I found this over at the Huffington Post in an editorial called “Why America Feels Like It’s Been Ruled by a Foreign Occupier“:
America fought a revolution to have its opinions represented by it’s government. That has faded in Bush’s term. America set up the UN after World War II to set up international law and put an end to military aggression and imperialism. That went out the window. Habeas Corpus was inherited from England where it originated in the 12th Century. Bush in that sense has embraced the morals of the middle ages.
So let me get this straight. By throwing out something that originated in the 12th century, Bush embraced the morals of the Middle Ages? Shouldn’t that be “repudiated the morals of the Middle Ages?” Or was habeas corpus some sort of progressive anachronistic moral development that it took four-hundred years or so for society to catch up to?
And since Lincoln suspended habeas during the Civil War, shouldn’t that be the go-to historical epoch for habeas-corpus-based unflattering historical comparisons? I’m just saying.