William Tell
06-07-2016, 01:59 PM
Dear Rand Paul – Thank You By: Brian Darling (https://www.conservativereview.com/search?keywords=Brian%20Darling&type=author) | June 07, 2016
https://www.conservativereview.com/sss/media/images/conservative-review/article-images/2016/february/rand-paul-with-family.jpg?w=744
John Gray and I wrote a well-received piece in early May titled “Dear Ted Cruz – Thank You (https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/05/dear-ted-cruz-thank-you).” It is time for a piece thanking Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) (https://www.conservativereview.com/members/rand-paul/) for coming back to the Senate with libertarian-ish guns blazing.
Senator Paul has filed a series of amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2017 that should get liberty-minded voters excited. As a former staffer for Sen. Paul, I am really happy to see him standing up for the American people, and the people of Kentucky, who care about freedom, liberty and the natural rights of man.
Stop Undeclared WarsCongress and president have disregarded the clear language of the Constitution by declaring, or not declaring, war on ISIS. The Constitution — Article I, Sec. 8 — states that only Congress has the power “To declare War.” Right now, the Obama administration is fighting a war against ISIS without any authorization from Congress. This is a failure on the part of both Congress and the president. Senator Paul is trying to force a vote on this very subject as part of the debate on the NDAA. Paul’s amendment explains: “Congress finds that neither the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force or the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 authorize the use of military force against the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS).” The Obama administration has relied on government lawyers to twist existing authorizations and interpretations of the words “imminent threat” to conduct a war without congressional authorization.
Connor Friedersdorf wrote the following for The Atlantic on November 2, 2015 (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-perils-of-president-obamas-latest-undeclared-war/413566/):
Without Congressional permission, public debate, or any attempt to rally the American public’s support, President Obama has ordered U.S. ground troops to a war zone, his most flagrantly unconstitutional war-making since he unlawfully helped to overthrow Muammar al-Qaddafi. ‘The United States is set to deploy troops on the ground in Syria for the first time to advise and assist rebel forces combating ISIS,’ CNN reports (http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/30/politics/syria-troops-special-operations-forces/). ‘The deployment of U.S. Special Operations forces is the most significant escalation of the American military campaign against ISIS to date.’
Remember the peace-loving then-Senator Barack Obama (D-Illinois)? Senator Obama argued to the Boston Globe in December 20, 2007 (http://archive.boston.com/news/politics/2008/specials/CandidateQA/ObamaQA/) that “the President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.” That guy was right and the current occupant of the White House is wrong.
Paul’s amendment further states (https://www.paul.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/AUMF.pdf) the following:
It is the sense of Congress that the President, unless acting out of self-defense or to address an imminent threat to the United States, is not authorized to conduct military operations against ISIS without explicit authorization for the use of such force, and Congress should debate and pass such an authorization.
Expect Hillary to stand on the shoulders of President Obama to push for more unauthorized conflicts like the one she pushed for in Libya. Congress needs to either pass an Act of War, or at a minimum debate an Authorization for the Use of Military Force. Thank you Rand Paul for forcing a debate in Congress on the current state of unauthorized war in Syria and Iraq.
Repeal the Draft Another fight happening on the NDAA is a debate over women being subject to the draft.
Sen. Paul has an amendment that would end mandatory conscription into the armed forces for both men and women. I agree with Rand Paul, and also agree with the rational voices who don’t want to force America’s daughters onto the front lines of the next war.
Republicans in the House lived up to the “The Stupid Party” moniker when one member thought it cute to offer an amendment forcing women into the draft with the intention of voting it down. According to the Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/05/14/key-senate-panel-endorses-women-in-the-draft-making-policy-change-more-likely/), the debate was started by an opponent of women in the draft:
The recent push to change the draft actually began with a measure that was designed to fail. Last month, Rep. Duncan D. Hunter (R-Calif.) (https://www.conservativereview.com/members/duncan-hunter/), who opposes opening all combat roles to women, offered an amendment during the House Armed Services Committee’s consideration of the annual defense policy bill to include women in the draft in order to start a “discussion” about the issue.
While Rep. Hunter voted against his own amendment, he clearly forgot that messaging amendments offered to prove a point are usually dumb experiments and sometimes they backfire. The Hunter Amendment should be memorialized for future members of Congress in a “What Congressmen Should Never Do” class. If American women are forced into mandatory front line service through the draft, they will have Rep. Duncan Hunter to thank.
While the usual suspects — Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) (https://www.conservativereview.com/members/john-mccain/) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) (https://www.conservativereview.com/members/lindsey-graham/) — supported this horrible idea, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) (https://www.conservativereview.com/members/mike-lee/) bravely opposed it and tried to strip the language out of the bill. If we can’t agree with Sen. Paul that the draft is a bad idea, let’s at least agree with Sen. Lee that forcing our nation’s women into battle is not something that a civilized society should do.
Repeal Gun-Free Military Installation Rule Sen. Paul has another amendment on the NDAA to allow permit members of the armed forces to possess firearms on military installations consistent with state and local law. It would seem like common sense to allow a member of the military to have a gun on the base to protect themselves from harm. How anybody would think that guns should be banned from a military base defies logic.
Senator Paul has two other amendments to declassify 28 pages of the 9/11 report and to restore veterans’ due process rights to own a gun. These are all great amendments and liberty-minded Americans should thank Senator Rand Paul for standing up for the ideas of transparency, freedom, self-defense and the explicit language of the Constitution.
https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/06/dear-rand-paul-thank-you
https://www.conservativereview.com/sss/media/images/conservative-review/article-images/2016/february/rand-paul-with-family.jpg?w=744
John Gray and I wrote a well-received piece in early May titled “Dear Ted Cruz – Thank You (https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/05/dear-ted-cruz-thank-you).” It is time for a piece thanking Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) (https://www.conservativereview.com/members/rand-paul/) for coming back to the Senate with libertarian-ish guns blazing.
Senator Paul has filed a series of amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2017 that should get liberty-minded voters excited. As a former staffer for Sen. Paul, I am really happy to see him standing up for the American people, and the people of Kentucky, who care about freedom, liberty and the natural rights of man.
Stop Undeclared WarsCongress and president have disregarded the clear language of the Constitution by declaring, or not declaring, war on ISIS. The Constitution — Article I, Sec. 8 — states that only Congress has the power “To declare War.” Right now, the Obama administration is fighting a war against ISIS without any authorization from Congress. This is a failure on the part of both Congress and the president. Senator Paul is trying to force a vote on this very subject as part of the debate on the NDAA. Paul’s amendment explains: “Congress finds that neither the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force or the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 authorize the use of military force against the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS).” The Obama administration has relied on government lawyers to twist existing authorizations and interpretations of the words “imminent threat” to conduct a war without congressional authorization.
Connor Friedersdorf wrote the following for The Atlantic on November 2, 2015 (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-perils-of-president-obamas-latest-undeclared-war/413566/):
Without Congressional permission, public debate, or any attempt to rally the American public’s support, President Obama has ordered U.S. ground troops to a war zone, his most flagrantly unconstitutional war-making since he unlawfully helped to overthrow Muammar al-Qaddafi. ‘The United States is set to deploy troops on the ground in Syria for the first time to advise and assist rebel forces combating ISIS,’ CNN reports (http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/30/politics/syria-troops-special-operations-forces/). ‘The deployment of U.S. Special Operations forces is the most significant escalation of the American military campaign against ISIS to date.’
Remember the peace-loving then-Senator Barack Obama (D-Illinois)? Senator Obama argued to the Boston Globe in December 20, 2007 (http://archive.boston.com/news/politics/2008/specials/CandidateQA/ObamaQA/) that “the President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.” That guy was right and the current occupant of the White House is wrong.
Paul’s amendment further states (https://www.paul.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/AUMF.pdf) the following:
It is the sense of Congress that the President, unless acting out of self-defense or to address an imminent threat to the United States, is not authorized to conduct military operations against ISIS without explicit authorization for the use of such force, and Congress should debate and pass such an authorization.
Expect Hillary to stand on the shoulders of President Obama to push for more unauthorized conflicts like the one she pushed for in Libya. Congress needs to either pass an Act of War, or at a minimum debate an Authorization for the Use of Military Force. Thank you Rand Paul for forcing a debate in Congress on the current state of unauthorized war in Syria and Iraq.
Repeal the Draft Another fight happening on the NDAA is a debate over women being subject to the draft.
Sen. Paul has an amendment that would end mandatory conscription into the armed forces for both men and women. I agree with Rand Paul, and also agree with the rational voices who don’t want to force America’s daughters onto the front lines of the next war.
Republicans in the House lived up to the “The Stupid Party” moniker when one member thought it cute to offer an amendment forcing women into the draft with the intention of voting it down. According to the Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/05/14/key-senate-panel-endorses-women-in-the-draft-making-policy-change-more-likely/), the debate was started by an opponent of women in the draft:
The recent push to change the draft actually began with a measure that was designed to fail. Last month, Rep. Duncan D. Hunter (R-Calif.) (https://www.conservativereview.com/members/duncan-hunter/), who opposes opening all combat roles to women, offered an amendment during the House Armed Services Committee’s consideration of the annual defense policy bill to include women in the draft in order to start a “discussion” about the issue.
While Rep. Hunter voted against his own amendment, he clearly forgot that messaging amendments offered to prove a point are usually dumb experiments and sometimes they backfire. The Hunter Amendment should be memorialized for future members of Congress in a “What Congressmen Should Never Do” class. If American women are forced into mandatory front line service through the draft, they will have Rep. Duncan Hunter to thank.
While the usual suspects — Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) (https://www.conservativereview.com/members/john-mccain/) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) (https://www.conservativereview.com/members/lindsey-graham/) — supported this horrible idea, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) (https://www.conservativereview.com/members/mike-lee/) bravely opposed it and tried to strip the language out of the bill. If we can’t agree with Sen. Paul that the draft is a bad idea, let’s at least agree with Sen. Lee that forcing our nation’s women into battle is not something that a civilized society should do.
Repeal Gun-Free Military Installation Rule Sen. Paul has another amendment on the NDAA to allow permit members of the armed forces to possess firearms on military installations consistent with state and local law. It would seem like common sense to allow a member of the military to have a gun on the base to protect themselves from harm. How anybody would think that guns should be banned from a military base defies logic.
Senator Paul has two other amendments to declassify 28 pages of the 9/11 report and to restore veterans’ due process rights to own a gun. These are all great amendments and liberty-minded Americans should thank Senator Rand Paul for standing up for the ideas of transparency, freedom, self-defense and the explicit language of the Constitution.
https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/06/dear-rand-paul-thank-you