I think that the assertion that Clinton was using extraordinary national security measures on the scale of Bush is about as believable as the assertion that we won (or almost won) Vietnam or perhaps that Castro was more cruel and retrograde than Bautista. And no, I don’t suspect I will convince you.

The difference with Bush is that he sought to instantiate this as formal policy. In other words to expand it into the domain of the rule of law.

Again, to rehash the earlier threadjack: WINE STEALS

This conversation would be far better over pizza and Chateauneuf-Du-Pape. Just sayin’