Rand Paul's latest flip flop

[Luddly Neddite]

Rand Paul Backs Drone Killing Of Hypothetical Armed Robber

Marking an abrupt shift in tone from his epic March filibuster, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said late Monday that he would be fine with a drone killing a run-of-the-mill armed robber.

SSDD from the Official Congressional Bat Guano (as in, the bat shit doesn't fall far from the bat.)

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Wasn't a flip flop.

 

[hjmick]

His view on the matter has evolved, so what?

He's wrong, but hey, what do you want?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

His view on the matter has evolved, so what?

He's wrong, but hey, what do you want?

Actually they haven't. He repeatedly stressed during his filibuster that he had absolutely zero issue with lethal force being used against people committing violence. Now I disagree with Rand on this 100%, the being ok with drones taking out an armed robber, but he's been consistent.

 

[Harry Dresden]

His view on the matter has evolved, so what?

He's wrong, but hey, what do you want?

Actually they haven't. He repeatedly stressed during his filibuster that he had absolutely zero issue with lethal force being used against people committing violence. Now I disagree with Rand on this 100%, the being ok with drones taking out an armed robber, but he's been consistent.

another Dudley thread shot to pieces.....

 

[idb]

His view on the matter has evolved, so what?

He's wrong, but hey, what do you want?

Actually they haven't. He repeatedly stressed during his filibuster that he had absolutely zero issue with lethal force being used against people committing violence. Now I disagree with Rand on this 100%, the being ok with drones taking out an armed robber, but he's been consistent.

I thought the whole thrust of his filibuster was that the Administration possibly claimed the right to use drones on US soil on US citizens.
It wasn't to do with the use of lethal force per se.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

His view on the matter has evolved, so what?

He's wrong, but hey, what do you want?

Actually they haven't. He repeatedly stressed during his filibuster that he had absolutely zero issue with lethal force being used against people committing violence. Now I disagree with Rand on this 100%, the being ok with drones taking out an armed robber, but he's been consistent.

I thought the whole thrust of his filibuster was that the Administration possibly claimed the right to use drones on US soil on US citizens.
It wasn't to do with the use of lethal force per se.

He was filibustering because the administration would not answer whether they believed they had the authority to drone strike U.S. citizens on U.S. soil, who were not actively engaged in any criminal or violent activity.