This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/07/rand-paul-drones-policy-filibuster

The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Rand Paul revives filibuster tradition and targets Obama's drone policy Rand Paul anti-drone filibuster draws stinging criticism from Republicans
(about 2 hours later)
Senator Rand Paul's extraordinary talking filibuster to halt the appointment of new CIA chief John Brennan finally ended in the early hours of Thursday morning, after he succeeded in casting an uncomfortable spotlight on President Obama's controversial drones policy. Senator Rand Paul's extraordinary talking filibuster to halt the appointment of new CIA chief John Brennan, due to his concerns over American use of drones, on Thursday drew withering attack from senior members of his own Republican party.
Rand, a Republican from Kentucky, held the Senate floor for almost 13 hours in a dramatic effort to ratchet up the drones debate. Paul was particularly exercised about the question of whether the US government believed it could use drones against its own citizens on American soil. Paul, a Republican from Kentucky, had held the Senate floor for almost 13 hours in a dramatic effort to ratchet up the drones debate.
What began as a lone protest in an almost empty chamber just before noon on Wednesday eventually galvanised the Republican party, as other senators rallied to his cause. It also brought in the support of a lone Democrat – Ron Wyden of Oregon – and provoked a huge outpouring of enthusiasm on Twitter from a broad range of conservatives, libertarians and liberals – all citing a threat to civil rights. Paul was particularly exercised about the question of whether the US government believed it could use drones against its own citizens on American soil. But that point of view clearly angered Arizona senator John McCain, like Brennan a keen supporter of drones.
Speaking in the Senate, McCain said Paul's filibuster had been a "distortion of the realities of the threats we face. It is not a mature discussion."
McCain was joined by South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham, who put up a sign on the Senate floor with figures saying that al-Qaida had killed 2,958 US citizens in America, while drones had killed none. "To take this debate into the absurd is what I object to," Graham said.
The pushback came after what had begun as a lone protest in an almost empty chamber just before noon on Wednesday eventually galvanised a broad swath of the Republican party to rally to Paul's cause. It also brought in the support of a lone Democrat – Ron Wyden of Oregon – and provoked a huge outpouring of enthusiasm on Twitter from a broad range of conservatives, libertarians and liberals – all citing a threat to civil rights.
Even Code Pink, a leftwing campaign group that is no natural friend of Paul's but has campaigned against drones, expressed its gratitude to Paul's effort.Even Code Pink, a leftwing campaign group that is no natural friend of Paul's but has campaigned against drones, expressed its gratitude to Paul's effort.
Paul's dramatic stance focused national attention on Brennan's nomination because the former top White House adviser has been a prominent advocate of using drones to strike suspected Islamist militants – including several US citizens – abroad. Paul also highlighted a letter he received this week from attorney general Eric Holder who conceded that using drones to kill Americans at home might be possible under extreme circumstances, such as preventing a major terrorist atrocity like 9/11. Paul's dramatic stance focused national attention on Brennan's nomination because the former top White House adviser has been a prominent advocate of using drones to strike suspected Islamist militants – including several US citizens – abroad.
Paul also highlighted a letter he received this week from attorney general Eric Holder, who conceded that using drones to kill Americans at home might be possible under extreme circumstances, such as preventing a major terrorist atrocity like 9/11.
Though Brennan's nomination as the next CIA leader is almost certain to go ahead, it is now under the shadow of a furious civil liberties debate. That is likely to develop further, as the CIA faces a Senate report into its now abandoned interrogation programme that appears set to deliver a harsh critique of the CIA's behaviour.Though Brennan's nomination as the next CIA leader is almost certain to go ahead, it is now under the shadow of a furious civil liberties debate. That is likely to develop further, as the CIA faces a Senate report into its now abandoned interrogation programme that appears set to deliver a harsh critique of the CIA's behaviour.
The New York Times reported on Thursday that the 6,000-page report will detail how the CIA systematically misled the White House, the Justice Department and Congress about interrogation and torture techniques – like waterboarding or sleep deprivation or extreme cold – that were used on suspected terrorists. The New York Times reported on Thursday that the 6,000-page report will detail how the CIA systematically misled the White House, the Justice Department and Congress about interrogation and torture techniques – like waterboarding, sleep deprivation and extreme cold – that were used on suspected terrorists.
However, the report may provide some relief for an Obama administration keen to move away from the drones spotlight. Republican leaders have generally supported the CIA in debates about its treatment of prisoners during the "war on terror" and most of the incidents catalogued will have happened during the administration of Obama's predecessor, President George W Bush.However, the report may provide some relief for an Obama administration keen to move away from the drones spotlight. Republican leaders have generally supported the CIA in debates about its treatment of prisoners during the "war on terror" and most of the incidents catalogued will have happened during the administration of Obama's predecessor, President George W Bush.
But on Thursday, Paul's filibuster was still the talk of Washington politics. It finally came to an end at 12.40am, after reviving an ancient tradition in Washington politics. Rule changes have relegated talking filibusters to little more than publicity stunts. Yet the tactic worked for Paul, as his protest attracted a long roster of Republicans who lined up to ask rambling questions, thus providing brief interludes of relief for the Tea Party favourite and son of longstanding libertarian hero Ron Paul.But on Thursday, Paul's filibuster was still the talk of Washington politics. It finally came to an end at 12.40am, after reviving an ancient tradition in Washington politics. Rule changes have relegated talking filibusters to little more than publicity stunts. Yet the tactic worked for Paul, as his protest attracted a long roster of Republicans who lined up to ask rambling questions, thus providing brief interludes of relief for the Tea Party favourite and son of longstanding libertarian hero Ron Paul.
They included Texas rightwinger Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio of Florida, Mike Lee of Utah, Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, Jerry Moran of Kansas and others. "You're standing here like a modern-day Mr Smith Goes to Washington. You must surely be making Jimmy Stewart smile," Cruz told him, referring to the movie that made the talking filibuster famous.They included Texas rightwinger Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio of Florida, Mike Lee of Utah, Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, Jerry Moran of Kansas and others. "You're standing here like a modern-day Mr Smith Goes to Washington. You must surely be making Jimmy Stewart smile," Cruz told him, referring to the movie that made the talking filibuster famous.
Paul's performance, carried live on C-Span, contained numerous acts of theatre. Rubio, a rapidly emerging Tea Party favourite, ended up quoting from rappers Jay-Z and Wiz Khalifa as well as the movie The Godfather. Not to be outdone, Cruz resorted to Shakespeare's Henry V.Paul's performance, carried live on C-Span, contained numerous acts of theatre. Rubio, a rapidly emerging Tea Party favourite, ended up quoting from rappers Jay-Z and Wiz Khalifa as well as the movie The Godfather. Not to be outdone, Cruz resorted to Shakespeare's Henry V.
Paul jokily referenced Hollywood stars as being potentially targeted for acts of dissent, such as Jane Fonda's criticism of the Vietnam war in the 1960s. "Now, while I'm not a great fan of Jane Fonda, I'm really not so interested in putting her on a drone kill list either," Paul said.Paul jokily referenced Hollywood stars as being potentially targeted for acts of dissent, such as Jane Fonda's criticism of the Vietnam war in the 1960s. "Now, while I'm not a great fan of Jane Fonda, I'm really not so interested in putting her on a drone kill list either," Paul said.
At one moment, Illinois senator Mark Stephen Kirk, who walks with difficulty after a stroke, delivered a Thermos of tea and an apple to Paul by slowly coming onto the Senate floor with the aid of his walker. Such practical considerations of food and drink and the lack of bathroom breaks are all part of the legend of the filibuster tradition.At one moment, Illinois senator Mark Stephen Kirk, who walks with difficulty after a stroke, delivered a Thermos of tea and an apple to Paul by slowly coming onto the Senate floor with the aid of his walker. Such practical considerations of food and drink and the lack of bathroom breaks are all part of the legend of the filibuster tradition.
The rules state that the speaker of the filibuster cannot leave the chamber, meaning that there are certain physical limitations that have to be borne in mind. The record for the longest filibuster belongs to senator Strom Thurmond, who spoke for more than 24 hours against the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957.The rules state that the speaker of the filibuster cannot leave the chamber, meaning that there are certain physical limitations that have to be borne in mind. The record for the longest filibuster belongs to senator Strom Thurmond, who spoke for more than 24 hours against the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957.
Paul did not even come close to breaking that record, acknowledging that he had reached his physical limits. "I would go for another 12 hours to try to break Strom Thurmond's record, but I've discovered that there are some limits to filibustering and I'm going to have to go take care of one of those in a few minutes here," he said.Paul did not even come close to breaking that record, acknowledging that he had reached his physical limits. "I would go for another 12 hours to try to break Strom Thurmond's record, but I've discovered that there are some limits to filibustering and I'm going to have to go take care of one of those in a few minutes here," he said.
Then he ended the performance with his final words generating a round of loud applause. "I thank you very much for the forbearance, and I yield the floor," he said.Then he ended the performance with his final words generating a round of loud applause. "I thank you very much for the forbearance, and I yield the floor," he said.