Drudge Report
Earlier today Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) made a remark about drones on Fox Business News that suggested his position had changed. "If there is a killer on the loose in a neighborhood, I'm not against drones being used to search them," Paul said.
"If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and $50 in cash, I don't care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him, but it's different if they want to come fly over your hot tub, or your yard just because they want to do surveillance on everyone, and they want to watch your activities."
More than a few people interpreted Paul's statement to mean that he had revised his position on the domestic use of drones. RAND LEARNS TO LOVE THE DRONE! is/was the treatment at the top of Drudge, which linked to a Foreign Policy post titled, "Ron Paul fans furious over Rand Paul's drone flip-flop." While some folks came to Paul's defense, such as Jordan Bloom at The American Conservative, it would appear that the Drudge headline touched a nerve. At 9:50 p.m. tonight, Paul's office released the following statement:
"My comments last night left the mistaken impression that my position on drones had changed. "Let me be clear: it has not. Armed drones should not be used in normal crime situations. They only may only be considered in extraordinary, lethal situations where there is an ongoing, imminent threat. I described that scenario previously during my Senate filibuster. "Additionally, surveillance drones should only be used with warrants and specific targets. "Fighting terrorism and capturing terrorists must be done while preserving our constitutional protections. This was demonstrated last week in Boston. As we all seek to prevent future tragedies, we must continue to bear this in mind."
Watch Paul's FBN appearance below:
Comments