Mediaboss Marketing

Rand Paul takes to the Senate floor Wednesday to oppose the nomination of David Barron to a US appeals court, citing one of his signature issues: the use of military drones to target Americans.

The speech didn't come close to the 13-hour filibuster of last year, but on Wednesday, Sen. Rand Paul (R) of Kentucky again took to the floor of the US Senate with impassioned words about civil liberties and US drone strikes.

Subscribe Today to the Monitor

Click Here for your FREE 30 DAYS of The Christian Science Monitor Weekly Digital Edition

The spark that set him on fire was, like last year, a nomination by President Obama. In March 2013, Senator Paul, a tea party favorite, filibustered the nomination of John Brennan to be CIA director, warning of the potential use of government drones against Americans on US soil. This time, he objected to the nomination of David Barron to the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit over concern about targeted killings of American suspects overseas.

Mr. Barron is a Harvard law professor, but when he worked for the Justice Department, he co-wrote legal memos that defended the Obama administrations policy of targeted killings abroad. The memos related to American Anwar al-Awlaki, the Al Qaeda operative killed by a US drone strike in Yemen in 2011. The memos reportedly defend the strike as lawful on grounds that Mr. Awlaki was a participant in the war with Al Qaeda on the enemy side and represented a specific threat to the US.

The legal material has been secret but, under pressure from senators, was recently made available to the full Senate not just members of the Justice and Intelligence committees. On Tuesday, the Obama administration, under court order, said it would release to the public a redacted version of the material. That has satisfied one of the Democratic critics, Sen. Mark Udall of Colorado, who supported Barron's nomination in a largely party-line procedural vote on Wednesday afternoon.

Senator Udall welcomed the administrations transparency and, in a statement, said it affirms that although the government does have the right to keep national security secrets, it does not get to have secret law. The material is not expected to be released before the Senate votes on Barron's nomination, probably Thursday.

But transparency wasnt enough to satisfy Paul, a leader in GOP presidential polls. He tried, unsuccessfully, to delay Wednesdays procedural vote on the nomination until the public fully debates the issue. As with other post-9/11 security issues torture of terrorism suspects, unlimited detention of detainees, and widespread surveillance of American phone data drone strikes challenge the balance between individual liberty and safety.

Am I the only one who thinks that something so unprecedented as an assassination of an American citizen should be discussed in the light of day? the senator asked, with incredulity.

See more here:
Rand Paul thumps Obama nominee over US drone strikes on Americans (+video)

By Niels Lesniewski Posted at 12:47 p.m. on May 21

Sen. Rand Paul is dismissing the idea that Minority Leader Mitch McConnells Republican primary victory in Kentucky Tuesday night was a defeat for the tea party movement.

Paul, who upset the establishment-backed candidate in his own 2010 primary, had endorsed McConnell early in the race, which was a sour point for some on the right who viewed the incumbent as too entrenched and insufficiently conservative.

Im probably considered to be from the tea party, but I supported Sen. McConnell because I like, you know, that hes a conservative, Paul told reporters Wednesday in the Capitol. I dont know that thats a defeat of the tea party necessarily when he wins. I think he stands for conservative principles, and him winning is consistent with the tea party.

Its not always, I think, as clear cut who is since the tea party has no membership, Paul continued. Its sort of like everybody or a lot of people say theyre in it, some people say theyre not.

Now, Paul is seeking party unity as McConnells general election race against Democratic nominee Alison Lundergan Grimes kicks into gear. TheKentucky Senate race is rated Leans Republican by the Rothenberg Political Report/Roll Call.

I was happy with Sen. McConnell winning yesterday, and I think hell be a good candidate and have a good chance in the fall, Paul said.

Paul said McConnells primary challenger Matt Bevin had a credible campaign despite getting less than 40 percent of the voteTuesday. He also offered an olive branch of sorts to Bevin.

Its just hard to win against an incumbent, but you know, I think hes got a future if he wants to continue work in the party, Paul said of Bevin. I hope he will support Senator McConnell, the nominee, because I think thatll show that there are no sour grapes and that hes really willing to, you know, do whats best for Kentucky and for the Republican party.

Read more from the original source:
Paul: McConnell Win 'Consistent With the Tea Party'

Last week, 2016 speculation/news was dominated by Karl Roves possibly botched smear attack on Hillary Clinton. But the real 2016 news was just how badly three prominent Republican aspirants were doing: the once dominant Chris Christie, whos arguably just seen the last three nails in his coffin; Marco Rubio, whose high-profile global warming denialism seems to have come at just the wrong time; and Rand Paul, with his one-step-forward, two-steps-back move on voter ID laws.

Tuesday, I wrote about Chris Christies doomed campaign prospects, beset by woes on three fronts: damning evidence from the mouth of his own press secretary at ongoing legislative hearingsthat he tried to cover up the Bridgegate scandal; the sixth bond downgrade of his administration (and third of the year) signaling his failure on the economic front; and the fresh, still-unfolding pay-to-play scandal first broken by David Sirota. But just because Christies prospects are so dire doesnt mean that anyone elses look that good, either, over on the GOP side.

Christies plummeting fortunes are widely seen as indications that the GOP establishment is in trouble, and it clearly lacks any obvious candidate to rally around. But its not as if any GOP candidate has really promising prospects even to get the nomination, much less win the general election. No candidate in Real Clear Politics poll tracking has cracked 20 percent since Chris Christie did it twice back in November, just after his reelection. No candidate is currently above 13 percent in RCPs polling average (Paul and Huckabee are tied for the lead, trailed by Jeb Bush at 12.3 percent).

The travails of Rubio and Paul this past week or so are illustrative of a much more general problem: The GOP bases increasing political isolation makes it virtually impossible for anyone who wins the primary to have a chance at winning the White House. And yet, even the slightest awareness of the general electorate can trip up candidates in their primary run. Rubio (who once supported cap-and-trade, before flip-floppingin his Senate race against Charlie Crist) showed his stuff on climate change denial last week, and the results were not pretty. Nor were things much better with Pauls modest criticism of the GOP going crazy with voter ID laws. Rubio was trying to tack hard right, while still seeming reasonable but he didnt. Paul was trying to seem reasonable, which he sort of did, until it became clear he had no intention of challenging the laws themselves.

Rubios problems began with his comments on ABCs This Week. The question put to Rubio by Jonathan Karl was refreshingly direct: Miami, Tampa, are two of the cities most affected by climate change. So putting aside your disagreement with what to do about it, do you agree on the science on this? How big a threat is climate change? Rubio ducked a direct answer to the question, and was off to the weasel-word races:

Rubio: I dont agree with the notion that some are putting out there including scientists, that somehow, there are actions we can take today that would actually have an impact on whats happening in our climate. Our climate is always changing. And what they have chosen to do is take a handful of decades of research and say this is now evidence of a longer term trend that is directly and almost solely attributable to man made activity.

Karl: You dont buy that

Rubio: I dont know of any era in world history where climate has been stable. Climate is always evolving. And natural disasters have always existed.

Karl: But let me get this straight. You do not think that human activity, the production of CO2, has caused warming to our planet?

Rubio: I do not believe that human activity is causing these dramatic changes to our climate the way these scientists are portraying it. Thats what Iand I do not believe that the laws that they propose we pass will do anything about it, except it will destroy our economy.

See the rest here:
Rand Paul and Marco Rubios worst nightmare: Trapped between crazy GOP base and actual reality

Rand Paul #39;s conversation with David Axelrod

By: DiSaStaCaPiTaLisM

See the rest here:
Rand Paul's conversation with David Axelrod - Video

Rand Paul: Obama Basically Said #39;If You Like Your Privacy, You Can Keep It #39;
certified financial planning financial broker personal financial advisors retirement financial planning financial planning companies financial advisers financial advisory services independent...

By: Alexandria Foster

Read more:
Rand Paul: Obama Basically Said 'If You Like Your Privacy, You Can Keep It' - Video