<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt">This is an interesting article on the reaction of Democrats to the Paul filibuster. I thought it was quite insightful.<br><br>The article is too long to post it in it's entirety. I'm posting a link to the article in the Guardian and will copy+paste the first few paragraphs.<br><br><br><div>http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/10/paul-filibuster-drones-progressives</div><div><br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 16px; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; background-color: transparent; font-style: normal;"><br></div><div id="main-article-info">
<h1 itemprop="name headline ">Three Democratic myths used to demean the Paul filibuster</h1>
<div itemprop="description" id="stand-first" class="stand-first-alone" data-component="Article:standfirst_cta">The
progressive 'empathy gap', a strain of liberal authoritarianism, and a
distortion of Holder's letter are invoked to defend Obama</div>
<br><div>Commencing immediately upon the 9/11 attack, the US government under
two successive administrations has spent 12 straight years inventing and
implementing new theories of government power in the name of Terrorism.
Literally every year since 9/11 has ushered in increased authorities of
exactly the type Americans are inculcated to believe only exist in
those Other, Non-Free societies: ubiquitous surveillance, impenetrable
secrecy, and the power to imprison and even kill without charges or due
process. Even as the 9/11 attack recedes into the distant past, the US
government still finds ways continuously to increase its powers in the
name of Terrorism while virtually never relinquishing any of the power
it acquires. So inexorable has this process been that the Obama
administration has already exercised the power to target even its own
citizens for execution far from any battlefield, and the process has now
arrived at its inevitable destination: does this due-process-free
execution power extend to US soil as well?</div><div><br></div><div>All of this has taken
place with very little public backlash: especially over the last four
years. Worse, it has prompted almost no institutional resistance from
the structures designed to check executive abuses: courts, the media,
and Congress. Last week's 13-hour filibuster of John Brennan's
confirmation as CIA director by GOP Sen. Rand Paul was one of the first -
and, from the perspective of media attention, easily among the most
effective -Congressional efforts to dramatize and oppose just how
radical these Terrorism-justified powers have become. For the first time
since the 9/11 attack, even lowly cable news shows were forced - by the
Paul filibuster - to extensively discuss the government's extremist
theories of power and to debate the need for checks and limits. <br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 16px; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; background-color: transparent; font-style: normal;"><br></div><div>All
of this put Democrats - who spent eight years flamboyantly pretending
to be champions of due process and opponents of mass secrecy and
executive power abuses - in a very uncomfortable position. The
politician who took such a unique stand in defense of these principles
was not merely a Republican but a leading member of its dreaded Tea
Party wing, while the actor most responsible for the extremist theories
of power being protested was their own beloved leader and his political
party.</div><div><br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 16px; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; background-color: transparent; font-style: normal;">...</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 16px; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; background-color: transparent; font-style: normal;"><br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 16px; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; background-color: transparent; font-style: normal;"><br></div>http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/10/paul-filibuster-drones-progressives</div></div></body></html>