HC petitions for North Koreans and Iranians is a great idea - Americans have only over the past five years gotten a taste of what those people have dealt with for a long time.
I know Bush called them the Axis of Evil, but he's trying his best within our system (and perhaps beyond) to emulate the examples of Adminejad (who is imposing the kind of theocracy American religious conservatives would drool over having here) and KJE (a bad case of Napoleonic complex).

Well, American citizens may be able to get a habeus writ, but they can still be declared enemy combatants and whisked off to Gitmo or God-knows-where. How easy do you think it is to get on the phone to your lawyer from a CIA prison?

Increased rights for citizens of oppressive countries is something we can all get behind, but bringing it up in the context of the Military Commissions bill is a disingenuous non sequitor.

Mrh,

It's not a non-sequitur at all. There's only a finite of resource and energy that people have to bring to bear on political/societal/civic-type problems. Where do you think that energy is better spent, working to protect average citizens in other countries from their tyrannical governments, or making up non-existent grievances against democratic ones?

And unless you are alleging that there's a group of American citizens who have been secretly whisked away to Guantanamo and have had their friends and family silenced about their whereabouts, then you are the one being disingenuous.

Rhody,

Please refer to the "non-existent grievances" sentence two paragraphs above.

Why do we need the MCA.Exporting torture
to Syria and Egypt seemed to be working
well.Exporting trials to Syria and Egypt
should be next.
Syria and Egypt could have a "reality TV
show" like Judge Caprio's "Caught in Providence" they could call it "Born in the USA. Caught in the USA"

MRH is dead on. this is the point AR and the rest of the right doesn't want to acknowledge. And where are all you "big Governement" conservatives now?

What is most fascinating about the comments of Rhody, Mrh, and now Jay and Pat is the small-c, ancien, visceral conservatism they all represent. If there’s a change, it doesn’t matter what the change is, the change must be bad. They don’t need to know any facts, because they know any change away from the way things were must be for the worse.

See RILawJournal.com for my opinion.

Gee Andrew, I've never been called conservative before. Should I be flattered?
I'm actually voting for more Republicans than ever this year, between many Democratic legislative candidates' social conservatism and their embrace of Ralph Mollis in many cases. Is Ralphie the best thing that ever happened to R.I. Republicans or what?

Andrew,
Manufactured grievances and willful naivete is idealogically chic, don't you know.

Rhody,
For bragging about voting for more Republican than Democratic this year, what do you want, a medal, or a chest to pin it on?

Speaking as a moderate, it looks to me like the progressives are trying to redirect any energy being spent to protect average citizens in other countries from their tyrannical governments by distracting people with non-existent grievances against democratic governments. There'd be no need of progressives if there were no proletariat to free some time in the future, so they gotta make sure there's always some proletariat available they can plan on freeing in the future.

I haven't changed, smmtheory. It's a reflection of the candidates. I grew up in a Reagan Democratic household (but didn't turn out that way), and have learned that voting the candidate, not the party, is the way to go.
I won't vote for Mollis, nor for any Democrat who actively aligns him- or herself with him. That tipped me over the edge and against Patrick Kennedy. And most of my local Dems in North Providence are more right-wing than your average R.I. Republican.

I never said you changed Rhody. In fact, I don't really care if you have changed or not. No, it was you that was bragging about how you were voting this year. It's a poor way of proving that everything is upside down and inside out. What is the purpose of your bragging? It smacks of ulterior motive to me.

Andrew,

Thanks for responding. I'm not sure I understand what about my comment led you to diagnose me as conservative or afraid of change... I'd be curious to hear more.

There's only a finite of resource and energy that people have to bring to bear on political/societal/civic-type problems. Where do you think that energy is better spent, working to protect average citizens in other countries from their tyrannical governments, or making up non-existent grievances against democratic ones?

Two things: One, there is, indeed, only a finite amount of energy to be brought to bear on political problems, but I'm not sure I understand how you are proposing to effect change in North Korea and Iran. I called it a non sequitor because you seemed to be implying that denying terrorism suspects the right of habeus corpus would in some way help to bring that right to citizens of North Korea or Iran. I don't see how that makes sense.

Two, I think characterizing "my" grievance as non-existent is a bit naive, or (perhaps more charitably) a bit too trusting in government. I think that any limitation of the rights of citizens is a potential cause for a grievance, and as this one is such a significant and fundamental right, I don't understand why raising it as a concern is such an irritant to you.

And unless you are alleging that there's a group of American citizens who have been secretly whisked away to Guantanamo and have had their friends and family silenced about their whereabouts, then you are the one being disingenuous.

I'm not alleging that such a group exists; I'm claiming that this law makes it possible that such a group could exist in the future.

Our democracy is fragile. I'm looking out for it