Lindsey Graham to GOP senators: Funny how you guys didn’t worry about drones under Bush

posted at 4:01 pm on March 7, 2013 by Allahpundit

Via Mediaite, here’s why I said in the McCain post that I didn’t share Mollie Hemingway’s receding cynicism. I trust that Paul would have the same objections to drone policy under a Republican president. I trust that Mike Lee would too. Beyond that, things get iffy. Glenn Greenwald has a point here:

Graham’s the right guy to challenge Paul because he is, in his own way, as nonpartisan on executive counterterrorism power as Paul is. If I understand him correctly, he ends up arguing at the end here that “enemy combatant” status is itself sufficient to justify a drone strike on a U.S. citizen on American soil whether or not he’s carrying out an attack at the time. This is the same guy who once lamented that we couldn’t rein in Koran-burning on grounds that, and I quote, “Free speech is a great idea, but we’re in a war.” This is not a guy who worries overly much about constitutional niceties when it comes to the military doing its job on counterterrorism. It’d be nice, at least, though, if he managed not to distort Paul’s point in the process. Paul’s not worried about Obama targeting noncombatants; what he’s saying is that there should be special protocols when dealing with “enemy combatants” if they’re American citizens and within reach of law enforcement here in the U.S. His point about Jane Fonda being theoretically targeted is that the definition of “enemy combatant” can be murky and potentially easily abused; to this day, the hard evidence that Awlaki was more than a propagandist and actually an operational leader is classified. Paul’s trying to draw at least one bright-line rule to limit the president’s power to unilaterally execute American citizens: In very narrow circumstances — U.S. citizen on U.S. soil who’s not presently engaged in an attack — you’ve got to send in the FBI to try to pick him up, not a Predator armed with Hellfires to take him down. Compared to the amount of anti-drone agitation in wider libertarian circles, Paul’s request here is actually conspicuously modest. He’s not asking for drone attacks in Pakistan and Yemen to end. He’s not even asking, as Graham is quick to note, that Obama quit firing at American-citizen jihadis overseas. He wants some acknowledged limit on executive power and he chose the strongest conceptual ground on which to ask for it.

But look. Graham’s not really worried about Paul’s drone position here. What he’s worried about is a sea change inside the GOP caucus towards the isolationist view of the war on terror. I can imagine the look on his face when he saw Marco Rubio, the great interventionist hope, head to the floor yesterday afternoon to lend Paul a hand. (Rubio’s not going to make it easy for Paul to paint him as the GOP’s next crazed superhawk in 2016.) After 11 years of war it’s doubtless true that isolationism has more fans among Republicans than at any time in the last few decades; to see a member of the Paul family suddenly the party’s new hero must be a nightmare for McCain and Graham. As Ace puts it:

Now it’s possible they’re suspicious of Rand Paul and think he’s carrying water for his father’s Doctrinaire Pacifism but under the false flag of a much more narrow issue on which he has the right; that is, they think he’s trying to move opinion to the Doctrine Pacifist camp in the typical way the Pacifists and anti-American agitators do it, to wit, seizing one one particular grabby issue at a time.

I have to confess I have the same suspicion. I do believe Rand Paul is his father’s son.

So do I, and so I think do lots of mainstream conservatives, which is why Graham’s worries are overblown. The cynicism-inducing question from last night’s Senate insurrection is how many of them mean it and how many of them pitched in simply because it was an irresistible chance to publicly humiliate Obama on a basic constitutional question. The retail politics of it were so winning that I actually thought McCain and Graham might themselves swing by to offer some sort of tepid endorsement of minimal executive accountability. Didn’t happen, but I also don’t think Paul’s stand presages any tidal shift in the Republican caucus. Anyone believe, if O orders a raid on Iran’s reactors tomorrow, the GOP as a body will react with paleocon laments about imperialism and U.S. aggression? Graham’s not really talking to Paul and Mike Lee here (note his persistent backhanded compliments of Paul at the beginning for being a principled libertarian), he’s simply warning the rest that he knows grandstanding when he sees it and is prepared to call them on it if they keep it up.


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

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Lindsey sounds like he’e on his period.

bw222 on March 7, 2013 at 4:10 PM

Hey twinkle toes, It looked to me last night that almost all of those that were speaking are the new breed and came after Bush. Step aside champ.

reddevil on March 7, 2013 at 4:10 PM

Did Bush target U.S. citizens for assassination with drones? If he did, then I take issue with that as well. As far as I’m aware, the outcry from the left during the Bush Administration had to do with things like enhanced interrogation, Gitmo, and warrantless wiretapping(and obviously the Iraq War). We can debate their merits in the War on Terror, but there’s a huge difference between waterboarding KSM for information and killing an American-born 16 year-old with a drone because his dad(who was already dead) was a suspected terrorist.

Doughboy on March 7, 2013 at 4:12 PM

MS.Lindsey and that senile old fool, McCain can hear foot steps behind them… Good….

sandee on March 7, 2013 at 4:12 PM

Graham is making every effort he can to suck the momentum out of the Republicans. Self righteous Republicans are wolves in sheep’s clothing and just can’t get enough of themselves.

Jackalope on March 7, 2013 at 4:12 PM

Speaking of manipulators too

Ms. Lindsey, focus your hypocritical ire at Obama, the former senator and now Lilliputian in Chief.

May he destroy you with what he feeds you.

Schadenfreude on March 7, 2013 at 4:13 PM

Allahpundit, just go join MSNBC already. They were loving on Graham too today.

Last night, Rand Paul ended his filibuster because he had made his much needful point and needed to go pee.

Today, McCain and Graham took off their Depends and crapped all over the Senate floor.

And Allahpundit calls it hors d’oeuvres.

WannabeAnglican on March 7, 2013 at 4:13 PM

Graham needs to learn the first rule of holes!

22044 on March 7, 2013 at 4:14 PM

I just want to know who the F these guys actually think they are. They are sitting up there calling out there own party while they dined with the President. Are they totally oblivious to the politics of last night or do they just think they are so untouchable and not care. I want these guys gone, and I don’t care how we do it. They are so arrogant and idiotic and no the only thing playing on the new is how these idiots called out Paul. What could have been a straight victory has now become the “repubs are infighting because of these idiots. I am so pi$$ed. I had the establishment.

melle1228 on March 7, 2013 at 4:15 PM

These chumps were yukking it up with 0bama while Rand was leading. What jerks.

Jackalope on March 7, 2013 at 4:15 PM

Why can’t it be leagl for Obama kill us with drones, when it’s already leagl for him to kill us with death panels?

Dougger on March 7, 2013 at 4:15 PM

Someone will correct me if I’m wrong, but I never heard that Bush was intent on targeting American citizens on American soil with automated planes.

And why the hell is Graham playing the liberals’ moral-equivalency card anyway? Oh wait, I forgot, he’s a liberal himself.

Aitch748 on March 7, 2013 at 4:15 PM

Hey Sen. Graham, how’s Afghanistan going? Are the lives of soldiers still worth it?

youknowit on March 7, 2013 at 4:15 PM

McCain and Grahamnesty, the male versions of Snowe and Collins…

Gohawgs on March 7, 2013 at 4:15 PM

graham/mccain, may you rot in the same place that drt worm chevz is now!

How much did bho give you graham/mccain, 30 pieces of silver to turn on America?
L

letget on March 7, 2013 at 4:16 PM

I’d add Cruz to the list of Rand and Lee.

IMO Rubio saw the train leaving and decided he better get on it or be left behind.

INC on March 7, 2013 at 4:16 PM

This is the fear of the Tea Party. Period.

This is the fear of the wrench, thrown into the failed Republican dinosaur works.

It’s the fear that their day is over.

May it be so.

OhEssYouCowboys on March 7, 2013 at 4:16 PM

Lindsey Graham to GOP senators: Funny how you guys didn’t worry about drones under Bush

Because Bush used drones much more infrequently than Obama.

Because Bush never made any motions toward using drones domestically.

Because Bush never asserted (or failed to object to) the idea that he could kill a non-combatant American citizen on American soil.

steebo77 on March 7, 2013 at 4:16 PM

Also interesting how demorats had a shiz fit over Bush WIRETAPPING US citizens inside the US, but are perfectly fine with Obama killing them.

Zaggs on March 7, 2013 at 4:16 PM

Seems like since the ol’Maverick and Lindsey(F-SC) have been on a RINO-rage today that they must have been kept out too late last night to get in their nightly 8 hours of snuggling…..not that there is anything wrong with that.

TheAdmiral on March 7, 2013 at 4:17 PM

McCain and Grahamnesty, the male versions of Snowe and Collins…

Gohawgs on March 7, 2013 at 4:15 PM

Except Ms. Lindsey is more feminine than Snowe or Collins….

sandee on March 7, 2013 at 4:17 PM

McCain and Grahamnesty, the male versions of Snowe and Collins…

Gohawgs on March 7, 2013 at 4:15 PM

McCain is the male version of Snowe, while Graham is the female version of Collins.

steebo77 on March 7, 2013 at 4:17 PM

I think your last line nailed it. Their can only be two grandstanders allowed in the party, John McCain and his trusted faithful kemosabe Lindsey Graham.

fourdeucer on March 7, 2013 at 4:18 PM

FU

brewcrew67 on March 7, 2013 at 4:18 PM

melle1228 on March 7, 2013 at 4:15 PM

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/03/stunner-lindsey-graham-organized-gop-dinner-with-obama-last-night-video/

Lindsey spoke with reporters after the dinner.
“So when the president asked to get together a group, I was willing and honored to do that.”

INC on March 7, 2013 at 4:18 PM

Yeah this is what we need to defeat the Dem’s, republican infighting. I wish the old guard would sometimes, just sometimes stop shooting themselves in the foot. Stop giving barky & co. ammo to use against us is that too much to ask? Defending the Constitution is now somehow a bad thing, who knew.

D-fusit on March 7, 2013 at 4:18 PM

They’re against the Death Penalty but for the Drone Penalty.

Hypocrites.

kingsjester on March 7, 2013 at 4:18 PM

First off, I don’t think Rand Paul was a senator when Bush was president. Secondly, Obama can shoot all the drones he wants to at terrorist targets in other countries. What I know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, is that the use of drones of ANY kind over American soil is going to make “1984″ look like kindergarten.

scgas on March 7, 2013 at 4:19 PM

Why can’t it be leagl for Obama kill us with drones, when it’s already leagl for him to kill us with death panels?

Dougger on March 7, 2013 at 4:15 PM

The former is out of hatred. The latter is out of love.

OhEssYouCowboys on March 7, 2013 at 4:19 PM

Why can’t it be legal for Obama kill us with drones, when it’s already legal for him to kill us with death panels?

Dougger on March 7, 2013 at 4:19 PM

Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

Liam on March 7, 2013 at 4:19 PM

Focus on this, Ms. Lindsey.

Plus, mesmerized by Obama-shit, he forgot his own peeve.

Schadenfreude on March 7, 2013 at 4:19 PM

Vichy Republicans.

kingsjester on March 7, 2013 at 4:19 PM

Did Bush target U.S. citizens for assassination with drones?

No, he just detained them indefinitely while denying them their constitutional right to habeas corpus. So much better than blowing them away with a drone. Many “conservatives” were okay with this.

Armin Tamzarian on March 7, 2013 at 4:20 PM

The lousy “moderates” in our party always whine about how the right-wing yahoos cause us to lose the messaging war.

We’re finally driving the narrative, thanks to the right wing of the party (Paul, Cruz, Lee, etc.), and the stupid “moderates” like McCain and Graham are totally effing it up for us.

steebo77 on March 7, 2013 at 4:21 PM

Well, at least the progressive republicans have pretty much drawn giant arrows pointing themselves out now. I count about 35 in the Senate. We’re more screwed than I thought.

tdarrington on March 7, 2013 at 4:21 PM

I am so pissed at these two. Nothing like giving ammunition to the enemy press about one of your own Party. I’m just flabbergasted…

sandee on March 7, 2013 at 4:22 PM

But look. Graham’s not really worried about Paul’s drone position here. What he’s worried about is a sea change inside the GOP caucus towards the isolationist view of the war on terror.

Well that horse has already left the barn. Fat too many people watched as ‘victory’ became Sharia enshrined constitutions in Iraq and Afghanistan, an Afghan government comfortable with saying they will stand with Pakistan in a war with America, and allies like Pakistan that are defacto terror states that includes sheltering Osama Bin Ladin. Throw in the Arab Spring and you have a lot of people wondering what the point of it all was.

sharrukin on March 7, 2013 at 4:22 PM

P.S.

Re: Greenwald’s “Bush cheerleading” bullshit.

I’m a Conservative, and I couldn’t stand either Bush.

The Party abandoned dullards like me, after Ronnie’s second term.

Greenwald, may you join McCain on the dung heap of Republican enablers.

OhEssYouCowboys on March 7, 2013 at 4:23 PM

By the way Brennan was just confirmed…

sandee on March 7, 2013 at 4:23 PM

If I understand him correctly, he ends up arguing at the end here that “enemy combatant” status is itself sufficient to justify a drone strike on a U.S. citizen on American soil whether or not he’s carrying out an attack at the time.

So he has as much disdain for the Constitution as Dear Liar has. wunnerful.

rbj on March 7, 2013 at 4:23 PM

The retail politics of it were so winning that I actually thought McCain and Graham might themselves swing by to offer some sort of tepid endorsement of minimal executive accountability.

Well, that would be smart of them; however, there were busy. Something about Obama and knee pads at the Jefferson Hotel.

youknowit on March 7, 2013 at 4:24 PM

I wanted to smash the tv earlier today. Instead of standing on the floor of the Senate discussing their positions, these weeners were allowing O to wine and dine them! Between the 2 of them, there is not one cojone….grr. (Sorry I am just angry.)

CoffeeLover on March 7, 2013 at 4:24 PM

I am so pissed at these two. Nothing like giving ammunition to the enemy press about one of your own Party. I’m just flabbergasted…

sandee on March 7, 2013 at 4:22 PM

They are fleas in need of flea spray.

May it be so.

OhEssYouCowboys on March 7, 2013 at 4:24 PM

So, as long as Obama screams “Terrorist!” first, it’s ok for him to kill any American, anywhere, anytime. It’s like Jimbo on South Park. “It’s coming right for us!”

tdarrington on March 7, 2013 at 4:24 PM

YOU WILL TAKE THE GOVERNMENT’S POWER TO KILL YOU WITH A DRONE STRIKE ON AMERICAN SOIL AND YOU WILL LEAN TO LIKE IT.

Good Lt on March 7, 2013 at 4:25 PM

For all of the self-identified conservatives; when you go down the Paul libertarian road, you are sometimes going to be at odds with your own tendency for government involvement on issues you hold near and dear to your heart. I have no problem with it as I am a classical liberal (which has nothing to do with a modern liberal) who understands restraint of government is always preferred.

Tater Salad on March 7, 2013 at 4:25 PM

sandee on March 7, 2013 at 4:23 PM

Do you know if Paul voted to confirm?
L

letget on March 7, 2013 at 4:25 PM

No, he just detained them indefinitely while denying them their constitutional right to habeas corpus. So much better than blowing them away with a drone. Many “conservatives” were okay with this.

Armin Tamzarian on March 7, 2013 at 4:20 PM

So killing is better than detaining? I’m ok with both. You give up your right to habeas corpus and due process once you work with our enemies.

thebrokenrattle on March 7, 2013 at 4:25 PM

INC on March 7, 2013 at 4:18 PM

Last night, I was so excited and had renewed hope for the conservative/libertarian coalition. Today, I am so mad, my mama would be appalled by the four letter words coming out of my mouth. I have been emailing and tweeting all day. This has actually got me to get a twitter account just so I could flood Graham and McCain anyway I can..

No, he just detained them indefinitely while denying them their constitutional right to habeas corpus. So much better than blowing them away with a drone. Many “conservatives” were okay with this.

Armin Tamzarian on March 7, 2013 at 4:20 PM

And a lot of us weren’t okay with it, but suspension of rights is still better than suspension of due process and summarily executing someone. Even Padilla was able to sue and eventually get his due process. If you are executed with a drone, there is no due process; you can’t go back and sue in court.

melle1228 on March 7, 2013 at 4:26 PM

Do you know if Paul voted to confirm?

I don’t, but he may have…His beef wasn’t with Brennan so much as with obama on the drone attacks…

sandee on March 7, 2013 at 4:26 PM

Ooops — hit key to fast. They should have been on the floor of Senate yesterday during the Filibuster instead of being sissies today on the floor of Senate.

I would have loved to seen a real discussion between Paul, Rand and Lee vs. McCain and Graham.

CoffeeLover on March 7, 2013 at 4:26 PM

The battle lines are made.

The sides are becoming clear.

Republican Uncivil war time.

portlandon on March 7, 2013 at 4:27 PM

steebo77 on March 7, 2013 at 4:16 PM

Covered it all. Very well stated.

hawkdriver on March 7, 2013 at 4:27 PM

Funny girl.
Funny.

RovesChins on March 7, 2013 at 4:27 PM

For all of the self-identified conservatives; when you go down the Paul libertarian road, you are sometimes going to be at odds with your own tendency for government involvement on issues you hold near and dear to your heart. I have no problem with it as I am a classical liberal (which has nothing to do with a modern liberal) who understands restraint of government is always preferred.

Tater Salad on March 7, 2013 at 4:25 PM

Or it could mean that (gasp) we might learn to compromise and work together.

melle1228 on March 7, 2013 at 4:28 PM

The arrogance and hubris on display with McCain and Graham is just astonishing. They trotted out to dinner with barack last night, while Rand, Cruz, Lee, et al, were fighting the good fight. Simply unbelievable. And as someone upthread said, I think they really do believe themselves untouchable. To date, sadly, they have been.

MustLoveBlogs on March 7, 2013 at 4:28 PM

Even that worthless tool Ann Coulter wrote, in her latest column, that republicans should stop arguing about drones because most Americans don’t understand the issue. In her opinion, in order for Repubs to get elected, they need to get on board with pop culture issues that the low info voters think is like, totally cool. Then repubs will be the cool kids in Washington, making up laws. Because, that is the point of Washington, to churn out laws and regulations, right?

tdarrington on March 7, 2013 at 4:29 PM

But look. Graham’s not really worried about Paul’s drone position here. What he’s worried about is a sea change inside the GOP caucus towards the isolationist view of the war on terror.

Really? You REALLY think Graham is worried that were no longer hawkish on the war in terror because we don’t think the President has the right to assassinate Americans?

Skywise on March 7, 2013 at 4:30 PM

For all of the self-identified conservatives; when you go down the Paul libertarian road, you are sometimes going to be at odds with your own tendency for government involvement on issues you hold near and dear to your heart.

Tater Salad on March 7, 2013 at 4:25 PM

Neither McCain or Graham are conservatives.

For actual conservatives the issue is the need for oversight, both congressional and judicial, authorization for the action in question, action only when domestic agencies cannot act, and executive restraint which is the more difficult part given who occupies the White House.

sharrukin on March 7, 2013 at 4:30 PM

Yo, Lacey Patties Graham,

We know you peed your panties, use some of our ear marked money and buy some that do not leak so much.

k”?

APACHEWHOKNOWS on March 7, 2013 at 4:30 PM

So killing is better than detaining? I’m ok with both. You give up your right to habeas corpus and due process once you work with our enemies.

thebrokenrattle on March 7, 2013 at 4:25 PM

Is that so? In that case, I look forward to the day when pro-life groups are classified as enemies of the state.

And a lot of us weren’t okay with it, but suspension of rights is still better than suspension of due process and summarily executing someone. Even Padilla was able to sue and eventually get his due process. If you are executed with a drone, there is no due process; you can’t go back and sue in court.

melle1228 on March 7, 2013 at 4:26 PM

The point is, neither of them are acceptable. Both of them are violations of constitutional rights. Conservatives should unequivocally oppose this no matter who is President, and yet many of them were willing to look the other way under Bush.

Armin Tamzarian on March 7, 2013 at 4:31 PM

So what’s Bill Ayers’s take on all this?

Seth Halpern on March 7, 2013 at 4:31 PM

Anyone believe, if O orders a raid on Iran’s reactors tomorrow, the GOP as a body will react with paleocon laments about imperialism and U.S. aggression?

Why shouldn’t we lament about imperialism and US aggression?

People like John McCain and Lindsey Graham want the US in perpetual war and they want to create a country that is hollowed out by immigration so that any war that is carried out is also hollow and meaningless.

ninjapirate on March 7, 2013 at 4:31 PM

Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, and even Marco Rubio defeated establishment Republican in their primaries (well Rubio drove Crist out) before winning their seats – Graham is part of that establishment that must be replaced.

People can fret over Ron Paul all they want, but the fact is that the Iraq War’s true legacy is Obama and Obamacare. Thanks for that.

Daemonocracy on March 7, 2013 at 4:31 PM

I can imagine the look on his face when he saw Marco Rubio, the great interventionist hope, head to the floor yesterday afternoon to lend Paul a hand. (Rubio’s not going to make it easy for Paul to paint him as the GOP’s next crazed superhawk in 2016.)

Unlike McCain and Graham, Rubio is not a tone deaf idiot. He saw that this was smart politics, so he jumped on the train to get some Marco Rubio press time. The Godfather/ Jay-Z speech has gotten lots of play, including in the entertainment press. This means that more people understand that Rubio is cool and knows his pop culture. Even superhawk Mark Kirk gave a show of support to Paul.

And yes a good part of this was politics. Lots of people were willing to support Paul in the name of pointing out that Obama is a hypocrite.

Illinidiva on March 7, 2013 at 4:32 PM

This is the fear of the Tea Party. Period.

This is the fear of the wrench, thrown into the failed Republican dinosaur works.

It’s the fear that their day is over.

May it be so.

OhEssYouCowboys on March 7, 2013 at 4:16 PM

Yeah, this. Allah, you’re my favorite writer on the site, but you are overthinking this one waaaaayy too much. The much simpler explanation is that Graham and McCain see their enemies (Tea Party, not Democrats) making a major show of strength, and they’re throwing temper tantrums about it along with the liberals.

No, he just detained them indefinitely while denying them their constitutional right to habeas corpus. So much better than blowing them away with a drone. Many “conservatives” were okay with this.

Armin Tamzarian on March 7, 2013 at 4:20 PM

I was never in favor of indefinite detentions, but I had no problem with the Bush administration spying on foreign enemies and killing foreign terrorists. I don’t consider non-US citizens as having any rights under the constitution.

Furthermore, Bush never proposed that he could KILL people on US soil without any due process.

Doomberg on March 7, 2013 at 4:32 PM

Schadenfreude on March 7, 2013 at 4:19 PM

Wow

fourdeucer on March 7, 2013 at 4:32 PM

I don’t really hate Obama as he was brought up and warped by trash, but McCain and Graham were not. They are hence two if the lowest and most disgusting and most anti-American men to ever walk the planet. The Founding Fathers would piss on them both and then have their dogs all piss on them and that would be for starts.

VorDaj on March 7, 2013 at 4:33 PM

All of the repubs should have been on that Senate floor yesterday. Lee, Rubio and Cruz may have poked their heads in, but the lot of them left Paul alone swinging in the breeze most of the day.

tdarrington on March 7, 2013 at 4:34 PM

So…where is the Drone list? Can we lobby our elected to add folks to the list?

That old parchment doesn’t matter anymore so let’s get this party started. /

LetsBfrank on March 7, 2013 at 4:34 PM

Allahpundit, just go join MSNBC already. They were loving on Graham too today.

Last night, Rand Paul ended his filibuster because he had made his much needful point and needed to go pee.

Today, McCain and Graham took off their Depends and crapped all over the Senate floor.

And Allahpundit calls it hors d’oeuvres.

WannabeAnglican on March 7, 2013 at 4:13 PM

.
You missed the “sh1te brunch” article from Jazz Shaw this morning, I guess.

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/03/07/filibusting/

If you read through the comments, Jazz discovered if you fling poo at the “hero of the moment” you are likely to be the person who ends up wearing most of it.

The two HA RINO editors have not covered themselves in glory today … but I guess Senator Paul forced them to set aside the articles they already had slated for today and they were just felling pi$$y about it.

PolAgnostic on March 7, 2013 at 4:34 PM

Bush didn’t want to nominate someone for CIA Director who wanted to fly drones over the U.S. Graham is starting to sound like Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters.

This is just an attempt of the establishment RINOs to hold onto what little power they have left and to marginalize a real conservative.

cajunpatriot on March 7, 2013 at 4:34 PM

I guess Graham just picks and chooses which Amendments and rights he decides can be violated…good to know Senator!

nextgen_repub on March 7, 2013 at 4:35 PM

Is that so? In that case, I look forward to the day when pro-life groups are classified as enemies of the state

Armin Tamzarian on March 7, 2013 at 4:31 PM

You’re silly. And judging by your choice of target, quite heartless as well.

thebrokenrattle on March 7, 2013 at 4:35 PM

The point is, neither of them are acceptable. Both of them are violations of constitutional rights. Conservatives should unequivocally oppose this no matter who is President, and yet many of them were willing to look the other way under Bush.

Armin Tamzarian on March 7, 2013 at 4:31 PM

LOL– Armin are you Democrat, because I saw a lot of Dems who were against unlethal forms of unconstitutional taking away of rights but now sit silently when Obama adminstration won’t state that they won’t use LETHAL FORCE to take away constitutinal rights; I would think that that would be the bigger hypocrisy. Why aren’t you on Huffington Post and MSNBC?

melle1228 on March 7, 2013 at 4:35 PM

Sen Graham:

I believe we are still at war, probably always will be. But we don’t have to sacrifice the Constitution to fight it. Americans are a very resourceful very loyal people. Try trusting the citizens to deal with the terrorists instead of the government trying to keep us living in fear all the time.

A Citizen

clippermiami on March 7, 2013 at 4:36 PM

Gee, Grahamnesty and McLame should look in the mirror and repeat that line because the last I looked Rand Paul, Ted cruz, Marco Rubio and Mike Lee have been in the senate for only 2 years(Cruz-2 months). And in that short time frame they are shaking things up unlike the repubicans who go along to get along, who are drunk with power.

jaboba on March 7, 2013 at 4:36 PM

No, he just detained them indefinitely while denying them their constitutional right to habeas corpus.

Armin Tamzarian on March 7, 2013 at 4:20 PM

Yaser Hamdi and José Padilla were both eventually afforded due process, unlike the hypothetical domestic victims of drone strikes.

steebo77 on March 7, 2013 at 4:36 PM

Many “conservatives” were okay with this.

Armin Tamzarian on March 7, 2013 at 4:20 PM

And, many weren’t. Many fought and continue to fight the erosion of our rights and freedoms. Many thought and still think “W” was a liberal/moderate in Republican clothing and that “compassionate” conservatism was large government progressivism with a little bitchin’ about the cost.

Many worried about his abuse of executive powers and questioned why he didn’t seal the borders after 9/11. Many spit at the mention of the man, after his presidency set up the election of an unknown redistributionist mirror of a man, a fallacious uniter, a bitter, delusional anti-colonial America punisher.

But. Obama has targeted American citizens in foreign lands with drones. It is a logical question to ask whether or not he would target Americans in America.

Fallon on March 7, 2013 at 4:36 PM

Uh oh, how did I trigger moderation this time?

Fallon on March 7, 2013 at 4:38 PM

Armin Tamzarian

Ridiculous apologist for Christopher Dornan keeps saying ridiculous things.

22044 on March 7, 2013 at 4:38 PM

McCain is worse than “fundamentally flawed” in the political sense. There has always been something very wrong with his character, which is one of extreme “me-first-and-only” self-entitlement. He was wrongfully admitted to the Naval Academy with bad grades ahead of more qualified applicants because his daddy and granddaddy were admirals. Rules that apply to ordinary people don’t apply to him. He thumbed his nose at Annapolis because he couldn’t be kicked out or flunked out, because he was JOHN MCCAIN, son and grandson of ADMIRALS. He ignored orders and crashed planes, because he couldn’t be disciplined as the son and grandson of admirals. He ditched the wife who stood by him, when he wanted a rich blonde chick young enough to be his daughter, who could finance his political ambition. He was caught taking bribes to his wife from the Keating 5, so tried to cover his tracks by imposing the McCain-Feingold nonsense on everyone else (laws only apply to everyone else, not to JOHN MCCAIN).

He entertained a blonde lobbyist in ways that worried his staff, and improperly pressured the FCC for her in exchange for …., because he is JOHN MCCAIN!!!!!!. He yelled obscenities at other senators who questioned ramming his McCain-Kennedy amnesty through the Senate in the dead of night without debate, and screamed he knew more about it than anyone else – because he is JOHN MCCAIN, a legend in his own mind !!!!!! He has had secret no press allowed meetings to praise Mexico as our dearest friend and closest neighbor, calling enforcement of the laws “Rhetoric”.

As president, McCain, like the man he helped elect. Barack Obama, would have tried to rule by fiat and would make Hugo Chavez look like George Washington. Like the Alice in Wonderland Queen of Hearts, if any GOP congresscritter disagreed with him “OFF WITH HER HEAD- I’m JOHN MCCAIN, KING OF THE UNIVERSE!!!”

There has always been something consistently very wrong with McCain’s character. Through it all, this lying unreliable self-aggrandizing megalomaniac poses as a “straight talker”, and is so sick, he probably believes it himself, because he is JOHN MCCAIN !!!!!!!!!!!!, son and grandson of ADMIRALS.

RasThavas on March 7, 2013 at 4:38 PM

Unlike McCain and Graham, Rubio is not a tone deaf idiot. He saw that this was smart politics, so he jumped on the train to get some Marco Rubio press time. The Godfather/ Jay-Z speech has gotten lots of play, including in the entertainment press. This means that more people understand that Rubio is cool and knows his pop culture. Even superhawk Mark Kirk gave a show of support to Paul.

And yes a good part of this was politics. Lots of people were willing to support Paul in the name of pointing out that Obama is a hypocrite.

Illinidiva on March 7, 2013 at 4:32 PM

I give Rubio props, but he was quite wishy washy and indecisive about the whole thing. He had to tweet first and see which way the wind blew. The people who were really there through thick and thin were Lee and Cruz. And you really have to give Wyden props for crossing the aisle and keeping principles no matter which party was filibustering.

melle1228 on March 7, 2013 at 4:38 PM

Allahpundit, just go join MSNBC already. They were loving on Graham too today.

This.

Mr. Arrogant on March 7, 2013 at 4:38 PM

Last night, I was so excited and had renewed hope for the conservative/libertarian coalition….

melle1228 on March 7, 2013 at 4:26 PM

McCain/Graham don’t count as conservatives or libertarians. They’re being moderates standing on the sidelines making noise. Not that they shouldn’t be called out, but I have to wonder if some of their anger today wasn’t because they realized their day of garnering attention is over.

INC on March 7, 2013 at 4:38 PM

Graham’s not really talking to Paul and Mike Lee here (note his persistent backhanded compliments of Paul at the beginning for being a principled libertarian), he’s simply warning the rest that he knows grandstanding when he sees it and is prepared to call them on it if they keep it up.

So, to call out grandstanding he grandstands…himself? Brilliant.

changer1701 on March 7, 2013 at 4:39 PM

GW wasn’t HellFiring any American Citizens (though al-Awlaki certainly deserved his fate), and I’ll wager it wouldn’t have taken him months to come out with a less than definitive statement about lethal drone use against Americans in America.

Another Drew on March 7, 2013 at 4:39 PM

Neither McCain or Graham are conservatives.

For actual conservatives the issue is the need for oversight, both congressional and judicial, authorization for the action in question, action only when domestic agencies cannot act, and executive restraint which is the more difficult part given who occupies the White House.

sharrukin on March 7, 2013 at 4:30 PM

I agree whole-heartedly with you on McCain and Graham, I guess where I was coming from is on issues like gay marriage and abortion. We are fighting those on religious grounds, not Constitutional grounds. The libertarian position is generally for much less government involvement; for gay marriage there is nothing for or against in the Constitution, and abortion needs to be fought on the human rights and scientific front.

Many conservatives approach these on a much more religious/morality angle.

Tater Salad on March 7, 2013 at 4:39 PM

If I understand him correctly, he ends up arguing at the end here that “enemy combatant” status is itself sufficient to justify a drone strike on a U.S. citizen on American soil whether or not he’s carrying out an attack at the time.

It doesn’t worry Graham that some government official here in the U.S. won’t “accidentally” have mistaken YOU for a target??? (or just decide that you’re expendable collateral damage?)

Rovin on March 7, 2013 at 4:39 PM

McCain/Graham don’t count as conservatives or libertarians. They’re being moderates standing on the sidelines making noise. Not that they shouldn’t be called out, but I have to wonder if some of their anger today wasn’t because they realized their day of garnering attention is over.

INC on March 7, 2013 at 4:38 PM

I know they are establishment.. and the establishment is strangling our party…

melle1228 on March 7, 2013 at 4:40 PM

No, he just detained them indefinitely while denying them their constitutional right to habeas corpus. So much better than blowing them away with a drone. Many “conservatives” were okay with this.
Armin Tamzarian on March 7, 2013 at 4:20 PM

As you seem to have forgotten the bulk of these occurred immediately after the United States was attacked by insurgents inside of America and that terrorist cells were still active inside of the US who could’ve easily (and were) plotting far more destructive attacks.

It was, and still is, war. But rather than do the RIGHT thing and invoke the war powers act (because that might offend somebody) we instead embarked in changing the legal fabric of the US… Ergo… We’ve always been at war with Eurasia…

I tacitly supported the Patriot Act explicitly excuse of the sunset provisions… And, lest you forget as well, Nancy Pelosi and the other Democrats promised time and time again to repeal it if they were elected into the house… Which they were in 2006… And then promptly stripped the patriot act of its sunset provisions and renewed it… Forever.

So now we get to have discussions about whether or not the President can kill American citizens in American soil at whim, but that’s ok… Because, y’know… Bush…

Skywise on March 7, 2013 at 4:41 PM

Bush was not using drones to kill American Citizens with no due process having been done nor any imminent danger present. Really Georgia!? REALLY?

astonerii on March 7, 2013 at 4:42 PM

Under Bush and soon after 9/11/01, Progs were worried about wiretapping…now they think we should just drone them..? And Lindsey agrees?

d1carter on March 7, 2013 at 4:42 PM

lindsey,

Plenty of folks thought Hitler was a great community organizer. That was until his tanks rolled over their homes.

You continue to deny that something terrible won’t happen because it’s so horrific it could never happen.

It’s time you left America’s security to the vigilant.

Semper Fi

crash72 on March 7, 2013 at 4:42 PM

63/34 vote on Brennan- not sure which way Paul went..

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-senate-approves-brennan-cia-chief-20130307,0,6735205.story

melle1228 on March 7, 2013 at 4:43 PM

Second look at Senator Mark Sanford?

Just asking.

Resist We Much on March 7, 2013 at 4:44 PM

I guess where I was coming from is on issues like gay marriage and abortion. We are fighting those on religious grounds, not Constitutional grounds. The libertarian position is generally for much less government involvement; for gay marriage there is nothing for or against in the Constitution, and abortion needs to be fought on the human rights and scientific front.

Many conservatives approach these on a much more religious/morality angle.

Tater Salad on March 7, 2013 at 4:39 PM

Libertarians seem a lot more concerned with the social issues than most conservatives are if you take how often they bring them up as any indication.

sharrukin on March 7, 2013 at 4:44 PM

Senators who voted no on Brennan nomination

5

0

By TIM MAK |
3/7/13 4:16 PM EST

The Senate voted, 63-34, Thursday afternoon to approve John Brennan as CIA director.

Of the 34 no votes, 31 were Republicans. Here’s the full list of senators who voted no:

Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.)
John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)
Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)
John Boozman (R-Ark.)
Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.)

Thad Cochran (R-Miss.)
John Cornyn (R-Texas)
Mike Crapo (R-Idaho)
Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.)

Deb Fischer (R-Neb.)
Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
Dean Heller (R-Nev.)
John Hoeven (R-N.D.)
Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)

Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.)
Mike Johanns (R-Neb.)
Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)
Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
Mike Lee (R-Utah)

Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
Jerry Moran (R-Kan.)
Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
Rob Portman (R-Ohio)

Jim Risch (R-Idaho)
Pat Roberts (R-Kan.)
Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
Tim Scott (R-S.C.)
Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.)

Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)
John Thune (R-S.D.)
Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)
Roger Wicker (R-Miss.)

http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-congress/2013/03/senators-who-voted-no-on-brennan-nomination-158790.html

CoffeeLover on March 7, 2013 at 4:44 PM

No, he just detained them indefinitely while denying them their constitutional right to habeas corpus. So much better than blowing them away with a drone. Many “conservatives” were okay with this.

Armin Tamzarian on March 7, 2013 at 4:20 PM

American citizens?

The Bush administration argued against habaeus corpus right concerning Gitmo prisoners, which was overturned.

The Obama administration however has still not allowed them those rights, even though the Supreme Court say have the right to file their grievences.

itsspideyman on March 7, 2013 at 4:44 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4