This letter is associated with the following article:
Letters
Wednesday, May 2, 2007 12:00 AM

The right's explicit and candid rejection of "the rule of law"

Read other letters about this article

  • Wednesday, May 2, 2007 08:04 AM

    A better question

    Glenn, awesome and truthful article, as usual.

    Your question:

    That is why -- as jarring as it is -- it is actually necessary to ask presidential candidates whether they intend to exercise the power to imprison American citizens with no charges of any kind.

    I suggest that a better question, for the Senator, Congressperson, pundit, or candidate is this:

    What is your plan to restore Constitutional government and the rule of law?

    And if they don't even understand there's an issue here, well, they're not a candidate for you.

    Further, if Democratic Party wants to make it clear that they want to restore Constitutional government, and not just take over and "moderate the excesses" of the authoritarian system that Bush is creating, then they could start holding hearings on matters like signing statements and warrantless surveillance. They aren't, and that greatly concerns me.

Most Active Letters Threads

685

Obama's exceedingly familiar justifications for escalation

The "new" approach to Afghanistan touted by White House officials seems quite old
581

The commendably missing element from Obama's speech

There was no pretense that human rights is our goal, or the likely outcome, in escalating the war
543

The crazy, irrational beliefs of Muslims

Tom Friedman explains the real problem: stupid Muslims think the U.S. is about war and aggression.
440

The face of rotted Washington

Evan Bayh demands more debt-financed war - fought by others - while boasting that he's a stern "deficit hawk."
310

Yes, it's Obama's war now

An uninspiring speech sells a dubious policy, but progressives who feel betrayed have only themselves to blame

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon