If We Dare Believe Him...

The recent old-fashioned filibuster by Senator Rand Paul over CIA director John Brennan made me feel proud, as well as thankful that attention was brought to an important issue. This filibuster pointed to the fact that the Obama administration would not admit that it would be unconstitutional to fire a drone at an American citizen on US soil. Such a thought is horrendous and difficult to conceive! After all is done however, and looking at what was accomplished by this filibuster - though I hate to say it - it does seem that we may have the cart before the horse.

With the threat we have from North Korea at this time; with the always ever present threat our ally, Israel is under; with growing antagonism by Iran to try to influence the support we give to Israel; with Egypt now controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood; and with our unsecured borders and immigration problems, it seems to me in comparison to those problems, firing drones on US citizens is not an imminent threat.

Did we really accomplish anything by this filibuster? Brennan was still confirmed. Yes, Paul was able to hear the administration say it would be unconstitutional to fire a drone at a citizen on US soil.  I guess that would mean something, if we could trust this administration!

Now, I am not saying the drone issue is a concern that should be ignored. Of course, we do not ever want to assume or allow ourselves to be governed on “intentions” as the President recently eluded referring to that topic; but we are also in a dialogue in regard to our enemy, as well as this war, that has yet to be concluded.

We have not yet clearly defined our enemy, of whom we may find at home or abroad. We have not yet even clearly defined this war in which we find ourselves. War on Terror?  Or “Overseas Contingency”? Terrorist attack? Or “Workplace Violence”? Until this discussion is finished, we are premature in assuming the worst about our government; we forget we ARE the government and we the people, are still in control.

Now when I first heard of Paul’s filibuster, I was pleased. Of course I agree with his thoughts and concerns.  We all should. But something was bothering me, and I couldn’t quite pinpoint it.  I knew Paul was right about what he was saying.  It was like a no-brainer.  Of course we don’t want it to be legal for our government to fire on a US citizen. We are already protected by this in our Constitution. And I understand fully the fact, that to keep that protection by our Constitution, it will continually require diligence and sometimes unpopular actions such as additional amendments. I always want to expect that diligence from our leaders and citizens, but there was something that still bothered me about Paul’s filibuster.

I knew it bothered me that the filibuster ended up being more about the drone attacks than it did about whether Brennan should be confirmed our not. The confirmation of John Brennan is what was taking place – that was the issue, but what it turned into was only the concern over the possible drone attacks by an administration that may get out of control. Brennan’s confirmation needed to be addressed. In my opinion, Brennan absolutely should not have been confirmed, but all of that was lost.  And in the end, of course there were enough votes to support Brennan. I think we all knew, including Rand Paul, that this would be the case.

When Paul came out and claimed victory for forcing the administration to admit it would not be Constitutional to fire drones on Americans, that of course was an admirable thing. I am so thankful for that outcome; but again, it only matters if we can believe it.

I also couldn’t help but wonder if there was a bit of political posturing going on, and a hope of gaining a political advantage was, in fact, the actual goal all along. Paul certainly got his name out there, and became known in a positive way to voters that in reality don’t often pay too much attention too politics.

I am sure it is common knowledge that Rand Paul will be seeking the Presidential nomination in 2016. He hasn’t really tried to hide that fact. I knew it would be his intentions when I saw him pose in front of an American flag, as well as an Israeli flag, several months ago.  Paul has some damage control to do over his position of supporting Israel. He blew it big time a few years ago when he authored a bill to withdraw financial support to Israel. The outcry from US citizens (translated voters) was enormous.  So much so he had to withdraw the bill. I am thankful for that outcry and that Senator Paul responded appropriately.

The biggest problem for me that I saw over the filibuster issue, was the fact when we are constantly attacking our government, who does it really help? The communists would have loved this back in the day for that was one of their goals – to put the citizens at odds with their leaders and government; and to breed disdain for ones country. When the conspiracy theories abound that our government is doing this and they are doing that, we are in effect undermining our own government, and even creating a “we the citizens can’t do anything” atmosphere.  People then don’t want to even bother trying to change anything; they even become discouraged at voting. They believe the hype and rhetoric they hear in the media. We join the mantra of attacks on America. American exceptionalism is lost.

But even as important as all of that is, what is even more crucial is that we are redefining the enemy and making ourselves the foe. It causes us to forget there is an actual adversary we are fighting that is far more dangerous than our own government. We focus our attentions on the wrong issue.

John McCain tried to say as much, but he clearly went about it the wrong way.  Attacking Senator Paul rather than giving him the support he deserved, was inappropriate. McCain should have supported Paul or at least acknowledged the senator’s concern while pointing out the other things that also needed to be addressed.

John McCain and Lindsey Graham were questioned and attacked as to why they would criticize Rand Paul in his endeavor, rather than support him. While I disagree with McCain and Graham in the manner they handled this situation, they do have a point.  “I am far more worried about an attack from Al Qaeda and other enemies than I am about our own government.” John McCain told us. I could not agree more!

Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel at the American Center for Law and Justice wrote an excellent article in regard to Obama’s flim-flam attitude about this war - which by the way Congress declared with a bi-partisan vote. I hope you will take a few minutes to read Jay’s article. He addresses some very important points. While at first glance one may not see the correlation between firing drones on US citizens to Sekulow’s points in this article, it is indeed there.

We haven't clearly defined this war, our enemy, military tribunals versus civilian courts, and even enhanced interrogation procedures. Therein exists the problem. This lack of understanding and explanation over these issues is creating unforeseen problems and leaving us ineffective in the handling of these problems. How are we going to deal with the enemies among us? Whether we want to admit it or not, they are indeed here in America. I certainly don’t want a sitting President to be the one that decides who should be singled out for attack, and frighteningly we seem to slowly be removing that responsibility from the military. Let’s hear that conversation first. The discussion about this war is far from over while we have an adversary that is invading and succeeding in their agenda because of our floundering, fighting amongst ourselves and other distractions.

Of course I'm not saying attacks on our citizens should ever be allowed, but we do need to recognize we have a dangerous enemy here that needs our attention and needs to be clearly defined. We need a dialogue that will take us to the point of how we are going to deal with that foe. Defining the enemy first, will have a direct consequence in regard to targeting people that should not be targeted and protecting our citizens not only from our government, if need be, but from those that are dangerous among us.

In my opinion, the actions of those we are at war with shouldn’t be handled in civilian courts with the same rights as civilians! This is a military issue. Secrets and intelligence will be given up in a civilian court by a rampant, biased press. We are in uncharted water, with a combatant we have never experienced before. We need to get it figured out. What are we going to do about the enemy within? That is the issue that should be addressed first and foremost. We have an unfinished dialogue.

Focusing on the obvious, like making sure citizens aren’t attacked at a President’s discretion has its place and must be addressed; but there are many more fiercely important issues that need to be defined and addressed first. Attacks on US soil will undoubtedly come into that discussion and well they must. But this administration has no clear policy in regard to our enemy here in our homeland, or overseas. This President does what he wants at the moment and he has absolutely no consistency in any of his actions or beliefs.
 
In the beginning, Rand Paul stated that this filibuster was about the confirmation of John Brennan - that was the issue of the moment. Yes, we need to know where this administration stands on the drone issue, especially after hearing the President’s waffling on that issue. So it is a wonderful thing the President was forced to make a statement. But again, only if we dare believe him!  How can we place faith in only his words? He has said a number of things on a number of issues only to do the opposite. This President does what he wants.

In the end, what are we really seeing?  We are again seeing the battle between the moderates and the conservatives - what some call the “Rino’s” (I refuse to use that term as I see it as destructive) and the Tea Party. In the end, the Republicans are at each other’s throats again. Maybe we should give some thought to the term “Divide and Conquer” and understanding there might be someone seeking that end in regard to the Republican party.

 

I believe in the final outcome, we saw some grandstanding by a potential candidate for the 2016 election. And when politicians start attacking our government and one another, as well as inciting fear into our citizens for political gain, they have gone far beyond their realm of duties.

I don't want to defend John McCain and Lindsey Graham over Rand Paul. I really don't. Shame on both of these men for voting to confirm. But in regard to Paul's filibuster, perhaps in their years of experience (especially with McCain's military experience) McCain and Graham in fact, did see other issues that also need to be addressed which are being unwittingly overlooked, and by what may even be viewed by some as grandstanding. I certainly see a few issues I would like addressed first. I want this administration to admit we have a dangerous enemy among us.  I want Congress and the President to never forget Al Qaeda declared war on us! I want our leaders to acknowledge that North Korea has threatened us with a missle attack. I want our President to be prepared to deal with Hamas who just this week threatened him with war if he dare set foot at the Temple Mount during his pending trip to Israel. What are we going to do about these issues? Seems to me there are a whole lot of distractions taking place, that aren't really leading to any set policies, even if we did get the President to simply state the obvious.

I also wish we would see a Republican Party that would begin to work together and stop this childish back-biting. With whatever goal is sought, it always seems to end with a battle for the heart and soul of the Republican Party. And Obama wins again. At least he tells us he does...if we dare believe him.

"We don't need a new idea. There is an idea: the idea is called America, and it still works."   ~ Senator Marco Rubio - at CPAC