Yay! The president can grant himself dictatorial powers in the event of a major emergency.
I'm sure most FReepers don't have a problem with it though, because it might be a republican in power.
To: Remember_Salamis
Article is BS. Bush is simply renewing an order to handle catastrophic events. Same order has been around for 50 years.
2 posted on
05/24/2007 3:21:40 PM PDT by
bnelson44
(http://www.appealforcourage.org)
To: Remember_Salamis
Hillary must be dancing in the streets.
To: Remember_Salamis
More like we don’t trust Corsi’s accuracy in reporting.
4 posted on
05/24/2007 3:23:13 PM PDT by
atomicpossum
(Replies must follow approved guidelines or you will be kill-filed without appeal.)
To: Toddsterpatriot; Mase; expat_panama; nopardons
President Bush, without so much as issuing a press statement . . . . Yet Jerome Corsi and World Net Daily found out about it somehow.
6 posted on
05/24/2007 3:25:21 PM PDT by
1rudeboy
To: Remember_Salamis
Ironically, the directive sees no contradiction in the assumption of dictatorial powers by the president with the goal of maintaining constitutional continuity through an emergency. Ironic indeed.
That's unbelievable, since the moonbats continually claim (as John Edwards did) that 911 was simply an excuse for an Executive Branch power grab.
This plays into such suspicions. Bad politics.
7 posted on
05/24/2007 3:25:36 PM PDT by
ovrtaxt
(I would rather vote for Lindsay Lohan than Lindsey Graham.)
To: Remember_Salamis
I’m disappointed in Corsi. He usually does better than this. I read the act and it clearly specifies that it only applies to the EXECUTIVE BRANCH of govt. Last time I checked, he already was the “dictator “ of the exec branch as are all POTUS.
8 posted on
05/24/2007 3:25:49 PM PDT by
tightwadbob
(There is no right way to do the wrong thing.)
To: Remember_Salamis
A Congressional Research Service study notes that under the National Emergency Act, the president "may seize property, organize and control the means of production, seize commodities, assign military forces abroad, institute martial law, seize and control all transportation and communication, regulate the operation of private enterprise, restrict travel, and, in a variety of ways, control the lives of United States citizens." Doesn't that just give you the warm & fuzzies? Especially if someone with a black heart (and ugly calves) were to become President.
BTW, if my guns and ammo get requisitioned/seized under this act, then the ammo will get turned in first.
To: Remember_Salamis
Hasn’t something like this been around since the 1930s?
So, unless we have been living in a dictatorship for almost 75 years, this article is nothing but alarmist moonbattery.
To: Remember_Salamis
Corsi needs a king size roll of foil.
18 posted on
05/24/2007 3:42:49 PM PDT by
jazusamo
(http://warchronicle.com/TheyAreNotKillers/DefendOurMarines.htm)
To: Remember_Salamis
Is this new? Doesn’t seem so. Newsworthy? Possibly, although there would be considerable commentary over the years, especially as it relates to FEMA.
21 posted on
05/24/2007 3:45:56 PM PDT by
RightWhale
(Repeal the Treaty)
To: Remember_Salamis
The Sky is Falling!
The Sky is Falling!
23 posted on
05/24/2007 4:03:38 PM PDT by
MindBender26
(Having my own CAR-15 in Vietnam meant never having to say I was sorry......)
To: Remember_Salamis
Corsi is getting too used to his appearances on “Coast to Coast” with George Noory.
24 posted on
05/24/2007 4:09:15 PM PDT by
infidel29
(Amnesia International: Forget about the atrocities of the left, they meant well.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson