Referendum on tortureWith Joe Lieberman voting for the torture and arbitrary detention bill on final passage, Ned Lamont has the chance to turn the Connecticut Senate race into a referendum on whether we intend to remain the United States of America, or give in to the terrorists by shredding our Constitution and sacrificing our national honor to our fears.
Win or lose, that seems to me like the right strategy.
You have your tenses wrong. We no longer are the United States of America. We have shredded our Constitution (not to mention the Magna Carta). The question is whether we will ever recreate the nation that was founded in 1776, and I'm doubtful. The point, seriously, is that we remained the nation we were even with a rogue president, because there was still the possibility, however unlikely, that he could be prosecuted for his crimes. But when the legislature makes his crimes the law of the land, then we are no longer that nation.
Posted by: Henry at September 29, 2006 08:30 AMSo now we have our own "Star Chamber" and I don't mean Kenneth Starr, though the confluence of names is apt. Now you can be taken prisoner, tortured, and kept in jail for ever because the President says you have "aided and abetted terrorists." You are convicted of being a terrorist without a trial. That can mean that if you inadvertently contribute to a charity that unbenownst to you helps an Islamist organization the Torturer-in-Chief can class you as a terrorist. If your protests about Bush and his Praetorian Guard become too loud - and too close to the truth - you can be wisked away and never heard of again. The "Star Chamber" was where, in medieval times prisoners were taken to be summarily sentenced to death without knowing what there crime bad been, with evidence they could never see (often obtained by torture) being used against them. It There was no defence. This country has now sunk to the lawless ness of medieval times. The "King" is sole juge, jury and executioner. What have we come to?
Posted by: Kate T at September 29, 2006 09:34 AMTo be whisked away you don't have to inadvertently contribute to a proscribed charity or loudly protest. With no habeas corpus, you can be whisked away for omitting the "h" in "whisked" or for no reason at all, as long as Bush says that you're an enemy combatant.
Posted by: Henry at September 29, 2006 10:39 AMWell, last I looked, Lieberman was ten points ahead. So if Ned Lamont makes it a referendum, the side you like loses. Is this smart?
Posted by: dave s at September 29, 2006 06:53 PMThanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)