In a now locked thread, critical of DUers, critical President Obama ...

[bigtree]

7. I'd think that would be because there isn't a complete breakdown in the justice system

What state is so utterly defiant of federal law -- and devoid of judicial or administrative ability to challenge such defiance or misconduct -- that it requires the extraordinary intervention of the federal government 'sending in troops?'

I don't think that just generally equating that action with situations we may object to is credible -- unless we can demonstrate that there are such extraordinary, imminent, or threatening actions in a state which aren't addressable through the mechanisms and remedies already provided by that state. I really find it incomprehensible that the intervention of the heavy hand of the federal government into affairs which are normally handled by states is treated as some progressive aim. Think, pot laws, for instance.

Your standard is an unreasonable, incomplete, and mostly inapplicable one.