Speaking as a resident alien, I would expect a civilized nation to extend to me the same protection under the law as she would her own citizens. (With the obvious exception that I can be deported, something that’s damn hard to do to a US citizen.) On the flip side of that, I of course willingly submit to living under the rules of said law - fair is fair. That does not seem like an unreasonable trade-off to me.
Anyway, what I expect is a moot point - as far as I’m informed, there’s legal precedent that the protections in the Bill of Rights (that’s the specific document you’re trying to wiggle around here, correct ?) extend to all persons - not just citizens - under US jurisdiction. If you really want to turn people into legal nonpersons, you need to move them to, say, a Naval base on foreign territory. I think I recall hearing about one of those…
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cases_of_anthrax]Then I would give you one.
[/quote]
Refresh my memory. Who was caught and prosecuted for that, again?
Say what you will about Frist, but by scheduling a floor vote on the censure measure, he got numerous Democrats to speak out against it. This marginalized Feingold and made the measure look far more radical than it would had it been allowed to gain momentum.
Tactically, the Democratic Party was badly outmaneuvered here.
Refresh my memory. Who was caught and prosecuted for that, again?
[/QUOTE]
Well, to be fair to Duffer’s point, the anthrax attacks happened just one week after 9/11, before any of the security measures he’s referencing were implemented.
So taking that…America had an attack on the Trade Center in 1993. Then not another succesful one until 2001. So did Clinton’s policies and procedures during that 8 year span protect America? Did you support Clinton during those 8 attack free years? Was he a Bold and Courageous leader? And was it GW’s incomming policies that weakened us?
I pity you that you think my comment was snide and cutting. I really don’t think your comments in this thread made sense or were particularly relevant to the topic under discussion. I had hoped you would somehow respond in a way that made your initial post less of a non sequitur. It seems to me that you’ve lately become more and more reactionary, caustic and stiff-necked so it was more wishful thinking than a real hope. Like Charlie Daniels you affect a down-homey demeanor while expressing distain for those who are different with different values and priorities. You cotton no criticism of yourself or your ossified opinons about the proper pecking order of society, yet are quick to offer denouncements of those who disagree. Sauce, goose, gander.
As far as previous friendliness goes, let’s just say I’ve got scars in my back from far too many backstabbers at that board. You may have noticed the timestamp of my last (not just latest) post is several months old now.
I would have said it’s more like beating a quadruplegic in a marathon, but only because the Democratic party volunteered to have its spine surgically removed around about September 2001 and hasn’t so much as reached for a replacement since…
I referenced the other board just to make sure you knew who I was, giving you the benefit of the doubt and all that, in case you did not connect me with that other name.
So you lump us in with things that others did to you? Sounds like you are saying we did it to you also? If we participate someplace you don’t like, you automatically don’t like us too?
That one line of yours was not a request for a better response from an acquaintance if not friend, but, since I had not said a word to you or about any post by you and you were not the OP, I really do not see it (your attack) in the same light as you now claim.
Now I forget, is it every body in Fords or is it Chevys that you automatically hate?
Weird how Bush gets a pass on the literally THOUSANDS of attacks against American troops and interests that have occurred during his horrendous misrule, but Clinton doesn’t get a pass for the two embassies and one destroyer. But you will do anything to prove you are a worthy subject for King George, including tossing off the “on our soil” clause that duffer included in the comment that started this little exchange.
Heh. I’ve seen this nickname (or similar) before, but it’s only now just dawned on me how ironic it is. (Not that I believe it’s at all an accurate view of Bush)
Nobody gets a pass for anything. I’m just saying it would be a mistake to misremember the 1990’s as a time of perfect peace and prosperity.
My Navy enlistment was served entirely during Clinton’s term, and I participated in operations that make me eligible to join the VFW. Therefore, I’m well aware of this.
I’m afraid the whole story can’t be told here, so any further clarifications will have to be done via email.
GunsNSpot and Homebrew, there is to be no more discussion of any off-board disagreements in this thread, if you please. While everyone has stayed fairly civil so far, these things always have the potential to blow up into a mess at the drop of a hat, and have no bearing on what takes place at this message board in any case.