Holder v. Paul has finally brought 'Battlefield America' into the spotlight.
Attorney General Eric Holder can imagine a scenario in which it would be constitutional to carry out a drone strike against an American on American soil, he wrote in a letter to Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky.
"It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States," Holder replied in a letter yesterday to Paul's question about whether Obama "has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil, and without trial."
Senator Rand Paul struck back with a nearly 13 hour filibuster on the Senate floor.
Dumb and Dumber, I mean, Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, whined about the filibuster, complaining it was a "disservice" to Americans while ardently defending
the dictator's President Obama's "evasive, and deliberately manipulative" reasoning for his despotic use of drones.
LD Jackson suggests that Dumb and Dumber pushed back because they feel "Rand Paul is asking a question that has no merit and demeans the nature of the United States Senate."
To that, I say hogwash. Blindly trusting that President Obama, or any other President, will do what is right is more than a little naive and/or ignorant.
Not to mention that it's the United States Senate itself, which "demeans" the United States Senate. Talk about a bunch of pathetic immoral clowns (no offense meant to clowns). In fact, Mordor-on-the-Potomac — the whole kit and kaboodle — is nothing but a sad cruel cesspool of a joke.
Case in point: Unable to control his temper (like a spoiled brat), McCain lashed out at Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, and Justin Amash, by calling them "wacko birds."
Um, pot meet kettle.
Dumb and Dumber's major media sycophants didn't hesitate to join the childish tantrum too, with MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell's playground rant about "the black-helicopter crowd" taking the cake in this latest, most ridiculous, D.C. war of hysterics.
Washington, D.C. — quite obviously — is an adult-free zone. Why anyone takes these people seriously is beyond my ability to comprehend.
The War on Terror … or War on Liberty?
Sen. Rand Paul's filibuster … already accomplished something … raising political alarm over the extraordinary breadth of the legal claims that undergird the boundless, 11-plus-year "war on terrorism."
The Kentucky Republican's delaying tactic … called into question aspects of the war on terrorism that a typically bellicose Congress rarely questions, and most often defends, often demagogically so. More astonishingly, Paul's filibuster became such a spectacle that he got hawkish senators to join him.
"When people talk about a 'battlefield America'," Paul said, around hour four, Americans should "realize they're telling you your Bill of Rights don't apply." That is a consequence of the September 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force that did not bound a war against al-Qaida to specific areas of the planet. "We can't have perpetual war. We can't have a war with no temporal limits," Paul said.
The War on Terror is a hoax.
Yeah, that's right. I just said the War on Terror a hoax. And put it on the internet.
Look … If you think the fedgov should go after Islamic terrorist cells in an effort to seek vengeance for 9/11 … I feel your pain, I really do. But none of that matters one bit.
Because almost 12 years later, Iraq and Afghanistan have both been transformed into Islamic regimes, American taxpayers are getting bilked to support the supposed enemy, al Qaeda … all while the remaining vestiges of liberty have been/are being systematically snuffed out in America.
So nevermind the folly of exporting American-style democracy to the Middle East (which is a leftwing/progressive scheme to begin with) and whatever else, let's focus (briefly) on what the War on Terror hath wrought right here at home in America.
- The plain truth about the PATRIOT Act is that it's unconstitutional. Period. Go ahead and argue for its "wonderfulness" if you must, but IF the Constitution is the law of the land, then (do the right thing) act accordingly and amend it.
- The Department of
FatherlandHomeland Security, with its "badges and procedures, ritual humiliations of grandmothers and children at the hands of people who would melt at the sight of an actual terrorist," is eerily reminiscent of the communist states we were warned about during the Red Scare (which is basically as "anti-American" as it gets). And we're less free, significantly poorer, and not a lick "safer" because of it.
- The TSA is as ridiculous and unnecessary as it is disgusting and abusive.
- The fedgov now collects more data on the average American than the Stasi did on East Germans, and they have every intention to spy on you even more.
- The War on Terror is a corporatist boondoggle — exactly as that "anti-American" commie bastard Dwight D. Eisenhower warned.
- The supposed war against "terrorists" was (like magic!) quickly twisted around into a war on the American people. (Talk about a crisis that wasn't allowed to go to waste.)
- Take the quiz: Are You a Terrorist? It's easy to find out! (The answer btw, is 'Yes, you are most undeniably a terrorist.'
- The War on Terror has transformed the "land of the free" into an "anti-American gestapo police state.
It should be clear to anyone by now that the War on Terror is, in reality, a War on American Liberty.
No truer statement has been made than Randolph Bourne's "War is the health of the state." War aggrandizes the state in all its despotic glory. People who normally ignore the state and/or otherwise seek to limit its powers, suddenly exchange their individualist nature for the collective "herd-machinery" of war. Formerly unheard of political powers and spending bills become not only acceptable, but cheered. "Licensed immorality" engulfs society and culture. Ronald Reagan's dictum that "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help,'" magically transforms into "The nine most wonderful words …"
Government — "Our Leaders" — will "keep us safe."
Yeah, right. The same bunch of morons who managed to destroy domestic life will magically make the right choices when it comes to foreign policy (and monkeys might fly out of my butt).
Ye shall know them by their fruits. — Matthew 7:16
The 9/11 terrorist attack wasn't the result of a lack of government power, nor the consequence of (too much) liberty. Yet the "solutions" that followed this horrendous attack, cheered on by tens of millions of Americans, was to increase government power and attack personal liberty? Really? And a handful of Americans still support this, um, war?
Now before you go getting your panties in a bunch, calling me "anti-American" for opposing this so-called War on Terror, let's be clear about one thing: The people who brought you No Child Left Behind, the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit, TARP, stimulus, more stimulus, and ObamaCare, just to name a few of their incomprehensibly insane ideas, are the same people who gave you the War on Terror.
Yes, the same cretins who've buried your children and grandchildren under $222 trillion of debt, are also the same politicians and bureaucrats who failed you miserably on September 11, 2001. They deserved scorn and ridicule for their failure, not exaltation. They deserved to be stripped of their power, not given even more. Yet, despite of decade after decade of bald-faced lies and utter incompetence, the American people chose to support and give them more power, even as they fundamentally transformed our way of life (as losers in war do) by crushing our freedoms.
If this is what it means to be "pro-war," you can definitely count me out. All that's left is to repeat the immortal words of Samuel Adams: "Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."
Don't tell me (or anyone else for that matter) that I'm "anti-American" for refusing to support (or even believe) the criminals and clowns that represent Washington, D.C. And let me remind you, that America was founded not by citizens who supported their government and its military, but by folks who literally waged war against their government (and King George III was a piker compared to the Federal Leviathan we have now). The American tradition is dissent, not obedience. The Second Amendment wasn't written in regards to deer hunting, it was written for McCain and Lindsey Graham … (of course I advocate nothing of the sort).
Let me take it even a step further … The DOD doesn't exist in an alternate universe, detached from the rest of Leviathan's machinery. Like the FDA and SEC, the DOD is just another massive Big Government bureaucracy, hopelessly infested with power-hungry statists. The purpose of the DOD isn't to defend your liberty, but to maintain the Ruling Class' power. Foreign policy is just policy, nothing more. It is every bit as open for argument and dissent as, say, ObamaCare is. Furthermore, any other employee of the state, those who carry out foreign policy are fair targets of ridicule and disdain.
Oh, and let's not forget what the "father of the Constitution" said:
In time of actual war, great discretionary powers are constantly given to the Executive Magistrate. Constant apprehension of War, has the same tendency to render the head too large for the body. A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence agst. foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people. — James Madison, Speech before Constitutional Convention, June 29, 1787
But then again, what the hell did that dirty radical leftwing hippie peacenik know … right?
It's time to end this War on Liberty, it's gone on far too long. Maybe it'd be different if retribution for the attack had been sought, but since that isn't what happened, nor what is happening, what "should be" doesn't justify the war at all.