize Obama and the Dems support the bill he is blocking.

Right?

ChrisL on June 1, 2015 at 12:13 AM

Cheers- (hope you don’t mind Mexican beer)

V7_Sport on May 31, 2015 at 11:36 PM

Dos Xs aqui

hawkdriver on June 1, 2015 at 12:22 AM

Anti-Semite, Pro-Drug, Pro-Abortion, Isolationist Libertarians that almost hate the GOP more than they hate liberal Democrats.

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 8:01 PM

Ayn Rand was Jewish. Pro Drug… nope, freedom to decide. If you had any clue you would know that abortion occupies a major debate in Libertarian circles. Read before you pronounce.

Isolationists, nope… non aggression. Congress is required to declare war, but hasn’t had the balls since WWII. 150,000 soldiers never took off the uniform since then and in each case, Korea, Viet Nam, Afghanistan, Iraq the weasels in blues suits and red ties f’ed it up for our soldiers.

If Congress doesn’t have the cajones to slap their name on a declaration of war and make the rest of us back home pay for it there aught not to be ‘war’, period. No balls, no war.

There is not one single drop of American blood worth all of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, et. al. The residents of those nations have demonstrated that it is not worth it to THEM to defend their nation, so please tell me why should we. If Lindsey and John want to fight I’ll buy the one way tickets.

It’s called the Dept. of Defense for a reason. The Constitution.

old school on June 1, 2015 at 1:52 AM

old school on June 1, 2015 at 1:52 AM

Congress did slap their seal of approval on the Iraq War. Maybe you missed that part.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution

You might want to read up a bit before you lecture me about a war many of us that comment on Hot Air served in.

K?

hawkdriver on June 1, 2015 at 2:43 AM

old school on June 1, 2015 at 1:52 AM

But I really do apologize that you were “back home” and had to “pay for it”.

hawkdriver on June 1, 2015 at 2:48 AM

Big mistake. Some may not live to regret it. Paul has lost my vote, for this and his stupid ISIS comment.

Enigma on June 1, 2015 at 6:10 AM

You can argue whether any of “that” was worth it, but those issues existed. Argue that. You cannot just characterize it with the liberal media meme that is was folly or illegal and only about WMDs that they claim were never found.

I was there. I was with the Kurds. I saw a country vote on a national referendum for their own constitution after living under a despot that terrorized his neighbors.

The war wasn’t folly and it wasn’t what gave rise to ISIS.

hawkdriver on May 31, 2015 at 8:24 PM

Bottom line.
They had an opportunity to break free, and weren’t able to make it work.
Corrupt leaders in Iraq, millenia-old feuds, ignorance, and the existential pain of living in a war zone.
It was worth a try, but the odds were always against succeeding even if NO mistakes were made in the implementation.

PS: the Constitution called it what it was: The Department of War.
Washington knew that the best defense is always a good offense.

The first cabinet, that of George Washington, consisted of only four department heads; those of State, Treasury, War, and the Attorney General. The names are familiar: Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, Henry Knox, and Edmund Randolph held the offices respectively.

The table below lists all departments, the date Congress added them to the Executive branch, and the first president to appoint a secretary.

Department Date President Notes
State July 27, 1789 Washington Originally Foreign Affairs
Treasury September 2, 1789 Washington
Defense August 7, 1789 Washington Originally War Department
Justice September 24, 1789 Washington Originally Office of Attorney General
Navy April 30, 1798 Adams, J. Merged into Defense in 1947
Post Office February 20, 1792 Washington Removed from Cabinet level in 1972
Interior March 3, 1849 Taylor
Agriculture May 15, 1862 Cleveland
Commerce and Labor February 14, 1903 Roosevelt, T. Split into Commerce and Labor in 1913
Commerce March 4, 1913 Wilson Originally Commerce and Labor
Labor March 4, 1913 Wilson Originally Commerce and Labor
Health, Education and Welfare April 11, 1953 Eisenhower Split into Health and Human Services and Education in 1979
Housing and Urban Development September 9, 1965 Johnson, L.
Transportation October 16, 1966 Johnson, L.
Energy August 4, 1977 Carter
Health and Human Services September 27, 1979 Carter Originally Health, Education and Welfare
Education September 27, 1979 Carter Originally Health, Education and Welfare
Veterans Affairs October 25, 1988 Bush, G.H.W.
Homeland Security November 25, 2002 Bush, G.W.

We should have stayed put at four departments.

AesopFan on June 1, 2015 at 1:21 PM

Big mistake. Some may not live to regret it. Paul has lost my vote, for this and his stupid ISIS comment.

Enigma on June 1, 2015 at 6:10 AM

This tells me you were planning on voting for Bush or Walker anyways.

TBSchemer on June 1, 2015 at 1:42 PM

USA Patriot Act, USA Freedom Act.. You gotta love the titles they keep coming up with. Bastards.

DisneyFan on May 31, 2015 at 8:03 PM

The Affordable Care Act. Definitive.

Government’s desire to limit freedom and obtain more power never ends. It seems that there will always be some ‘compelling need’ that judges at SCOTUS will decide trumps the Constitution.

Coming Attractions (offered somewhat in jest, but considering some of what we have previously seen, maybe somewhat serious):

The Handgun Ownership Protection Act - Bans all private ownership of handguns without prior approval by the ATF. Punishment for obtaining a weapon without approval, or for failing to surrender all currently-owned weapons by 1-month deadline, is 60 years to life in federal prison. Requests for ownership approval must be submitted within 2 days after passage of this act, and delivered in person by requestor at Tranquility Base on the lunar surface.

The Free Speech Protection Act - Bans any publication of information not pre-approved by the State Department. Publication of unapproved data in print or electronic form is punishable by death. Requuests for approvals must be submitted 90 days in advance of proposed publication, at the appointments desk of any VA Hospital.

Private Property Protection Act - Allows local, state, and federal governments to seize private property without compensation. By statute, any petitions for redress of grievances under this act must be submitted in person at any US Consulate in Zimbabwe by 8AM the following day after notification of the property seizure.

New Millennium Voting Rights Act - Requires ethnic whites to pay $1000 per election to obtain a voter registration card, and $500 additional fee to enter a polling place. Recorded votes of fee-paying voters must be monitored on video, and published along with the voter’s home address and phone numbers, employer name and address, names and school enrollment of all dependents, and other information deemed relevant by the election judge, within one week following the certification of election results. Other ethnic groups, illegal aliens, and local, state, and federal employees are exempt from the fees and recorded vote data publication requirements.

s1im on June 1, 2015 at 4:13 PM

Congress did slap their seal of approval on the Iraq War. Maybe you missed that part.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution

You might want to read up a bit before you lecture me about a war many of us that comment on Hot Air served in.

K?

hawkdriver on June 1, 2015 at 2:43 AM

Resolution is not the same as a declaration.

You may be familiar with the excise tax on tires (we still have) to help pay for and gather materials for WWII, sugar rationing, gas rationing, steel pennies etc…

There was no material sacrifice at home for the effort the soldiers were making in the Middle East, as was with the prior war. If 1% is willing to put it on the line the other 99% can surely well help out, in other words pay for it.

Your right, I wasn’t in the Middle East. I had a kid there.

old school on June 1, 2015 at 5:32 PM