From Power Line Blog:

When you capture someone like Padilla and hold him as an enemy combatant, you’re not going to hire him a lawyer and read him his rights. Imagine the idea of regiments of lawyers on a battlefield, rushing in to read soldiers (in this case, terrorists) their “rights” when they are taken prisoner. When the government decided to turn Padilla over to the criminal justice system for prosecution, they had to identify offenses for which such prosecution was viable.

This illustrates the difference between war-fighting, the administration’s primary approach to terrorism, and criminal prosecution, the Democrats’ predominant if not exclusive method. In a war-fighting model, you’re trying to get information about terrorist plots before they mature, so you can prevent them from taking place. In a criminal prosecution model, you’re trying to punish terrorists for acts they’ve already committed. In Padilla’s case, the government was able to achieve both ends. But the administration’s priority was correct: first, do what it takes to learn the facts, so that if there are plots that may be carried out imminently, they can be foiled.

—————————————————————————————

From me:

I know that many on the left are busy calling the President a fascist and claiming that Malkin hates America. But if you would take a moment to let your hatred of those who are supporting the fight against terrorism die off for a moment, you would realize that there is an actual debatable issue here. That issue is whether or not a U.S. citizen who has joined those who declared war against the U.S. have the same rights as those who are accused of any other crime. If you care to actually have this debate, we are willing to debate. If you are simply going to call Bush a fascist and claim that those who supported his side in this issue hate America, well, we are just going to make fun of you.

This includes you Barbara.