Rand Paul 2009: Do we really want to be the party that backs Dick Cheney on torture?

posted at 4:41 pm on April 10, 2014 by Allahpundit

Do we? This is why I posted that HuffPo poll yesterday. Fully 68 percent of Americans, including large majorities of both parties, think torturing terrorists who may have information on future attacks is always, sometimes, or rarely justified — and that’s when you refer to it explicitly as “torture” instead of the kinder/gentler “enhanced interrogation.” Only 22 percent oppose it categorically. It’s strange to think of a boutique issue like this becoming a major subplot in the next election, especially so far removed from 9/11 and waterboarding by the CIA that happened in the years after, but given the polling it’ll be hard for Paul’s rivals to resist. They’re going to use this as a litmus test for him on national defense: Would President Rand refuse to use every tool in his arsenal to thwart an impending attack, knowing that a majority of the public supports torture? (Can’t wait to hear what President Hillary would do!)

This new scooplet comes, by the way, from David Corn at Mother Jones, the same reporter at the same lefty magazine who dug up what Paul said about Dick Cheney changing his mind on Iraq after working for Halliburton. Maybe he’s doing his own deep-dive through the YouTube archives, mining Paul’s chats with people like Alex Jones and Antiwar.com to find shiny nuggets illuminating the libertarian/conservative divide, or maybe he’s being pointed in the right direction by “helpful” GOP competitors. Either way, Grade-A sh*t-stirring. Corn’s summary of Paul’s position as stated at the time across several interviews:

Paul was firmly in the camp of those who consider the harsh interrogations used by the CIA as torture. He believed that Bush and Cheney were responsible for such torture. He came across as sympathetic to the notion that they could be prosecuted for having ordered torture, and he certainly indicated he thought Cheney was bad for the GOP. But Paul, who as a senator has demanded investigations of US drone policy and NSA surveillance and called for Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to be tried for perjury, would not go so far as to endorse an investigation or prosecution of Bush and Cheney. (He was running in a Republican primary at the time.)

Paul’s comments about the Bush-Cheney administration’s use of torture—like his assertion that Cheney helped launch the Iraq war to profit Halliburton—show that the confrontation between these two camps in the GOP is not merely a good-faith policy dispute over the appropriate deployment of military power overseas. This is a clash of cultures in which motives are deeply questioned. It seems Paul views the most recent vice president of his own party as a treasonous war-profiteer who gave a green light to criminal activity. Cheney considers Paul and his ilk as ill-informed and dangerous isolationists. With a wide-open campaign for the Republican presidential nomination nearing, this uncivil civil war can be expected to grow in ferocity, as the GOP continues to wrestle with its past and future.

Follow the link for Paul’s exact quotes. Here’s what he said about Cheney:

If Republicans want Dick Cheney to be sort of the representative of our party, still defending torture, which is not something America stands for, it’s just another way to shrink the Republican Party.

A Paul fan argued in Headlines that Rand, ironically, isn’t any different on this point from his old friend John McCain, who did okay in the 2008 primaries despite opposing Bush and Cheney on torture. Right, but as a war hero and superhawk, Maverick was bulletproof on the question of whether he’d be aggressive enough as C-in-C. If anything, his problem was the opposite: Various Democrats accused him of having too much of a “temper” to be a responsible leader on foreign policy, which was their way of insinuating that the old man was crazy and might fire off some nukes in a fit of pique. It’s a textbook only-Nixon-can-go-to-China situation. If you’re famously hawkish, you can afford a high-profile dovish position or two. If, like Rand, you’re suspected of being dovish in the first place, not so much. (Which, of course, is why he’s been busy lately flirting with hawks on Russia and defense spending.)

But I digress. Do Republicans “want Dick Cheney to be sort of the representative of our party” on this issue, at least? I’ve always been fascinated by the enduring respect Cheney seems to enjoy from most grassroots conservatives even though they’re critical of so many features of the Bush years, from spending to “compassionate conservatism” to nation-building to the NSA. My sense is that it’s because he seems to care not at all that the left detests him. He believes in an aggressive foreign policy, up to and including enhanced interrogation if it’ll help defuse a threat, and that won’t change no matter how many op-ed pages screech at him over it. That’s another reason why torture is one of the more interesting subplots of the next primaries: It’ll determine whether tea partiers, who made a senator of Paul four years ago, really trust him or Cheney more on defense issues. Rand’s entire 2016 bet is that the grassroots has tilted libertarian across the board. Has it?


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

I blame Aqua Buddha

tominsd on April 10, 2014 at 4:42 PM

I blame Bishop.

ToddPA on April 10, 2014 at 4:44 PM

Well Rand, it should all depend on what Mrs. Garcia and her nephew think about it, now shouldn’t it?

VorDaj on April 10, 2014 at 4:44 PM

I disagree with Rand on this … but for me it’s a minor point. The fact that he’s NOT a GOP Establishment Ayatollah puts him the front-runner seat with Ted Cruz for me. I’ll support either.

I’d rather have a POTUS who’s said things I disagree with – than have one that said everything I wanted to hear but failed to execute on it when in office.

The last 50 (with the exception of Reagan) had been one long nightmare of lies from the Ayatollahs. I’ll vote Democrat if the GOP noms an Ayatollah.

HondaV65 on April 10, 2014 at 4:46 PM

I don’t care so long as he’s not torturing me.

Akzed on April 10, 2014 at 4:47 PM

And rand was right then, right now. Regardless how you think the issue polls (including “rarely justified” as torture supporters), Cheney and the whole era of enhanced interrogations/patriot act/big government conservationism is absolutely toxic to the party and its future.

LittleNicky on April 10, 2014 at 4:48 PM

Like father like son.

idesign on April 10, 2014 at 4:49 PM

The ‘Rand Opposition Team’ strikes.

Round 1

jake-the-goose on April 10, 2014 at 4:49 PM

It’ll determine whether tea partiers, who made a senator of Paul four years ago, really trust him or Cheney more on defense issues.

What a choice! Cheney is not to be trusted on defense issues as he has way too much of a propensity to want to throw away American lives, limbs, crotches {IED’s] and treasure for nothing, but Rand Paul is not to be trusted on American sovereignty issues as he wants to turn them over to Mrs. Garcia and her nephew.

VorDaj on April 10, 2014 at 4:51 PM

HondaV65 on April 10, 2014 at 4:46 PM

Yeah, I’d much prefer to support someone who has some respect for the constitutional limitations of govenment and the rule of law. I can live with differences on a policy issue.

butch on April 10, 2014 at 4:52 PM

I’m a big fan of Rand Paul but I’m getting more reservations about him as our nominee. But it’s not his possibly kind of bleeding heart foreign policy that most concerns me, it’s because of a number of issues I don’t think he would unify the party, certainly not like Ted Cruz would. If Cruz will run, I say conservatives unify behind him, unless someone else has other ideas. And btw, it’s GOP unity that will be key to victory in 2016. It is NOT appealing to the left that will be key to victory, so forget Jeb & Christie etc. Remember the 6 million strong “mising white vote” that sunk Romney? It could be 20 million the next time.

anotherJoe on April 10, 2014 at 4:56 PM

Short answer – yes. My job in VN was to gather and assess a myriad of different forms of ‘intelligence’ gleaned from a like number of ‘sources’ in order to identify, fix and predict ‘bad guy’ movements and potential abf’s. Prisoner ‘interviews’ were among the sources. Helpful? Absolutely. Critical? Debatable.

vnvet on April 10, 2014 at 4:56 PM

No we want you to be the party that does the right thing.

crankyoldlady on April 10, 2014 at 4:57 PM

The fact that Republicans still want Dick Cheney as the face of their party is incredibly stupid.

Why not bring out Richard Nixon?

tetriskid on April 10, 2014 at 4:57 PM

But I digress. Do Republicans “want Dick Cheney to be sort of the representative of our party” on this issue, at least?

I think there is a legitimate debate to be had on foreign policy, however if the primary becomes a referendum on the Bush-Cheney years or the Iraq, the party is already defeated in 2016.

I’d say that immigration is much more likely to sink Paul than foreign policy. However, I don’t know if a candidate will emerge that is actually significantly stronger than Rand on immigration. Immigration seems to be every candidates weakness at this point.

midgeorgian on April 10, 2014 at 4:58 PM

Report on CIA interrogation methods
1h
==

40 House Democrats urge President Obama to quickly declassify portions of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s report on the government’s use of enhanced interrogation techniques – @thehill
read more on thehill.com
========================

http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/operations/203222-40-house-dems-urge-obama-to-quickly-declassify-cia-report#ixzz2yVsPdlcv

canopfor on April 10, 2014 at 4:59 PM

Cheney and the whole era of enhanced interrogations/patriot act/big government conservationism is absolutely toxic to the party and its future.

LittleNicky on April 10, 2014 at 4:48 PM

Mmm. Let’s talk about this.

davidk on April 10, 2014 at 5:00 PM

Wonder if he was curious about vetting the President’s prior statements about Hillary or vice-versa. You know, just to stir things up… LOL, nah.

WitchDoctor on April 10, 2014 at 5:00 PM

I disagree with Rand on this … but for me it’s a minor point. The fact that he’s NOT a GOP Establishment Ayatollah puts him the front-runner seat with Ted Cruz for me. I’ll support either.

I’d rather have a POTUS who’s said things I disagree with – than have one that said everything I wanted to hear but failed to execute on it when in office.

The last 50 (with the exception of Reagan) had been one long nightmare of lies from the Ayatollahs. I’ll vote Democrat if the GOP noms an Ayatollah.

HondaV65 on April 10, 2014 at 4:46 PM

Dear Ole Dad wasn’t an “establishment ayatollah” either, but that didn’t keep Ron Paul from being an opportunistic hypocrite.

And as for Ted Cruz, don’t hold your breath. He won’t run in 2016.

gryphon202 on April 10, 2014 at 5:00 PM

Hey, canopfor.

davidk on April 10, 2014 at 5:00 PM

Ans: Yes, of course!

De Oppresso Liber on April 10, 2014 at 5:01 PM

Some here have not learned the lesson from the NSA spying scandal that the federal government will inevitably turn its methods against “them” on us.

So police here could presumably waterboard a suspect, since it isn’t “torture”, right? Why or why not?

iwasbornwithit on April 10, 2014 at 5:02 PM

Either way, Grade-A sh*t-stirring
=================================

Lol,…Oh boy, followed up with a Sh*t-Storm sumpins!!

canopfor on April 10, 2014 at 5:02 PM

Hmmm. While I think Rand’s been a little wishy washy; on this, I simply ask why we don’t run Dick Cheney if his approach is so popular?

chris0christies0donut on April 10, 2014 at 5:02 PM

Dear Ole Dad wasn’t an “establishment ayatollah” either, but that didn’t keep Ron Paul from being an opportunistic hypocrite.

And as for Ted Cruz, don’t hold your breath. He won’t run in 2016.

gryphon202 on April 10, 2014 at 5:00 PM

OK. I’ll bite…How was Ron Paul an “opportunistic hypocrite”? And who do you like better?

iwasbornwithit on April 10, 2014 at 5:03 PM

Fully 68 percent of Americans, including large majorities of both parties, think torturing terrorists who may have information on future attacks is always, sometimes, or rarely justified — and that’s when you refer to it explicitly as “torture” instead of the kinder/gentler “enhanced interrogation.

Better yet, let’s ask them if the fratboy prank known as ‘waterboarding’ IS torture. I don’t see it as torture.

slickwillie2001 on April 10, 2014 at 5:03 PM

Hey, canopfor.

davidk on April 10, 2014 at 5:00 PM

davidk: *Waves*,…Good Day DK:0

canopfor on April 10, 2014 at 5:04 PM

I’ve always been fascinated by the enduring respect Cheney seems to enjoy from most grassroots conservatives even though they’re critical of so many features of the Bush years, from spending to “compassionate conservatism” to nation-building to the NSA. My sense is that it’s because he seems to care not at all that the left detests him.

Well, by that measure, he and Rand Paul have something in common…

JohnGalt23 on April 10, 2014 at 5:04 PM

Rand Paul 2009: Do we really want to be the party that backs Dick Cheney on torture?

Yes. Next!

Stoic Patriot on April 10, 2014 at 5:04 PM

Ya know,…Cheney just might respond with,….”Go Boink Yourselfs”,..haha!!
(sarc)

canopfor on April 10, 2014 at 5:05 PM

The last 50 (with the exception of Reagan) had been one long nightmare of lies from the Ayatollahs. I’ll vote Democrat if the GOP noms an Ayatollah.

HondaV65 on April 10, 2014 at 4:46 PM

Oh, but you already have, Obama-voter.

thebrokenrattle on April 10, 2014 at 5:05 PM

Rand Paul 2009: Do we really want to be the party that backs Dick Cheney on torture?


I don’t know

If Cheney is in favor of torturing Lois Lerner and Eric Holder … I support that position. Though the same results could be achieved by putting them in the general population of any Federal maximum security prison.

Rand Paul doesn’t acknowledge a world where adult men, in the name of their religion, force children to be suicide bombers to save their younger brothers/sisters from being murdered.

He doesn’t acknowledge a world where a Mafia State known as Russia is preparing to re-establish its old empire by force – including the use of puppet heads of state who authorize snipers to shoot unarmed demonstrators.

We already HAVE a SCOAMF who does not acknowledge the world as it is … WTF do we need another ONE?

PolAgnostic on April 10, 2014 at 5:06 PM

Rand is done. No chance at a nomination. Too many of his dad’s qualities are coming to light.

The Notorious G.O.P on April 10, 2014 at 5:10 PM

Neo Con kooks are leading us to a disastrous world war, and shills in the comments keep repeating the same tired old talking points.

Another Libertarian on April 10, 2014 at 5:11 PM

Neo Con kooks are leading us to a disastrous world war, and shills in the comments keep repeating the same tired old talking points.

Another Libertarian on April 10, 2014 at 5:11 PM


Oh … but for the glorious days of Neville Chamberlain!!!

Obama just can’t appease like Neville did to insure “peace in our time”.

Yeppers, it’s the neocons and Hot Air commenters that are enabling Putin, Syria, Iran, the Chinese …

/s

ProTip: Having an upclose view of their own colon DOESN’T make someone a visionary.

PolAgnostic on April 10, 2014 at 5:19 PM

If Republicans don’t use Enhanced Interrogation techniques then how will spineless Democrats get to take credit for capturing terror leaders?!?

nextgen_repub on April 10, 2014 at 5:19 PM

The GOP at least has a chance of a future with people like Rand Paul. It has no future with establishment guys like Jeb or Christie being the face of the party.

DisneyFan on April 10, 2014 at 5:21 PM

Some here have not learned the lesson from the NSA spying scandal that the federal government will inevitably turn its methods against “them” on us.

So police here could presumably waterboard a suspect, since it isn’t “torture”, right? Why or why not?

iwasbornwithit on April 10, 2014 at 5:02 PM

Just trust Dick Cheney and everything will be OK.

tetriskid on April 10, 2014 at 5:23 PM

This issue will have no impact on the primary. McCain made it through and he felt the same way. The government response to terrorism issue that will get play in the primaries is that of the NSA, and most grass roots Republicans are going to be on Rand’s side on that issue.

eski502 on April 10, 2014 at 5:23 PM

And rand was right then, right now. Regardless how you think the issue polls (including “rarely justified” as torture supporters), Cheney and the whole era of enhanced interrogations/patriot act/big government conservationism is absolutely toxic to the party and its future.

LittleNicky on April 10, 2014 at 4:48 PM

You know what I think is toxic? Planes hitting buildings.

hawkdriver on April 10, 2014 at 5:26 PM

It’ll determine whether tea partiers, who made a senator of Paul four years ago, really trust him or Cheney more on defense issues.

1) This quote was from 5 years ago. Tea partiers got him elected after this statement which kind of makes the point quoted above seem silly to me. I guess David Corn can make AP jump whenever he wants these days.

2) Paul will not be running against Cheney. If you want him to run against Cheney then perhaps we should do the comparison across the whole spectrum and not just focus on a minor point in Foreign Policy. For example, how does Rand stack up against Cheney on spending and cutting the size/scope of federal government?

airupthere on April 10, 2014 at 5:27 PM

You know what I think is toxic? Planes hitting buildings.

hawkdriver on April 10, 2014 at 5:26 PM

I think shredding our constitution is worse. But that’s just me.

tetriskid on April 10, 2014 at 5:32 PM

We already HAVE a SCOAMF who does not acknowledge the world as it is … WTF do we need another ONE?

PolAgnostic on April 10, 2014 at 5:06 PM

Indeed! I agree with the points of your whole post.

onlineanalyst on April 10, 2014 at 5:33 PM

Prisoner ‘interviews’ were among the sources. Helpful? Absolutely. Critical? Debatable.

vnvet on April 10, 2014 at 4:56 PM

Yes, but what about the JenJis Khan-fashionally-reminiscent razing of villages, pizening of foodstuffs, shooting livestock and generally ravaging the countryside?

That’s what I heard, anyway.

Lanceman on April 10, 2014 at 5:40 PM

Militia groups are rallying behind a rancher whose cattle are being seized by the federal government.

The Las Vegas Review-Journal reports that two militia members from Montana and one from Utah have arrived at Cliven Bundy’s ranch.

“We need to be the barrier between the oppressed and the tyrants,” Ryan Payne of the West Mountain Rangers told the Review-Journal. “Expect to see a band of soldiers.”

Payne said that militias from New Hampshire, Texas and Florida are likely to join and stand with Bundy and stay at his ranch.

“They all tell me they are in the process of mobilizing as we speak,” Payne told the Review-Journal, adding that hundreds of militia members are expected.

The Review-Journal also reports that Bundy’s son, Ammon Bundy, was shot with a stun gun by law enforcement officers Wednesday and that the rancher’s sister, Margaret Houston, was pushed to the ground.

http://lasvegas.cbslocal.com/2014/04/10/expect-to-see-a-band-of-soldiers-militia-members-arrive-at-nevada-ranch/

davidk on April 10, 2014 at 5:43 PM

I think shredding our constitution is worse. But that’s just me.

tetriskid on April 10, 2014 at 5:32 PM

Hijacking planes, slamming them into buildings and killing 3000 people is worse than waterboarding terrorists.

Throat Wobbler Mangrove on April 10, 2014 at 5:48 PM

I personally knew Dick Cheney and Mr. Paul…you are no Dick Cheney.

Hell yes we should do anything and everything to these scum to prevent the taking of a single American life. Hack their limbs off one at a time …I don’t give a rat’s azz.

trs on April 10, 2014 at 5:48 PM

The current showdown pits Bundy’s claims of ancestral rights to graze his cows on open range against federal claims that the cattle are trespassing on arid and fragile habitat of the endangered desert tortoise.

U.S. Rep. Steven Horsford, D-Las Vegas, noted that BLM officials were enforcing federal court orders that Bundy remove his animals. The legal battle has been waged for decades.

Kornze, the new BLM chief, is familiar with the area. He’s a natural resource manager who grew up in Elko, Nev., and served previously as a senior adviser to Senate Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Reid aide Kristen Orthman said her boss “hopes the trespassing cattle are rounded up safely so the issue can be resolved.”

http://lasvegas.cbslocal.com/2014/04/10/expect-to-see-a-band-of-soldiers-militia-members-arrive-at-nevada-ranch/

davidk on April 10, 2014 at 5:48 PM

I disagree with Rand on this … but for me it’s a minor point. The fact that he’s NOT a GOP Establishment Ayatollah puts him the front-runner seat with Ted Cruz for me. I’ll support either.

I’d rather have a POTUS who’s said things I disagree with – than have one that said everything I wanted to hear but failed to execute on it when in office.

HondaV65 on April 10, 2014 at 4:46 PM

Well said, HondaV65. I agree.

Burke on April 10, 2014 at 5:50 PM

Sounding more and more like his dad every day.

KickandSwimMom on April 10, 2014 at 5:53 PM

What party do you belong to Rand?

kcewa on April 10, 2014 at 5:58 PM

Paul may or may not be right on the issue, but the overwhelming fact is that the man has some fight in him. That is so rare in a Republican that I’m willing to overlook details.

PersonFromPorlock on April 10, 2014 at 5:58 PM

I personally knew Dick Cheney and Mr. Paul…you are no Dick Cheney.
Hell yes we should do anything and everything to these scum to prevent the taking of a single American life. Hack their limbs off one at a time …I don’t give a rat’s azz.
trs on April 10, 2014 at 5:48 PM

Thank God for that.

iwasbornwithit on April 10, 2014 at 6:00 PM

I would prefer a presidential candidate not to sound like Michael Moore, or maybe it’s just me :P

thebrokenrattle on April 10, 2014 at 6:10 PM

Overplaying his hand.

Cindy Munford on April 10, 2014 at 6:11 PM

I do believe that once you are president, the briefings get real. I think Obama had a real WTF moment and that’s why he stuck with W’s basic plane. And look how great he’s done since he took off on his own!

Cindy Munford on April 10, 2014 at 6:19 PM

1) This quote was from 5 years ago. Tea partiers got him elected after this statement which kind of makes the point quoted above seem silly to me. I guess David Corn can make AP jump whenever he wants these days.

2) Paul will not be running against Cheney. If you want him to run against Cheney then perhaps we should do the comparison across the whole spectrum and not just focus on a minor point in Foreign Policy. For example, how does Rand stack up against Cheney on spending and cutting the size/scope of federal government?

airupthere on April 10, 2014 at 5:27 PM

And it’s not like it’s some new revelation that Rand Paul is a critic of Dick Cheney. He spoke critically of many of the Bush-Cheney era foreign policy tactics during his filibuster last March. Paul was also pretty adamant in opposing Liz Cheney’s senate bid.

midgeorgian on April 10, 2014 at 6:32 PM

I’d rather have a POTUS who’s said things I disagree with – than have one that said everything I wanted to hear but failed to execute on it when in office.

I agree.

And I am not sure I disagree on principle. High level torture
for high level terrorists to protect us from another attack can
be agreed to by most. However, torturing as general policy is something I don’t agree with. I think that is what Rand was
referring to. I would hope this nation’s military has evolved
and is not a band of thugs like those we go to war against.

And this decades + long war(s) along with nation building and its
cost to the taxpayer is something I am totally against.

Amjean on April 10, 2014 at 6:41 PM

Torture is immoral.

fatlibertarianinokc on April 10, 2014 at 6:50 PM

I have no issues with non-citizens caught overseas being waterboarded (its not torture) as it was done. extremely rare and not just done for the hell of it.
I also have no issues droning an al queda operative after he publicly renounced citizenship multiple times and refusing to return so he could go through the courts.
I do have issues with that persons son, still a citizen, getting droned.

dmacleo on April 10, 2014 at 7:05 PM

I think shredding our constitution is worse. But that’s just me.

tetriskid on April 10, 2014 at 5:32 PM

I think auto granting our us constitutional rights onto citizens of other countries is wrong. they want our rights let them become a citizen.

dmacleo on April 10, 2014 at 7:08 PM

A Paul fan argued in Headlines that Rand, ironically, isn’t any different on this point from his old friend John McCain

Is it just me, or is anyone else troubled by Rand’s choice of friends. They seem to represent the who’s who of the Neocon club. First the Turtle, and now the Penguin?? Also, I don’t remember any stories of torture taken place by the US Government. Does anyone have a link? I didn’t hear of anybody getting bamboo shoots shoved up their fingernails, etc. I have however heard of the enemy being subjected to poor musical choices

Brock Robamney on April 10, 2014 at 7:25 PM

I have no issues with non-citizens caught overseas being waterboarded (its not torture) as it was done. extremely rare and not just done for the hell of it.
I also have no issues droning an al qaeda operative after he publicly renounced citizenship multiple times and refusing to return so he could go through the courts.
I do have issues with that persons son, still a citizen, getting droned.

dmacleo on April 10, 2014 at 7:05 PM

I agree.

Throat Wobbler Mangrove on April 10, 2014 at 7:31 PM

Hold on here. Let’s take a step back. Rand Paul’s definition of “torture” (i.e. water boarding) is not my definition of torture.

When we bring out hammers, pliers, blow torches, vices and filet knives, then we’ll talk about “torture”.

We’ve done no such thing.

Ruckus_Tom on April 10, 2014 at 8:11 PM

Torture is immoral.

fatlibertarianinokc on April 10, 2014 at 6:50 PM

So’s murder.

hawkdriver on April 10, 2014 at 8:56 PM

hawkdriver on April 10, 2014 at 5:26 PM

I think shredding our constitution is worse. But that’s just me.

tetriskid on April 10, 2014 at 5:32 PM

Hard to protect your Constitution when you’re dead.

But that’s just me.

hawkdriver on April 10, 2014 at 8:58 PM

You know that thing about ‘if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck’? “Dick Cheney is in favor of torture” is the way tin-foil-hat-wearing Ron Paul types quack. That’s my problem with it.

Knott Buyinit on April 10, 2014 at 10:33 PM

Hard to protect your Constitution when you’re dead.

But that’s just me.

hawkdriver on April 10, 2014 at 8:58 PM

Exactly how has granting so much power to the executive branch made us any safer? You have to think a little more long term than five or ten years out.

The “Boo! Terrorists!” & “We’re all gonna die if you don’t give up your natural rights” doesn’t really work with me anymore.

I believe in EVERY ONE of the BILL of RIGHTS. What John Yoo and Dick Cheney accomplished Obama is running with. That is why America is in so much trouble.

tetriskid on April 11, 2014 at 11:01 AM

tetriskid on April 11, 2014 at 11:01 AM

I didn’t know that Al Qaeda had constitutional rights. You must be one of the Eric Holder type crowd

Brock Robamney on April 11, 2014 at 1:45 PM

OK. I’ll bite…How was Ron Paul an “opportunistic hypocrite”? And who do you like better?

iwasbornwithit on April 10, 2014 at 5:03 PM

President Nullification, and I’d like to see Article V as his running mate. ;)

gryphon202 on April 11, 2014 at 4:50 PM