Okay, not following the news is becoming addicting. However, an honest-to-goodness filibuster will never bother me. And when the filibusterer is also in the right…as Rand Paul most certainly is…I can’t help but be cheered.
Also, apparently I can’t help but add some commentary. Dr. Charles Krauthammer is usually pretty good in his analysis. But he’s taking the administration’s side in this case. Ugh. Doctor, no sane person is arguing that a murderous would-be terrorist hasn’t forfeited his right to life, even if he has no actual victims yet. What we’re saying is, that doesn’t forfeit due process.
Oh, wait. I hadn’t finished reading his argument.
Once you take up arms against the United States, you become an enemy combatant, thereby forfeiting the privileges of citizenship and the protections of the Constitution, including due process.
OMG. Okay, I’m ready to withdraw from humanity again. Why? Here’s a thought experiment: how many such (secret) enemy combatants would it take to actually destroy the U.S.A.? Answer: the square root of negative one. A nonexistent number. Couldn’t happen, even if you pretend these would be no ever-mounting response to a series of actual terrorist attacks.
Now ask yourself this: how many federal governments will it take to destroy the nation if they can ignore due process whenever they want?
(HINT: “They” is misleading here, since it indicates plurality.)
Oh well. So Krauthammer is just another idiotic carbon-based lifeform, so what? It’s not like it makes any difference. Meanwhile Rand goes on, on even though “the odds are against him”. The odds are against him; I had to listen to this awesome theme song again, to realize why his filibuster brought it to mind:
(BTW, I’m one of the weirdos who loved the movie version. Although, my brother’s dislike of it was due purely to disorientation and motion sickness. And admittedly, it is much like watching a bushel of Skittles in a drying machine.)
World's Only Rational Man 
I found Holder’s argument for it hilarious. Invoking Pearl Harbor and 9-11. Ridiculous. In both cases the US military and intel have utterly failed. In case of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor the entire political, military and intelligence field turned two blind eyes for at least a decade. And then the only solution they had was lock up tens of thousands Japanese-Americans simply because they weren’t white. That, of course, didn’t stop any espionage activities and ultimately only did one thing: depriving the US military of tens of thousands of soldiers.
In regards of 9-11… well, what happened there was pussy-footing with terrorists, which still goes on.
Both reactions were extreme. The extreme opposite ends. And both reactions have achieved absolutely nothing.
Though, I would say that, in the case of Awlaki, or whatever his name was, his citizenship was of no importance. He was an enemy combatant, that makes him a legitimate target under rules of engagement and the laws of war.
Same for Krauthammer’s (far too longwinded) answer to #1
“1. By what right does the president order the killing by drone of enemies abroad? What criteria justify assassination?”
It’s not assassination. It’s killing an enemy combatant. Terrorists are exactly that, enemy combatants. Whatever citizenship they have is, at best, only means for infiltration to strike at targets.
All of my previous questions have been consumed by this one: how in the heck do you make these thoughtful comments while I’m still tweaking the original post with proofreading edits?
1) I have it on email alert
2) I’m fast with the mouse
3) I’m was with the keyboard
4) My brain is bored and thus does things like that
But I think we can best sum it up under: “I’m the Bear, it’s what I do”. dun dun DUN!