[mburbank]

"that was the most retarded article I've ever read. Since when have jews, fags and gypsies been terrorists?"

Kahl, you're joking, right? That's a reerence to the following famous quote.

"First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me."
- Pastor Martin Niemöller

It's referencing the fact that when oppression begins, it doesn't seem like a huge big deal, and probably doesn't effect you, but if you don't recognize it for what it is, by the time it does effect you it's tooo late. You are free to find that retarded, but that's what Kiellor is talking about.

Kev, you can think of this as 'passing bill' as opposed to 'not passing a bill'. That's one interpetation. I see a constitutional crisis and my country legalizing torture and suspending habeus corpus and the system of checks and balances. This is what people are talking about here when they say you got arrogance when you started eating meat. You like to say you always argue on the merrits, but I think you overestimate yourself. More and more you pretend that the other side of arguments simply doesn't exist. Tell me you can't see the argument that what happened at the end of this congressional term isn't more significant than 'passing a bill'. You want to argue this is hyperbole, do it, but stop pretending it's hysterics about nothing.

OR, if you feel it is hysterics about nothing, explain how what seem to me like significant changes to the charcater of democracy in the united states are no biggie.

Are you arguing that the President does not have the power to have people tortured by any serious deffinition of the word? Are you arguing that he does not now have the right to declare people enemy combatants and make them dissapear until the WOT is over (if ever). Are you arguing that he does hve to prove to someone outside the executive branch that he has just cause to have someone declared an enemy combatant? There's a big gray area about what he can legally do to American citizens, so I won't even ask about that, lets just say kidnapping people in other coutries and whisking them away on executive say so alone with no oversight. Are you arguing that he'd never abuse these powers, and no future president would either, and though we've never based our system of ghovernment on blind trust, it's okay to do it now?

I agree with Kiellor that the people on his list have very casually done something very shameful. That's an emotional response to their actions. No one requires you to agree with it. Here's what I think you should require of yourself, since you are an intelligent decent fellow.

That you give the matter some serious thought.

So you know, I do not think we are teetering on the brink of American Facism. I have more faith in the American pendulum than that, and I hope my faith is not misplaced. I DO think that our elected representatives have shamefully abandoned their duty to the constitution and I hope the courts will rectify it. If you think that standpoint is ridiculous, laughable, absurd, why not explain yourself. I dare say you embarass yourself when you are so didactic. Youb are far too much of a lad for so much hubris. It ill becomes you.