.

Sen. Graham You're Droning On and On...Rand Paul Was Right

Senator Rand Paul's courage under fire, even from moderates in our own party, sets the example for how to reclaim constitutional government, in stark contrast to Lindsey Graham.

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Or so that's what our founders once declared.

With that responsibility, the Federal government has a duty to protect its citizens, providing certain unalienable rights.

So, it's no surprise then that Republicans and Democrats alike joined with Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) Wednesday supporting his filibuster to protest John Brennan's CIA nomination and bring attention to Obama's overreach of the Federal government with the U.S. drone program (of which Brennan was one of the chief architects).

Only Eric Holder could put it so eloquently, “President Barack Obama has the legal authority to unleash deadly force, such as drone strikes, against Americans on U.S. soil without first putting them on trial...”

But not every senator praised Paul's leadership. South Carolina's very own U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham, chided Paul for his outspoken leadership. Instead, he patronized Paul as “ridiculous.”

Graham was against Brennan before the filibuster, calling him “arrogant, kind of a bit shifty.” But a few hours after dinner with the president, Graham was suddenly in favor of him, determining that the nomination was instead a referendum on the drone program.

As South Carolinians, we are no stranger to controversy. Our politics are notorious for it, for better or worse. Oftentimes for worse.

In a state with many active duty military and veterans alike, we pride ourselves in our patriotism of God and country. But what's the price for freedom? Is opposing a drone program against U.S. Citizens on U.S. soil really opposing our military? I would argue opposing "judge, jury and executioner" style drone strikes is standing up for the constitutionally guaranteed principles our military has been protecting for more than 200 years. Would someone please clarify that for Lindsey Graham?

This is a fundamental issue about our individual liberties. It's about the federal government, our constitution. It's about the ever growing arm of the federal government, encroaching into our lives.

So as Graham continues rehabilitating his liberal voting record by appearing on Meet the Press and FOX News every week, remember, he is a republican senator who voted for liberal supreme court justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

When he says, “Foreign relations are not a Democrat or Republican issue, but an American issue,” but still votes to send foreign aid to countries that teach their children to hate our culture and freedom, burn the American flag and support terrorism. We should realize that more and more Americans want to shield their sons and daughters from harms way when they go to war.

When he campaigns against a republican senator in a general election, take Democrat Joe Manchin for instance, we will continue to hurt the Republican Party.

As he works in a “bipartisan” manner on a "grand bargain" that includes higher taxes, and when he decides that he “will violate the tax pledge” for the “good of the country,” he waters down our fiscal conservative values in the process.

So as we continue to dismember the republican party, when we should be coming together on the basic tenets of individual liberty and the free-market, remember this:

Paul's filibuster is the reason the president no longer has the authority to use an unmanned aerial craft to kill an American on U.S. soil “who was not engaged in combat.”

Thank you Rand Paul and true conservatives like Ted Cruz, Mike Lee and others who backed him, for your leadership on a fundamental issue facing our nation, and that is our right to individual freedom and liberty.

Your courage under fire, even from moderates in your own party, sets the example for how to reclaim constitutional government and God given rights for every American.

This opinion piece originally ran on The Hill, read it here: http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/homeland-security/287033-rand-paul-was-right-to-highlight-us-drone-policy#ixzz2Mz0SzYlV

Nancy Mace is a Republican consultant in the Lowcountry.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

reg March 16, 2013 at 04:34 AM
apparently, ducktor, there's a significant portion of the 5th you're overlooking: "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;" Please refresh yourself on the terms of the policy I mentioned earlier: "Any operation of the sort discussed here would be conducted in a foreign country against a senior operational leader of al-Qa’ida or its associated forces who poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States." Do you see the correlation there, ducktor? apparently not (is your bill too big that it blocks your vision?) Even if you are a citizen of the United States (say, by birth here), **if you are overseas in a foreign nation ... *and* are a senior leader of the al-Qa'ida terrorist organization ... *and* are posing imminent threat of violent attack against the U.S.* ... then guess what? *Damn straight the US military can take you down.* Whoa! What are you trying to project yourself to be, ducktor? Some dope-smokin', flower-kissin', tie-dye hippie or something? "Oooooh! Just because he's a senior official in a terrorist group who is currently in a foreign country and is about to attack the United States, like, that doesn't mean, you know, like, he's not a coooool doooood or nothin', right? Let's just, you know, wait for him to surrender and we can, like, arrest the guy. Peace, man. Love. Sollllllid!!!!"
Robert Kelly March 16, 2013 at 12:19 PM
I think it is clear from American law and practice that drones are not, and will not be, used to kill Americans in America. Abroad? I have to admit I am curious about the reaction from the drone killings, with respect to the killings by Navy Seals and by traditional American military force. I am not defending the use of drones to kill wedding parties and civilian homes with family members, but neither do I advocate traditional military force to do that either. We already lost the moral high ground when we invaded the middle east countries under false pretenses and under no threat to the United States. Why are the defenders of our foreign war making now suddenly concerned about the tools we are using? Is it because it appears to be cheating to use remote control planes which do not endanger American pilots? Is it like a football team using a radio to tell the quarterback which receiver is open downfield? Is it a sense of "fair play" that it is all right to invade a country, but you at least have to put the lives of your soldiers and pilots on the line? Would some supporter of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, who opposes drones, please explain the core issue to me. I'm serious. I am not looking for a bunch of pacifists to explain this with appropriate sarcasm; I really want a sincere war hawk to answer this.
Dr. John March 16, 2013 at 01:24 PM
Robert, I will leave your question to Reg. He is the biggest proponent of using drones and warfare in the Middle East so far on this post.
Robert Kelly March 16, 2013 at 09:11 PM
Dr. J, I am not looking for a supporter of drones, I am looking for a supporter of the wars in the middle east who is also critical of the administration's use of drones. It's OK to bomb and kill in person, but drones are crossing the line? I would like to understand the logic. So far, no explanations.
Ambassador March 17, 2013 at 11:42 AM
I guess we will agree to disagree. As far as I am concerned, the simple and brief reply from this garbage we call the AG took more than a few hours to put together. Why was it so hard to immediately say no in very clear and substantial words instead of this nanny panny answer. What did they have to think about? I do not trust our federal government--when the AG and his boss--these pieces of garbage-- open their mouths you know they are lying----THAT IS THE REASON WHY I WOULD BE QUESTIONING THIS DRONE SUBJECT. This federal government scares the hell out of me. You have something to say about my comments? You scare me. Stay the hell out of my backyard--I cannot stand the smell.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »