“The Good Guys” Won?!

by Robert Alt - July 5th, 2006 - National Review Online

Walter Dellinger, the former acting solicitor general for the Clinton administration, exclaimed that “Hamdan is simply the most important decision on presidential power and the rule of law ever, ever” and concluded that “this really is a wonderful day for the rule of law.” It is simply absurd to call Hamdan the most important decision on presidential power ever. This is not a partisan judgment; it is the simple legal sense of the matter. Much of Hamdan is little more than a questionable patchwork of statutory interpretation.

In the case Hamdan v. Rumsfeld the Supreme Court has ruled that Osama bin Laden’s personal driver and bodyguard, Salim Ahmed Hamdan has the right to stop our government from incarcerating him . . . but without awarding him rights under our Constitution. Not content with running our nation's murder rate up to the highest in the world (by their revolving door criminal justice system that is designed to assure that criminals can easily steal enough from American citizens to pay attorneys their outrageous fees) the Supreme "Tyrants" seem determined to assure that our soldiers cannot fight in battle without an attorney as well. There is no reason not to label the five justices who made this ruling, "Enemies of America", as they most assuredly are. We have moved one step closer to the lawyer's dream world that every person in America must ask permission from a lawyer and a Judge before they may take any action. And yet as noted, Democrats want to go even further.

Democratic politicians have asserted that that the decision recognized constitutional rights for non-citizen detainees held at Guantanamo. Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said “This is a triumph for the rule of law. The rights of due process are among our most cherished liberties, and today’s decision is a rebuke of the Bush Administration’s detainee policies and a reminder of our responsibility to protect both the American people and our Constitutional rights.”

What I cannot understand is how Democrats see this as protecting Americans. Since when did an enemy of our nation become someone the Democratic Party defends. Since when did they become Americans. Does the Democratic Party really see everyone in the world as deserving of the title American? This man is an enemy of our nation. Only the most perverted sense of defending our respect for fair treatment sees this as an issue of importance, and even that cannot possibly justify the current exuberance at what is a decision that will harm our soldiers.

The war continues. Why are Democrats so concerned with these prisoners?