Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Friday, August 15, 2014

Rand Paul: There is a legitimate role for the police to keep the peace, but there should be a difference between a police response and a military response. The images and scenes we continue to see in Ferguson resemble war more than traditional police action. ... The militarization of our law enforcement is due to an unprecedented expansion of government power in this realm. It is one thing for federal officials to work in conjunction with local authorities to reduce or solve crime. It is quite another for them to subsidize it.

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

lee_the_agent

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

More

Anyone who thinks that race does not still, even if inadvertently, skew the application of criminal justice in this country is just not paying close enough attention. Our prisons are full of black and brown men and women who are serving inappropriately long and harsh sentences for non-violent mistakes in their youth.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

It looks like the good senator has never been to St. Louis or to any of our urban areas. If anything, our police needs to increase militarization. They're outnumbered. Fear and brute force is what the urbanites understand.

#1 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2014-08-14 01:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

Paul is still pandering to butt-hurt Obama voters... hoping they'll trade a little libertarian happy talk for Paul Ryan's economics, dismantling the ACA, and another Scalia or two.

#2 | Posted by Corky at 2014-08-14 01:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

Excellent. A major politician calling for demilitarizing the police. The ball is in your court, progressive Obama and progressive Hillary.

#3 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-14 01:20 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

"Paul is still pandering "

Paul seems to be expressing the same views that his father did. It's hillarious that a clintonite would accuse anyone else of pandering.

#4 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-14 01:31 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

Fear and brute force is what the urbanites understand.
#1 | POSTED BY LEE_THE_AGENT

Not a fan of history books, eh? I recommend any that highlight the Civil Rights era. Furthermore, I recommend The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness by Michelle Alexander to address your significant naivete.

Paul is still pandering to butt-hurt Obama voters...
#2 | POSTED BY CORKY

You should be butt hurt. Who was it acknowledging the true reality of systemic racism within the CJS? It wasn't Obama, or Hillary, no....oh, that's right...it was Howard Dean and RAND fnckin' PAUL!

The ball is in your court, progressive Obama and progressive Hillary.
#3 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

I'm with you NULLI!

#5 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-08-14 01:35 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Howard Dean would make a fine President.

Ayn Rand Paul Ryan will make a typical Klown Kar Kandidate.

#6 | Posted by Corky at 2014-08-14 01:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

to address your significant naivete.

Go spend the night in Detroit or the south side of Chicago and get back to me.

#7 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2014-08-14 01:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

Rand Paul appears to be to the left of Clintonites on the most important issues: imperialism and the national security/surveillance/
incarceration state.

Must really piss off those "progressives".

#8 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-14 02:01 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

-the most important issues: imperialism and the national security/surveillance/
incarceration state.

Hilarious.

www.gallup.com

#9 | Posted by Corky at 2014-08-14 02:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

What's Hillary's position on demilitarizing the police? Does anybody know?

#10 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-14 02:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

Nulli's actually correct. If Rand Paul didn't have such a disgusting racist background he could be a candidate I might give serious thought to supporting. But he does. So he is not.

#11 | Posted by moder8 at 2014-08-14 02:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

I see Dandy Paul is back to his opportunistic pandering again.
Who does he think he is foolin'? Certainly not the people who pay attention.
Without a militarized police force, (which are local by the way) who is going to protect him from girls in halter tops asking him to elaborate on his lectures he so freely and eagerly offers up from the safety of a studio.

#12 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2014-08-14 02:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

" opportunistic pandering again."

Is his position any different than his father's? Has it changed in the last twenty years?

#13 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-14 02:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

" If Rand Paul didn't have such a disgusting racist background he could be a candidate"

You mean like this?

Rand Paul: Drug War Is Racist Like Jim Crow
politix.topix.com

Has Obama or Hillary ever said that?

#14 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-14 02:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Is his position any different than his father's? Has it changed in the last twenty years?"

That's what is so sad.
You would think that after twenty years and over 3 million dollars in collected salary, (tax dollars) they would realize that law enforcement is managed at a state level. "States Rights"!

------- idiots.

#15 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2014-08-14 02:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

"www.gallup.com"

Argumentum ad populum, this poster's favorite "retort".

#16 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-14 02:40 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

What's Hillary's position on demilitarizing the police? Does anybody know?

#10 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN AT 2014-08-14 02:21 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

What and have to dodge sniper fire in Georgia?

#17 | Posted by 726 at 2014-08-14 02:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Has Obama or Hillary ever said that"

Yes, cause "saying" it is just as good as actually doing something.

The better question is: after 25 years of "saying" libertarian things, there is not one instance of anything ever being done other than voting with authoritarian republicans while "saying" empty crap like this.

Why should anyone think different now?

#18 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2014-08-14 02:44 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

The better question is: after 25 years of "saying" libertarian things, there is not one instance of anything ever being done other than voting with authoritarian republicans while "saying" empty crap like this.

Just think of all the empty crap any republicon has said over the past 25 years concerning:

Abortion

Health Care

Immigration

Job Creation

Why should this be any different?

#19 | Posted by 726 at 2014-08-14 02:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Yes, cause "saying" it is just as good as actually doing something."

The Clintons were in office for 8 years, and Obama for 6 years so far. They haven't stopped the militarization of the police by the federal government.

#20 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-14 02:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

The ball is in your court, progressive Obama and progressive Hillary.
#3 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

I'm with you NULLI!

#5 | Posted by rstybeach11

I know huh?

What is taking that Obama so long to unilaterally step in and reform the States Police forces?

He still has a pen doesn't he?

#21 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-08-14 02:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

"What is taking that Obama so long to unilaterally step in and reform the States Police forces?

He still has a pen doesn't he?"

He has a pen but no balls.

#22 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-14 02:54 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

I keep saying if it turns to Rand Paul versus Hillary, the election will be a mess. Democrats (capital D) might vote for Hillary - but the left will be divided between those for whom economic issues are more important and those for whom civil liberties and out of control imperialism are more important. Meanwhile, Hillary would likely appeal more to the hawkish right than RP even. I almost hope those are the big two, purely to watch that political shake up happening. Another part of me desperately hopes not, as either way, the 1% win and the rest of us lose.

#23 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-08-14 02:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

#20 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN AT 2014-08-14 02:51 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

If anything, Bill is the one who began the unnecessary and out of control building of the police forces.

#24 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-08-14 02:57 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

"If anything, Bill is the one who began the unnecessary and out of control building of the police forces."

And yet, that weasel is worshipped by DNC partisans.

#25 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-14 03:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

If we're going to demilitarize the police, we need to start with the Department of Homeland Security.

#26 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2014-08-14 03:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

I am not sure I understand Liberals, you wanted bigger government you got it...... now you complain about it.......

In order to enforce an ever increasing amount of interference in people's lives you must have a force that leaves without question the power of the government.

This issue was brought up in the Bundy situation, but none of you pukes really gave it much thought....
21stcenturywire.com

Why was that? Because it was for your cause, now the tables have turned and you complain....

You reap what you sow.....

#27 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2014-08-14 03:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

-Argumentum ad populum,

Voters don't matter. Only Pure of Heart ideologues matter.

#28 | Posted by Corky at 2014-08-14 03:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

Mackris, it's clear you don't understand liberals. A police state is in many ways an authoritarian right-wing concept. (Full blown communism aside, but hence my preference for the political compass with points of anarchy and authoritarianism, as well as and beyond the simple left/right paradigm.) Liberalism, my kind anyway, is merely about investment. Investing in society, giving it a leg up. More safety nets for people to bounce back up in case of failure, more education and opportunity.

Government will always try to expand. That's it's nature. One can guide that to better serve, or make a monster out of it that one must serve instead. A nascent fascist organization such as the one we're feeding with our militarism and expanding police powers, sadly is the second kind.

#29 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-08-14 03:19 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 3

#28 OR ideas don't matter, only pure of vote ideologues matter, right Cork? Argumentum ad flavus canis?

#30 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2014-08-14 03:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

""If anything, Bill is the one who began the unnecessary and out of control building of the police forces.""

He put an additional 10,000 police on the streets of America who were used to do "community policing" which is when the cops walk beats and get to know the residents of their beat. Bush began the militarization of the police departments after 9-11. I remember, I lived in Hollywood, FL where they got a big Hummer courtesy of the federal government. I didn't feel one iota safer knowing that they had that Hummer but the cops loved driving around in it being tough guys.

#31 | Posted by danni at 2014-08-14 03:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

He has a pen but no balls.

#22 | Posted by nullifidian

So let me get this straight. You want Obama to unilaterally interfere in a States internal affairs without any Congressional backing.

I thought he was already being sued for that.

Speaking out against this and shaming them is one thing but for him to unilaterally act is another. He is sending in the FBI to monitor the situation. Not sure what you think he can actually do that he is not already doing.

From the New York Times

Mr. Obama urged law enforcement and protesters to "take a step back and think" about their actions. He scolded the police in Ferguson for reports of excessive force by officers and of protesters being jailed.

"Police should not be bullying or arresting journalists who are just trying to do their jobs," Mr. Obama said. "Now's the time for healing. Now's the time for peace and calm on the streets of Ferguson."

Minutes earlier, the governor promised that residents of Ferguson were going to see a different tone in the response by the police after five nights of unrest during which the authorities have used tear gas and rubber bullets to control the crowds.

Officials said that Governor Nixon would soon remove the St. Louis County police from handling the protests in Ferguson.

The police chief of Ferguson, Tom Jackson, said during a news conference that federal, state and local officials were meeting Thursday to discuss the police response to the protests, in part to determine if the actions of officers had exacerbated the conflict.

"We're going to talk about not only the tactics but the appearance" of the officers, who have been equipped with riot gear, armored vehicles and assault rifles during the demonstrations, Chief Jackson said.

www.nytimes.com

I'd say this is a good start at reducing the tensions there.

#32 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-08-14 03:38 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Ferguson isn't a Presidential problem..this isn't even a federal problem. This is the Missouri Governor's problem and the buck should stop there. What has the their governor done? Anything? I don't even know who he/she is but I haven't seen him/her on the news, so I presume the answer is "diddly squat".

#33 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2014-08-14 03:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

"They haven't stopped the militarization of the police by the federal government."

Oh boy!
Here we go again.

State and municipal law enforcement is now lumped in with the "feds" by the "State Rights" bozos.

Go figure, (*not really).

State and local law enforcement are militarizing not because Obama or democrats --- its militarizing because we are having an explosion of antigovernment, conspiracy theory gun toting "prepper" yahoos running around threatening public safety, and the safety of law enforcement officers with their public dress up gun fetish.

All thanks to douchebags like Rand Paul.

Just what did these people think would happen when they decided to go on a date with their paramilitary rifles to family restaurants? It is beyond me.
You were warned though --- as usual.

#34 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2014-08-14 03:56 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

The militarization is increasing because lobbyists for the industries that supply military gear are buying Congress, Legislature, etc. It's all about the money.

#35 | Posted by danni at 2014-08-14 04:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Voters don't matter. Only Pure of Heart ideologues matter."

Majority vote doesn't establish principles. I can see why a Clintonite wouldn't understand that.

#36 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-14 04:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

"The militarization is increasing because..."

Obama has done nothing in the last 6 years to stop it?

#37 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-14 04:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

'16 is going to be really interesting.

Note to Democrats: Rand Paul is the Republican you should be worrying about.

In more normal times I would say that Rand Paul is unelectable. However, given the NSA issue and given that the #1 perceived threat to this country is big government, Paul's brand of politics could be coming at just the right time.

Particularly in light of the NSA revelations, a LOT of liberals are displaying a fierce streak of civil Libertarianism. While liberals will still disagree with a lot of his politics, they may find enough agreement in certain key areas to pull the lever for him in lieu of Hillary Clinton.

#38 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-08-14 04:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

Issues don't matter in presidential elections. If that were the case Romney would be president.

Presidential elections are popularity contests. Everybody knows who the Clinton's are. Their name recognition is through the roof. Rand Paul is a gnat in their ear.

#39 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2014-08-14 04:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

- Paul's brand of politics could be coming at just the right time.

He'll never, ever, get his own party's nomination. Ever.

#40 | Posted by Corky at 2014-08-14 05:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

#39 | POSTED BY LEE_THE_AGENT AT 2014-08-14 04:56 PM | FLAG:

Mistaken. Issues are why Romney failed. Rather his stance on them. With someone who persistently fails to take the side of the left like Obama, Romney still had to try to swing right of him on every issue: making of himself a caricature. One can hardly tell Obama apart from Bush, the worst president we've ever had. The last thing people wanted was someone who would exacerbate those issues.

#41 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-08-14 05:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

He'll never, ever, get his own party's nomination. Ever.

#40 | Posted by Corky at 2014-08-14 05:08 PM | Reply | Flag: I hope and pray!

#42 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-14 05:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

#42 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN AT 2014-08-14 05:15 PM | FLAG:

I pictured chanting that while rocking with a teddy bear.

#43 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-08-14 05:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

He'll never, ever, get his own party's nomination. Ever.
#40 | POSTED BY CORKY

If not Rand, then who? ROMNEY again?

HAHA! Sad pathetic environment the Republicans have now found themselves in suggests you are completely WRONG!!

HAHA!

#44 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-08-14 05:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

Rand Paul is soft on crime!

--Carlyle

#45 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-14 07:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

House Democrat Readies Bill To Demilitarize Local Police

Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) announced Thursday that he plans to file legislation aimed at stemming the militarization of local police. His office said he has been working on it for months but decided to expedite it in light of this week's events in Ferguson.

Bicameral. Bipartisan. Hopefully they can work together for such a common sense movement.

#46 | Posted by tonyroma at 2014-08-14 08:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

"One can hardly tell Obama apart from Bush, the worst president we've ever had."

Passed healthcare reform, raised taxes, pulled troops out of Iraq, passed Wall St. regulations in Dodd Frank, tried to pass legislation to bring jobs back home, ended torture, and on and on.....to pretend he is just Bush 3 is ridiculous.

#47 | Posted by danni at 2014-08-14 08:23 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

-Majority vote doesn't establish principles.

No, it establishes Presidents. Something Noam, nor Ayn Rand Paul Ryan, will ever be.

-Flag: I hope and pray!

-I pictured chanting that while rocking with a teddy bear.

#43 | POSTED BY ZEROPOINTNRG

I see the Puritopians have yet to find their lowest level of ad hominem rather than argument. But they must be getting close.

#48 | Posted by Corky at 2014-08-14 10:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

Hillary represents a DNC establishment which is as far removed from civil libertarianism as was Bush 2 and his neocon national security clowns like Kristol, Zelikow, etc. A vote for Hillary is a vote for more of everything that civil libertarians hate. Democratic partisans are scared because Americans do not want more of that status quo..

Democrats voted for hope and change hoping to actually see the NSA, police state and war reigned in. If Hillary runs, the hard core progressive left turn out will be only marginal because they know she and the Feinsteins and others who call themselves Democrats will do nothing in that regard.

#49 | Posted by Robson at 2014-08-15 04:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

I agree with a sizable portion of what Rand Paul says, including this.

It's a sad commentary on the state of the GOP when the libertarian is the sensible one.

#50 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-15 11:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

The GOP, which includes supposed "libratarians", love them some police state when a (R) sits in the WH.

Just look at Dandy Paul's own history to see this in effect.

Remember the thrill they displayed when the war protestors got roughed up? What about the "don't tase me bro" guy? This of course when Bush was in office, when the "government was keeping you safe" and criticism of a sitting president "emboldened the enemy".

Now we are supposed to believe they don't like this, after they created it with thier chants of "if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about".

Thanks, --------.

#51 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2014-08-16 10:36 AM | Reply | Flag:

I hope Paul does get the nomination. He'll be slammed hypocritically from both the left and right, and probably won't win, but at least it would be an interesting campaign.

#52 | Posted by sentinel at 2014-08-16 01:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

I want Rand Paul to have a serious run at it, but not to win. I want him part of the debate, but not the deciding factor. I think much of what he says is important for the nation to really consider, but he is too flighty in his points of view for me to be comfortable with him as the final say.

#53 | Posted by kanrei at 2014-08-16 01:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

"but at least it would be an interesting campaign."

Would be quite interesting to see Hillary outflanked on the left by a Republican on big issues like imperialism and the national security/surveillance/
incarceration state.

#54 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-16 01:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

" but he is too flighty in his points of view for me to be comfortable with him as the final say."

Plus he wears a dead animal on the top of his head.

#55 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-16 01:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

Plus he wears a dead animal on the top of his head.

POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN AT 2014-08-16 01:43 PM

It ain't dead; it is hanging on for dear life.

#56 | Posted by kanrei at 2014-08-16 01:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I hope Paul does get the nomination."

Clintonites are praying for Ted Cruz. Paul is their worst nightmare.

#57 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-08-16 02:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

#53 KANREI - I want Rand Paul to have a serious run at it, but not to win. I want him part of the debate, but not the deciding factor.

The debate doesn't mean squat as we saw from "all the right words from Obama".

We need to see a major change in philosophy from those that have been given the chance to run the USA into the ground for 30 years. That's what Americans want and need. We need change not just promises. Obama proved that promises don't cut it.

#58 | Posted by Robson at 2014-08-16 07:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

Eric Cantor's defeat illustrated that Americans are disgusted with the status quo of corrupt politicians working for Wall Street and other countries. Both Parties are subservient to both.

#59 | Posted by Robson at 2014-08-16 07:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

Just look at Dandy Paul's own history to see this in effect.
Remember the thrill they displayed when the war protestors got roughed up? What about the "don't tase me bro" guy? This of course when Bush was in office, when the "government was keeping you safe" and criticism of a sitting president "emboldened the enemy".

I don't remember. Post a link. I have a feeling I'm going to be waiting awhile because this is a total fabrication on your part.

#60 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2014-08-17 09:03 AM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable

 

Advertisement

Drudge Retort