Remember this?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/7/12/752666/-UPDATEDSenior-DOJ-Reporter:-Obama-NOT-To-Pursue-Indefinite-Detentions

or click on signature.

From July 12:

Big news on The Chris Matthews show today from NBC Justice correspondent Pete Williams:

Williams - "The Obama administration's review of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay has yet to find a single detainee who needs needs to be held indefinitely, and their feeling now is they may only have two categories: those to be released, and those to be put on trial. This third category of people that have to be held forever? That may simply not exist."

Matthews - "In other words, we can either prove a criminal case against somebody, or we let them go?"

Williams - "Yes."

(emphasis his)

------

I would guess that there are at least two factions on the issue of preventive detentions within the Obama Administration, and they're fighting it out. Presumably Obama will pick a winner at some point in time, based on purely political calculations.

I agree, a huge part of our problem is that corporations have been ruled to be legally equivalent to persons.

Make a list of posters you're going to ignore.

Then try to stick to it. There is no other workable way.

In any case, in debates on the Internet having the last word doesn't count for anything anyway. What matters is having your point of view and facts out there.

Normal folks will appreciate having it there. The flat-earthers, birthers and other such will have a whole lot to say, but it is of no consequence. I've never met a converted flat-earther anyway, so why even try?

If I were Holder or Obama, I'd be embarrassed to show my face in public. Especially after Colbert's masterpiece.

Just as the Republicans created the meme of "Weak on Defense" which they use with success to tar their opponents, we need to create the equivalent meme of "Weak on the Constitution" and be able to make it stick with damaging effects to that person's electoral chances.

Yes, I am a moron for wasting time replying to you.

Do note- New Hampshire is a libertarian paradise in the sense of not having sales or income taxes.

Do note- as per Wikipedia some 92% or more of New Hampshire is undeveloped land. Doesn't make for a huge property tax base, I would think.

Do note- you, libertarian, are demanding a government service as a right, and you, libertarian, are not addressing of how to pay for the service, and who should pay for it, and why.

Do note- New Hampshire has set up a website with guidelines for safe hiking: http://www.hikesafe.com/ You can go through it and see how many guidelines Scott Mason broke.

Do note- Now that you've established that you do favor your taxes in your Southern State going towards a government function of rescuing for free clueless people who get themselves in trouble in the wilderness, don't go around quoting approvingly "All government is evil....".

I personally think that search and rescue is an excellent use of my taxes. But your libertarian hypocrisy grates so.

A group of us watched "New York" exactly that way - via an online subscription service.