Wednesday, April 24, 2013

Stand* with Rand! (*Whites or Hot Tubs Owners Only)

Do you see me doin' thrill seeker liquor store hold-ups with a "Born To Lose" tattoo on my chest? -  Bobby DeNiro, Heat   
 The 13 Hour Filibuster staged by Seantor Rand Paul a mere month ago was a dishonest sham staged only for theater. On a Faux Business Network Interview Rand stated,
"If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and $50 in cash, I don’t care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him, but it’s different if they want to come fly over your hot tub, or your yard just because they want to do surveillance on everyone."
You see only those people rob liquor stores whilst the right people own Hot Tubs. I've also been informed that Hot Tub users have a high tendency of smoking pot, I wouldn't know I don't have a hot tub or smoke pot.

So, Rand is fine with using a Drone to kill a suspect of a Robbery, presumably an American, who hasn't had his Due Process. Please recall that on March 7, 2013, Senators Rand Paul and Ted Cruz introduced a Senate Bill: To prohibit the use of drones to kill citizens of the United States within the United States.

Now, I wonder if Glenn Greenwald will begin a campaign of lies and vitriol against Rand in the same manner he has against President Obama? Because according to Greenwald, President Obama is worse than Dick Cheney because he infringed on an American's Constitutional Rights by authorizing a Drone Strike on Anwar al-Awaki (and his son).

Rand Paul is a right-wing madman who would do away with all Civil Rights Laws and Unchain Business so they could put Americans back in chains.

Glenn Greenwald and Jeremy Scahill and all the neoliberal hipsters and self-satisfied libertarians who rushed to Stand With Rand and deified him to thwart the evil anti-chirst Obama got used by Conservatives like they always do.

Conservatives never viewed the Drone issue as anything other than an opportunity to attack President Obama while getting some confused or ignorant lefties to aid them.

Drones are valuable tools and weapons. It makes no difference if a person is killed by bullets, blood chokes, burning or drone strike. Dead is DeadDrones simply fall under the Use of Force and the 4th Amendment. 

As for surveillance, using a Drone is no different than using binoculars or my eyes. If I observe a crime or contraband in plain sight or if I have a properly obtained Search Warrant then there is no issue.

Update:
Rand realized he upset the Gravy Train of his deluded followers who fund him. And Nothing so alarms a Grifter, like Rand Paul, as when his Grift is threatened:
"My comments last night left the mistaken impression that my position on drones had changed. Let me be clear: it has not."
Please consider sending $25 to Help Rand Fight the DroneZ!

7 comments:

Jerry Critter said...

So, in Rand Paul's eyes, I guess looking at someone is worse than killing someone, especially if you have a hot tub.

Grung_e_Gene said...

Jerry Critter,
Hot Tub denotes property owner. And property is valued well beyond people in Rand's Philosophy. Hence business owners are free to discriminate and anyone who steals is deserving of death from DroneZ!

ChickenHammer said...

"As for surveillance, using a Drone is no different than using binoculars or my eyes. If I observe a crime or contraband in plain sight or if I have a properly obtained Search Warrant then there is no issue."

Using a drone is different than using your binoculars which is different than using your naked eyes.

What is in plain sight using your naked eyes, through binoculars, or via a drone all weight differently against a reasonable expectation of privacy.

What you see on the coffee table while you are standing in an apartment entryway without a search warrant and what you see looking across the street into a 17th floor hotel room with your binoculars without a search warrant are not the same.

Correlating warrant less drone surveillance and the 4th Amendment will be the job of the courts and it's probably not too far down the road.

Green Eagle said...

"My comments last night left the mistaken impression that my position on drones had changed. Let me be clear: it has not."

Spectacular. Who are you going to believe, your ears or the guy who just lied in your face?

Sad to say, for right wingers, this utter contempt for his followers is perfectly acceptable.

Grung_e_Gene said...

Chickenhammer,

You are just wrong. If I use the zoom feature on a squad camera to observe a hand-to-hand drug transaction from several hundred feet away does not mean I have invaded the privacy of the suspect.

If recent car burglaries have occuured in a neighborhood and I position myself in a copse of trees to observe a stretch of residential streets with binoculars and I watch suspects come up to a car and try the door handle

But, you did something, which I guess you think is clever, by adding the without a search warrant, to all your phrases.

There are ant # of scenarios I could describe to illustrate I am correct but you aren't arguing in good faith on it so I will not.

Green Eagle,

Rand Paul was watching the rEOVLution donation page and saw a drop in the $$$ rolling in.

w-dervish said...

Maybe it's because I'm ignorant of what Glenn Greenwald is lying about, but I like him. He's taking Obama to task for the high number of innocent civilians that have been killed by drones. I think we're making more terrorists than we are killing. It isn't smart.

I have not heard him say Obama is worse than Dick Cheney though. But I wouldn't say I am a fan or a follower of Glenn Greenwald... So maybe his criticisms are over the top?

As for Rand Paul, I agree with you on him completely. He is a hypocrite and a phony Libertarian.

ChickenHammer said...

Nothing cute intended by adding the phrase "without a search warrant." Absence of a search warrant affords us an expectation of privacy. If you're using your binoculars to look into my 8th floor hotel room from across the street violates my expectation of privacy and invalidates you are conduction an illegal search without a warrant.