Well said, sir. I love the story of your upbringing and how it instilled a deep appreciation for what makes this country unique. “Only in America,” as we used to say. Keep fighting the good fight.
“What if this trend towards political violence continues on campus?” But I had to remember that the trend towards political violence had been steadily increasing for years.
Another thing well worth remembering is the wisdom of the warning in a fairly famous SCOTUS decision, Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), quoting the wise and great Justice Brandeis (joined by the wise and great Justice Holmes) dissenting in Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928)) put it:
"Our Government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the Government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy."
Trump is a great teacher. He's publicly killing people based on his ipse dixit that it's "self-defense" against a Venezuelan invasion force attacking the U.S. one little boat at a time.
Where were you when Obama was droning people -- including US citizens -- left and right?
Did you retire to your fainting couch then too?
For the record, I was fine with Obama droning terrorists and Trump zapping drug runners from cartels. Both are akin to pirates, on whom military force has been used without compunction -- until very recently -- for thousands of years.
Feargall, what does your question matter? What does it matter where anyone was? What matters is what conduct is constitutional, not whether every person who considers the current president's blatantly unconstitutional misconduct also addressed a prior president's conduct.
Since you asked, however, I'll say that I thought very little about the Obama conduct that you mentioned, in part, because it didn't seem as dangerously maniacal as Trump's killings. It part, I also wasn't worried that Obama was trying to drag the U.S. into a conflict without Congressional approval (as Trump obviously is trying to do).
If you think a constitutional argument can be made supporting Trump's conduct, please feel free to make it. But please don't join the people who pretend that violations of our Constitutions are ok just because they seem somewhat analogous to something someone else did.
Well said, sir. I love the story of your upbringing and how it instilled a deep appreciation for what makes this country unique. “Only in America,” as we used to say. Keep fighting the good fight.
“What if this trend towards political violence continues on campus?” But I had to remember that the trend towards political violence had been steadily increasing for years.
Another thing well worth remembering is the wisdom of the warning in a fairly famous SCOTUS decision, Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), quoting the wise and great Justice Brandeis (joined by the wise and great Justice Holmes) dissenting in Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928)) put it:
"Our Government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the Government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy."
Trump is a great teacher. He's publicly killing people based on his ipse dixit that it's "self-defense" against a Venezuelan invasion force attacking the U.S. one little boat at a time.
Where were you when Obama was droning people -- including US citizens -- left and right?
Did you retire to your fainting couch then too?
For the record, I was fine with Obama droning terrorists and Trump zapping drug runners from cartels. Both are akin to pirates, on whom military force has been used without compunction -- until very recently -- for thousands of years.
Feargall, what does your question matter? What does it matter where anyone was? What matters is what conduct is constitutional, not whether every person who considers the current president's blatantly unconstitutional misconduct also addressed a prior president's conduct.
Since you asked, however, I'll say that I thought very little about the Obama conduct that you mentioned, in part, because it didn't seem as dangerously maniacal as Trump's killings. It part, I also wasn't worried that Obama was trying to drag the U.S. into a conflict without Congressional approval (as Trump obviously is trying to do).
If you think a constitutional argument can be made supporting Trump's conduct, please feel free to make it. But please don't join the people who pretend that violations of our Constitutions are ok just because they seem somewhat analogous to something someone else did.