Posted on 08/02/2004 7:08:37 AM PDT by Rebelbase
Per FNC, Bush OK's the 9/11 commission's recommendation to appoint a National Intelligence Director and create an Anti-Terrorism office.
Exactly how many Wacos has John Ashcroft perpetrated?
This will not be a cabinet position. It will be an advisory position. This intelligence czar will be hired by the president, subject to firing by the president, will be hired with teh advice and consent of congress and will do no more than brief the president on domestic and foreign intelligence. This individual will have no jurisdictional power and will therefore NOT affect you in any way, except to possibly make you safer.
The Senate already has enough RINO's.
We don't need another bureaucratic layer.
Look at it this way: the more bureaucratic layers we have, the more warm, safe and cozy we'll feel.
So, how's SANDY BERGER been lately?
Bush takes action and puts another nail in the democrat's campaign coffin!
The trouble is that nail was removed from the shaky supports holding up what's left of our constitutional republic.
"The trouble is that nail was removed from the shaky supports holding up what's left of our constitutional republic."
Good point. So you voting for Kerry or Bush?
I disagree. One prime example is the disasterous (for freedom of speech) campaign finance "reform." The President even said it was a bad idea and that he thought it would be overturned by the courts, even as he was signing it. That was nakedly political.
**Bush takes action and puts another nail in the democrat's campaign coffin!**
Ditto!
Bush's team spent a week looking at the recommendations and crafting a response. You dont need a lot of time to determine if you need a counterterrorism coordinator or not.This is based on policy, not politics.
The only problem with the 9/11 commission is they dont fix the Q of whether a dept head is redundant to what the DCI already does.
Kerry's approach is based on politics.
Same ol' briar patch 'make a quick decision' in Congress.
Nope. Make a good decision at executive level NOW, then let COngress craft legislation, in good time.
If they want Congress to do something quickly, go ahead and renew the patriot act.
General Franks says Richard Clarke didnt give him a single piece of actionable intelligence. says Clarke was useless... who'd a thunk??!? I mean counter-terrorism czar in the period where 'america slept' and we did nothing, i mean, wasnt he the hero?
He signed it because they would have overridden his veto.
Clone Rudy? yeah, but only with *adult* stem cells.
hey rudy, can I borrow some of your bone marrow?
Good point. I did think about that, but by the time I did that, it was too late. I should have said they don't do national security things for political reasons.
"It would have cost very little to hold Jamie Gorelick accountable."
I dunno, how much would it have cost to defeat Clinton in 1996?
Note to self: Dont let corrupt Democrats take control of Executive Branch of Federal Government.
"The trouble is that nail was removed from the shaky supports holding up what's left of our constitutional republic."
I didnt realize our constitutional republic depended on us not having a single point of contact and leadership on terrorism and intelligence... where did you get that nutty idea? ... you think our rights are more secure with an inefficient, sprawling, multi-headed and compartmentalized organization facing new terror threats?
whatever the case, it's not something in the Constitution one way or another ... except that "Provide for the Common Defense" bit, which I think covers all of this.
Kerry forced Bush into this so he could tell everyone it was because of his pressure that Bush implemented this. If it goes wrong under Bush's watch, Kerry can then flip flop and say Bush acted too hastily.
This is strictly a political gamble on the part of the RATS for the reson someone above stated. This agency will be the precursor of a domestic spying agency.
Rudy would make a good choice.
I don't know if that's true or not, but even if so, it wouldn't cut any ice with me. If you think something is wrong, you ought to act accordingly.
The issue is whether it will hold up in court. It is not the President's function to veto on that basis.
"This agency will be the precursor of a domestic spying agency. "
Ahem, I dont think Bush signed up for that, and a domestic spying agency is *NOT* what the 9/11 commission recommended. They want it kept in FBI ... hence the reason to *require* some coordinator above and beyond, say, DCI.
So this is IMHO an alternative (but I'll have to read the fine print) not a precursor. Besides, that question will require congressional action.
My belief is that Bush is acting on policy, and Kerry on politics.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.