- Text smaller
- Text bigger
A tip of the ball cap is due in the direction of the junior senator from Kentucky, Rand Paul, for his courageous filibuster last week during debate of John Brennan’s CIA nomination.
Rand Paul simply wanted an assurance from Attorney General Eric Holder that President Obama couldn’t issue a drone strike on a noncombatant American on U.S. soil, so for 13 hours he engaged in a dramatic filibuster. The next day he would receive a letter from the man who runs Department of Justice with an answer:
“It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: ‘Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?’ The answer to that question is no.”
Now, why on earth would a man as distinguished as Rand Paul be worried about the president of the United States having the constitutional authority to issue “drone” strikes on Americans? (If by some chance you are not familiar, they are Unmanned Aerial Vehicles drone operators fly around like a video game, earning medals that outrank combat medals like the Purple Heart and Bronze Star.)
Probably for the same reason people across the country are realizing you no longer need to wear a tin-foil hat to be worried about the incredible bulk purchasing of ammo by the Department of Homeland Security. The DHS has issued an open purchase order for a whopping 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition – media reports indicating “some of this purchase order is for hollow-point rounds, forbidden by international law for use in war, along with a frightening amount specialized for snipers.”
That’s an awful lot of bullets.
“What might they be for?” is a perfectly valid question, just as Sen. Paul’s quest to find out if President Obama has the authority to launch drone strikes on American citizens on U.S. soil.
Let’s get one thing straight: Were America a healthy nation, whose elected officials had the best interests of the actual American people at heart, would we even need to worry about either of these stories?
The answer is an unequivocal “no.”
The Democratic Party is a loose coalition of perpetually aggrieved “victim groups” determined to uproot all of America’s traditions with a never-ending “progressive” agenda; those currently at the top of Republican Party merely want a seat at the ruling table, where left-leaning individuals have always chosen the items on the menu.
Were America a healthy nation, with a government whose elected officials were only interested in protecting the life, liberty and property of the American people (instead of an army of faceless, unaccountable bureaucrats and lobbyists whose livelihood depends on the continual growth of government), there would be absolutely no fear of a hypothetical president of the United States ordering drone strikes on a “noncombatant” citizen.
Instead, drones would be one of the first lines – not to mention cheapest and most effective – in the defense of the integrity of our borders.
Were America a healthy nation, drones with sophisticated technology would ensure that both the borders with Mexico and Canada were secure, immediately tracking areas of the border that were vulnerable for either illegal-alien crossing or potential drug routes.
We are not that healthy country, however – our government releases hundreds of illegal aliens held in local jails (blaming looming budget cuts) while a vindictive, spiteful Obama administration cancels White House tours and sends emails out to the Agriculture Department instructing officials “not to find ways to lessen the impact of the sequestration.” One employee was told by email, “[Y]ou need to make sure you are not contradicting what we said the impact would be.”
No, the American people do not have individuals – elected or unelected – within the federal government, in charge of executing the Constitution of the United States of America, that have their best interests in mind.
Those inside the Washington, D.C., Beltway, occupying positions of authority within think tanks, non-profits and, of course, the various governmental departments and Congress, are only interested in protecting their positions of authority and influence.
This is why the filibuster by Rand Paul was exciting to watch, knowing that for a time period that was all too brief American’s had the opportunity to see what having an elected representative to the government who puts the interests of the American people ahead of American government looks like.
Rand Paul was right to push for an answer regarding the constitutionality of the usage of drones in lethal attacks on noncombatant American civilians, precisely because it is without question that many occupying positions of power in the halls of Congress (and in the unelected and unaccountable bureaucracy of the government, such as the DHS) don’t have the interests of the American people guiding their decision-making process. They only do what is best to consolidate their own power, at the expense of the American people’s life, liberty and property.
America can be a healthy nation again – a proud, strong republic whose elected officials go to Washington not as a means to enrich their own pockets, but to make sure laws aren’t passed that restrict the American people’s ability to earn a living, innovate, accumulate wealth and prosper according to each individual’s definition.
Right now it’s the other way around.
And for this reason, we have every right both to fear the usage of drones and ask why the DHS is purchasing billions of rounds of ammo.
Quote of the week: “A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.” – Edward R. Murrow