[MrDem]

Do you still believe that the President should have sent in the Federal Marshalls as you stated?

Yes

Good call Jim. When in doubt, think...WWRD (What Would Reagan Do)

To a man's man, Reagan, there would have been nothing to think about, and no hand-wringing ("oh what should I do?").

FDR 'violated the law' over and over again, to stand up against Nazi Germany.

Little men, allow 'bad laws' to rule over them as opposed to allowing what is right,just,moral.

Our founding father expressly said it was a citizens duty (ah.. not "suggestion") to disobey immoral laws.

And the law to starve a healthy woman to death, is utterly immoral.

[MrDem]

Of course, the one-liner 'law-zombie/robots' (Repeat - "It was the law","It was the law","It was the law",...) will respond with "We are a nation of laws", but never mention one word, not one peep, ever, how Greer violated or allowed the law to be violated. See #4515 for starters.

[unbalanced but fair]

I'll ask you the same question that I ask everyone . Would it then be okay for the President to use the same action against abortion clinics where innocents are killed every day? Isn't Roe vs Wade a bad law? Isn't it immoral?

[cyncooper]

Reagan would not have done what you say.

[sinkspur]

To a man's man, Reagan, there would have been nothing to think about, and no hand-wringing ("oh what should I do?").

It's a fool's errand to speculate on what Ronald Reagan would have done in this situation.

This is the same president who, when confronted with the terrorist murder of 243 Marines in Lebanon in 1983, turned tail and ran.