Rand Paul was grandstanding a non-vital issue.
As your quote shows, the only way this is relevant is in extremely unlikely hypothetical examples which again is why it is precisely a non-vital issue.
I assure you that every piece of legislation being stalled by his filibuster had more importance.
Right. Analogizing gun control to drone attacks. Right.
Flonne Wrote:How do you alone suddenly get the authority to decide whether or not someone should live or die based on some arbitrary rating system akin to Bush's threat level color chart? How does one chart "imminent threat". If a dog walks on the white house lawn, he is posing an imminent threat to the grass because he might take a pomegranate on it, maybe we should bomb the dog! That's how I see that response; he can still use them on literally anyone he wants, because absolutely anyone can be seen as "a threat", and all he has to do is say "I thought he/she was a threat". As long as he doesn't use it on a celebrity or a little kid, the media won't give a pomegranate, and if the media doesn't give a pomegranate, the general populace doesn't give a pomegranate.
As your quote shows, the only way this is relevant is in extremely unlikely hypothetical examples which again is why it is precisely a non-vital issue.
I assure you that every piece of legislation being stalled by his filibuster had more importance.
Flonne Wrote:just as "non-vital" as gun control, amirite
Right. Analogizing gun control to drone attacks. Right.