Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumRand Paul knocked off his high horse: How he lost moral high ground in attack on Bergdahl
As fellow GOPers tried to revive hysteria of Bush years, supposed civil libertarian sat silent -- exposing his lieELIAS ISQUITH
Although it feels like a memory from the distant past, it wasnt so long ago that I was at CPAC, watching Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul thrill a rapt audience of conservative activists with a romantic speech extolling liberty and slamming President Obama for failing to dismantle the post-9/11 national security state. I remember how quiet and still the crowd was while Paul spoke, and I remember how that surface-level calm was periodically interrupted with wild cheers whenever Paul delivered an especially well-crafted applause line.
In reference to mass surveillance, indefinite detention and secretive drone strikes on American citizens, for example, Paul quoted William Lloyd Garrison, the famous abolitionist, and asked the congregation, Will you, Americas next generation of liberty lovers, will you stand and be heard? The answer was a resounding yes.
But as much as they loved imagining themselves as the modern heirs to a 19th century liberation movement that reached its apogee through the expansion of presidential and federal power, these assorted conservatives and libertarians were even more thrilled by the sections of Pauls speech castigating President Obama for being insufficiently dedicated to protecting Americans civil liberties. I dont question President Obamas motives, Paul said, but history will record his timid defense of liberty.
A specific instance of timidity that Paul had in mind was Obamas decision to sign the NDAA, despite his misgivings that it infringed on the right of habeas corpus. When Congress passed legislation allowing for the indefinite detention of an American citizen without a trial, Paul said, [Obama] shamefully signed it while promising not to use such a power. In Pauls eyes, this was clearly not enough. A great president, he claimed, would have risen to the occasion. Instead of merely suggesting that he wouldnt use this dreaded power, a great president would have taken pen in hand and vetoed this abomination.
more
http://www.salon.com/2014/06/07/rand_paul_knocked_off_his_high_horse_how_he_lost_moral_high_ground_in_attack_on_bergdahl/
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 1561 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (5)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Rand Paul knocked off his high horse: How he lost moral high ground in attack on Bergdahl (Original Post)
DonViejo
Jun 2014
OP
Rand Paul, defender of liberty, defending the right to be found guilty without trial? What a joker.
Fred Sanders
Jun 2014
#1
I'm still trying to figure out why Paul/Cruz/Rubio are treated as anything other
TwilightGardener
Jun 2014
#2
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)1. Rand Paul, defender of liberty, defending the right to be found guilty without trial? What a joker.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)2. I'm still trying to figure out why Paul/Cruz/Rubio are treated as anything other
than lightweights with zero core convictions or achievements.
Takket
(21,577 posts)3. Your avatar nicely answers your own questions
Their followers are drones, with no brains or ability to think for themselves.
SunSeeker
(51,571 posts)4. Fuck Rand Paul. nt