Which Side Is More Hypocritical On Drones?

A case of situational outrage for both parties

A senator launches a filibuster of a CIA director nominee to protest the president's drone policy. Specifically the president's refusal to rule out use of drones domestically. Now imagine if the president was George W. Bush. Democratic senators would have been crying bloody murder over the administration's actions.

But this time it's a Democratic president in office, Barack Obama. And the senator leading the filibuster again CIA director nominee John Brennan is a Republican, Rand Paul of Kentucky. Are Senate Democrats being rankly hypocritical by allowing the administration to essentially say "trust us" on domestic drone strikes - something they would never had stood for during George W. Bush's presidency?

The Washington Post's "Right Turn" blogger Jennifer Rubin thinks so. "Where, for goodness' sake, are the liberal civil libertarians?" Rubin wrote hours into Paul's filibuster. "Where, for that matter, are the mainstream media and the liberal punditocracy that would be calling for impeachment about now if a Republican president had done all this?"

But Senate Republicans aren't being any less consistent. "Where are the Republicans (who would filibuster Chuck Hagel, but only for show, and only briefly)?" she wrote. Paul's filibuster has "exposed the rank hypocrisy that has infected the left and the right."

Paul commandeered the Senate on Wednesday with an old-fashioned filibuster focused on what he called the dangers of drone strikes against Americans inside the U.S., seizing a high profile opportunity to derail the Senate's progress on the White House's nominee to head the CIA.

Paul and his colleagues have seized on a letter from Attorney General Eric Holder in which Holder said in an extreme situation, the executive branch reserves the right to take lethal action against Americans on American soil. Paul, reading Holder's response as a justification for the potential use of lethal drone strikes inside the U.S., said he would hold up Senate progress on Brennan to give a defense of American civil liberties.

"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," Paul said. "It is something that should not and cannot be tolerated in our country. I don't rise to oppose John Brennan's nomination simply for the person. I rise today for the principle."

Many reactions were predictable according to party. Former Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), who recently left office to head the conservative Heritage Foundation, lent his support to the filibuster efforts of GOP Sens. Paul, Ted Cruz (Texas), Jerry Moran (Kan.) and Mike Lee (Utah).

"We should all thank @SenRandPaul @tedcruz @JerryMoran @SenMikeLee for standing up for the Constitution and due process," tweeted DeMint (@JimDeMint).

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is trying to force a vote on Mr. Brennan. Senate Democrats believe they have enough support to overcome the 60-vote hurdle needed to bring Brennan's nomination up for a vote.

Via The Washington Post, and Politix reporting.

Which side is more hypocritcal on drones and civil liberties?

[jessejaymes]

I find it hypocritical that we're asked to waste our time defining which party is more hypocritical on a single issue when any rational person would tell you that both parties are hypocrites on EVERY issue.

[Knightkore]

Thank you.....my thoughts exactly.....

[riggers]

I concur!

[MongoAPillager]

i would like to argue your point,but really can,t find a foothold.. but neither party wants drones to go away,they have wayyy too much potential for sheep control

[martydotcom]

@MongoAPillager Help!!!!!! Help!!!!! the paranoids are after me

[stepped_in_it]

@MongoAPillager Until these drones are completely automated, a human "joysticks" to it's target and fires the missile. Unless the military has trained crazy "joystick" jockeys most military would refuse to attack their homeland and their own people.
With that said, jess is right. BOTH sides are un electable and BOTH sides need to be sent home, permanently. There's no defense for either party here as both parties have an agenda and that agenda is not for you OR good for you!
RE-ELECT NOBODY 2014/2016

[Quantummist]

How does Team Obama justify killing him?

The answer Gibbs gave is chilling:

ADAMSON:...It's an American citizen that is being targeted without due process, without trial. And, he's underage. He's a minor.

GIBBS: I would suggest that you should have a far more responsible father if they are truly concerned about the well being of their children. I don't think becoming an al Qaeda jihadist terrorist is the best way to go about doing your business.

[harold_lloyd]

Right now, drones are just another excuse for two factions to do battle.

Drones are a new technology, and it will take a while to understand the implications of that new technology and find a good way to keep it under control.

Truth is, I'm not as worried about Holders' drones as I am about the drones in the hands of the Weekly World News or Fox. Or my weird neighbor....

[frigginhell]

And yet if there are a group of nutcases in Wyoming living out in the woods and plotting to blow up a government building because they're "outraged by the injustice and socialist slant of the president" I hope like hell they get their compound bombed by drones and treated like the terrorists they are. Terrorist vs Patriot is not just something that's open to a persons opinion. When you're plotting the overthrow of our government because you don't like who got elected and you're planning violence on citizens of the United States to further your own agenda then drone strke you to hell. Why should one law enforcements life be wasted trying to get the rats out of their holes?

[harold_lloyd]

@frigginhell
The Constitution forbids such action without due process. At a mimum that would mean by order of a judge, but I'd consider that to be an insufficient safeguard. I'd rather see a grand jury convened to decide.

[frigginhell]

@harold_lloyd If warrants are signed and they go into standoff mode then send in the drones. You think I'm trying to get around due process? No. I'm suggesting an alternative to sending in law enforcement agents in a situation where they put their lives at risk by going to what could well be a booby trapped area that's been scoped out by a paramilitary anti-government faction. You can get the warrant. Attempt to serve it. If they don't want to come quietly and without resistance then drone them. Why should one single person die because they're paranoid and plotting something.

[Concerned_Cit]

Get rid of the drone programs. It is a disaster for all Americans, as it's a tool waiting for a power hungry ruler to oversee and misuse. Hmmmmm

[PoliticalSpice]

The House of Repressentatives controls spending. They could do that. They like both the program, that they can use it to bash Obama.

[MongoAPillager]

@PoliticalSpice they could but they won,t,this is giving the powers that be a a weapon of subjugation like Hitler or Stalin could only dream of ...of course both parties are working on the same goals...

[PoliticalSpice]

@MongoAPillager That is my point. They have the powers to Bush. He went as far as was politically feasible. He laid the ground work, created the legal and began the technical infastructure.

Now obama is completing that task. If a dem is elected the right will continue thinking it is about liberals imposing fascism. If by some mircle the repubs wake up and put forward a rational program/ candidate anf that candidate gets elected, dems will beleive the repubs are imposing fascism.

People on this site think fascism must be politically conservative or politically liberal. That is inaccurate. Fascism can be excersized by either side. It can have either liberal or conservative policies. It is a system people associate with Nazism, but it has little to do with Nazism. It is being slowly rolled out here, and it will be unique to American soceity once firmly established. It won't look like Germany under Hitler. It will look American. Under fascism elections were held, there was a judiciary and a legislature. In Italy the press was only occasionally censored. Other political parties were tolerated.

[Fishbone345]

@PoliticalSpice Very well said.

[MongoAPillager]

@PoliticalSpice thats a lot for an ole hillbilly to assimilate,but i think you might be on the right track

[jessejaymes]

"Paul and his colleagues have seized on a letter from Attorney General Eric Holder in which Holder said in an extreme situation, the executive branch reserves the right to take lethal action against Americans on American soil. Paul, reading Holder's response as a justification for the potential use of lethal drone strikes inside the U.S., said he would hold up Senate progress on Brennan to give a defense of American civil liberties."

Eric Holder should be removed from office for that statement alone.

[captchaos69]

You are absoulutely correct, that statement and giving arms to Mexican drug gangs.

[Fishbone345]

We can't remove him. Its racist!!

[PoliticalSpice]

You know Democrats were not particularly strong in defense of civil liberties under Bush so to call them hypocrites for supporting policies that began under Bush without protest by either side is silly. The authority to use u.s. forces against civilians began under Bush. The Patriot Act was adopted under Bush. Both democrats and republics supported it. Republicans most loudly. Now obama is doing it. No surprize. The house controls spending. Why not cut off funds for all drone progrsms.

[dances-weebles]

is that anything like a 'professional orgasm'?

[AceLuby]

Dog and pony show... they just expect people to not remember that far back. Truth is that the same liberal groups protesting Bush are also protesting Obama and are getting about the same news coverage, little to none.

[bsking]

Yeah the focus is a really which side is more hypocritical we could go on for ever with that 1 . the real meat in this story is that a Kentucky senator seems to be the only 1 concerned when the nominee for the CIA and a sitting Attorney General will not come out and officially State that the government of the United States will not use drones or any other form of military force to kill United States citizens at home ever. that's the tragedy this administration thinks that I miss so fired from a homeland security operated drone into American household in "enter your cityname here" , America... is constitutional. this administration has proven over and over again its willingness to attack its own people. this administration is arrogant belligerent corrupt and an enemy of the Constitution and the majority of the American people.

[PoliticalSpice]

The policies you blame this administration for were adopted under the prior administration, when it said military force could be used for vibilian arrest.

[drpeeper]

@PoliticalSpice So the "Hope & Change" thing was a ruse eh? LOL

[PoliticalSpice]

@drpeeper more troll like twisting of words from you? How did @PNWest put it? Bzzzz.....

[bsking]

@PoliticalSpice now you know Obama and holder have a different twist on everything. they are clearly aiming to use drone technology to target American citizens by intercepting code words from cell phone Communications and specifically will profile people in areas that are not politically in line with their ideology. this technology will be able to determine if the person is armed, which is the legal right in this country, and then they will make a determination as to the threat level of that armed person and the likelihood of extermination.

..... that is leaps and bounds from what did George Bush enacted and you know it.

[PNWest]

@bsking Why doesn't he just figure out where you and Neo live by way of your IP addresses and drone you tonight?

[Ryuo]

The worst aspect is a President who reserves the right to kill Americans on American soil, in secret, and without oversight. We're in Nixon/LBJ territory here.

[greenslime300]

Worse than Nixon/LBJ. Moving closer to Stalin/Pol Pot territory. Just imagine what would happen if those men had drones at their disposals.

[SomethinsFishy]

What's this about launching drone strikes on U.S. soil? I support them fully on foreign battlefields, but when it comes to US soil, there's too much chance of "collateral damage" here due to the highly densely populated urban areas of the USA. Not only that, if someone is here then it means we can lay our hands on them, arrest them, and try them on whatever charge they are wanted. That's something that's no so easily managed on foreign soil.

[jessejaymes]

I have a real hard time believing that any administration can come right out and say there is any circumstance that drones will be used within the borders of the USA to kill US citizens. They won't do a damn thing to stop Mexicans from flooding across the border but they will kill our own citizens. What's wrong with this picture? I submit EVERYTHING.

[AlexMIA]

I don't care which side is in favor of it! Use all the drones you want to take out confirmed enemies abroad, but not a single one in the US! Besides that, who decides which American is an enemy and why? Is the percieved "right wing nut" that really hasn't done anything wrong the enemy while the left is in power? Or maybe it's the percieved "left wing wacko" that hasn't done anything wrong that gets bombed while the right is in power? If I consider the way Waco was handled wrong, this ranks many times worse. I applaude anyone against it, right or left.

[Fishbone345]

"Besides that, who decides which American is an enemy and why?"
You'll find the answers you seek written in the Patriot Act and NDAA 12.

[Yank]

I have seen many on the right support Obama's use of drones, and I have some on the left condemn his use of drones. What I have seen is that the large group on the left, who called Bush a war criminal, got suddenly quite after Obama took office and escalated Bush’s policies. I did also notice a near total lack of media coverage of those on the left who did condemn his continuation and expansion of the Bush policies.

[Fishbone345]

"I did also notice a near total lack of media coverage of those on the left who did condemn his continuation and expansion of the Bush policies."
Here's the difference. During the "W" administration we were called "UnPatriotic". Now we're just called "Racists".

[BossTweed]

Duh! It's 2013 Washington. Lower your standards and your expectations to address today's dismal reality.

[Ryuo]

Indeed. I miss the old Washington, when by drones, they meant the Civil Service.

[BossTweed]

@Ryuo ..........Oh they still fit that bill but are publ empl are small D drones. The DC drones all got the day off today ....it snowed 2" and the powers to be decided that the delicate flowers couldn't handle the commute. yet another play day at tax slave expense...whoppee. It's GREAT to be a Bureaucrat!!!

[miketost]

So if the sh-t hits the fan its just one more obstacle to over come.The taliban has done pretty good in Afghanistan have they not?Think people what is coming We are free people for now but you are willing to give that up to the king.---- the king.

[Fishbone345]

You know what one action will welcome the age of a Tyrant Government the most?
Apathy.

[Thunderchicken]

I have no problem using drones in a theatre of war but this really bothers me;

"Holder said in an extreme situation, the executive branch reserves the right to take lethal action against Americans on American soil."

[commonsense51]

They are both hypocritical but one side has common sense. That would be the GOP.

[GuyFawkes]

These are smaller heli-drones.
I wonder how long it will be before somebody shoots one down with a hunting rifle?
A good shot with a .30-06 and its junk.

[miketost]

The first drone has already been shot down(Yes in the north not the south but in Pennsylvania)and guess what? With a shotgun . Look it up on you tube.

[ErnestPayne]

The latest "whiz bang" that is going to win wars with no sacrifice of man power. Of course both sides are in favour. A cheap and easy fix to all americas problems. Until the "other side" gets them. I expect the Mexican or Columbian drug lords will be among the first with Iranians not far behind.

[Dan_Tien]

"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," Paul said.

But not if they are shot by human agents in their home on Ruby Ridge, Idaho or Waco, Texas? Only if they are shot by remote control flying machines?

Law enforcement has had remote control tracked robots armed with shotguns for years. Where was the moral outrage over those?

[CommonSense]

I missed the part where Rand Paul endorsed the shootings at Ruby Ridge or Waco.

[Dan_Tien]

@CommonSense He didn't endorse them, but he is making a distinction based on the weapon, not the policy.

[CommonSense]

@Dan_Tien
So what do you think he should do? Do you think he should be talking about Ruby Ridge and Waco during the Filibuster?
Maybe he will. Wait and see.

[Dan_Tien]

@CommonSense I think he may as well stand at the low tide mark and try to hold back the waves as to try to stand against the advance of technology. But does the 2nd Amendment allow citizens to own armed drones?

[CommonSense]

@Dan_Tien
No just like the 1st doesn't protect your right to scream fire in a theatre that isn't on fire.
I'm not against the advance of technology. I'm for due process. Drones are fine when there's an immanent terrorist threat and apprehension of the suspect isn't feasible. And if there's any doubts about the honesty of the officials afterwards there should be an investigation and anyone involved in ordering drone misuse should go to prison for murder if it turns out apprehension really was feasible.