The Daily Banter

And, No. Drones Will Not Kill You While You Drink Coffee at Starbucks.

Here’s the centerpiece of my Thursday column:

In a senate hearing yesterday, far-right Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) grilled Eric Holder about his letter to Rand Paul, repeatedly asking Holder if he thought it was constitutional to use a drone to kill a citizen who was drinking coffee at a cafe on American soil. Yes, really.

It’s an absurd line of questioning given that Holder strictly confined the use of lethal military force to imminent, emergency situations on the level of 9/11 and Pearl Harbor. Holder continuously responded that it’s inappropriate under the Constitution to use any other means beyond typical law enforcement methods if this hypothetical coffee-drinker happened to merely be planning a terrorist attack. Holder wrote the same thing in his letter to Rand Paul and, other than a brief salutation, the law enforcement policy description encompassed the entire first half of the letter.

But not once has any Republican, including Cruz and Rand Paul, mentioned anything about ending the war on terrorism or repealing the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF). The lack of nuance, as well as the lack of a sense of history on both the far-right and far-left is eerily coincidental. [continue reading here]

  • GrafZeppelin127

    If the actual goal here was to prevent drone strikes against terrorism suspects who happen to be American citizens, the best way to do that would be to repeal the AUMF and the PATRIOT Act, and declare the War On Terror™ over. But they’re not going to do that, because (1) that’s not the goal, and (2) they want the next Republican POTUS to have a War On Terror™ to fight and use for political purposes. The goal, obviously, is to embarrass and engender/validate hatred of the current POTUS, then in 2017 when Jeb or Rand or Marco or Chris or Sarah or whomever takes over, go right back to not giving a shit who he kills and how, as long as someone on Fox or the radio says the target/victim is/was a “terrorist.”

    • IrishGrrrl

      Exactly. This is about pointing out how scary it is to them to have a black man in the White House with Executive Branch powers. But if it’s a white guy, even one with an IQ no greater than my daughter’s pet hamster, by golly, it’s okay!