Thank you
NoVA Scout, for explaining this so well to your Republican brethren.
I find this issue of Republicans in state races (or, for that matter, local pols) kvetching about imprisoning terrorist suspects in the State to be a particularly wrong-headed issue. What is the principle for this objection? A few choices suggest themselves to me:
1) Virginians are too good to provide real estate for confinement of enemies of the nation.
2) Virginians are too NIMBY-ish to provide real estate for the confinement of enemies of the nation.
3) Virginians are too frightened to provide real estate for the confinement of enemies of the nation.
4) Virginia politicians are too thick to understand that this issue makes them look bad.
5) Virginians don’t care if you stash these people somewhere else, just not here (perhaps this is another way of stating objection No’ 2)
We’re at war. We capture enemies in the field.
We bring them back here. By what principle do we contend that Virginia shouldn’t be engaged in that common necessity of the defense of the nation? Are we prepared to say that these detainees should go to other jurisdictions? If so, which ones? Are we really afraid that a detainee confined under Marine guard at Quantico is a threat to us?
I think I would respect a candidate more if he said “As part of our war against these people, I advocate that Virginia (or Prince William or Stafford, or Fairfax etc.) volunteer to take some portion of these enemies of the nation. We must all participate in the effort to rid the world of this threat”
If this somehow becomes an R issue, there is a good chance we will be viewed as the party of wusses.
I don’t get it.
- NoVA Scout
I don't get it either; the manly man, tough-on-terrorism party is afraid - TERRIFIED! - of imprisoning terrorists in Virginia ultra-super-duper-max prisons? (no, there's no such thing as an "ultra-super-duper-max" prison, but you get the idea) Are Virginia Republicans turning into Ah-nuld's "girly men" or what? So disappointing! Heh. :)
