Bush Slams Democrats on Homeland

Yahoo News ^ | Mon Sep 23,11:03 AM ET | JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press Writer

[billbears]

Right....we wouldn't want him to have hire/fire/transfer authority in the department overseeing national security

That's not what I'm saying. The departments that will fall under this new department already exist, rightly or wrongly. Do you not find it a little disconcerting that a Republican POTUS, who ran on smaller government as one issue, is creating another level of bureaucracy and at the same time circumventing any powers the Legislative Branch of the government might hold over said existing departments? Expansion of the government's power and centralization of said power. That's real conservative

[alethia]

You are correct -- attacked again. And not for the second time -- people seem to forget many events that have happened over the past 20+ years. The Marine barracks, Lockerbie, USS Cole, WTCI and WTCII, OKC, Pan Am 800, and the airbus (flight 587) that "accidentally" crashed over New York City just a short while after WTCII.

I'm truly beginning to detest many of the Dems -- they're playing politics with our safety -- and the security of this great nation. I have NO patience for that kind of BS. Do they really not get it? Are they too stupid? Or is it just about the power?

[Rome2000]

The liberal media is already beginning to spin this as a battle for "workers rights" versus GOP union bashing.

We'll see in the coming days just how much the Rats fear W and real Americans.

The Democrat/ABCCBSNBCCNN WPNYT alliance can sweep the Senate debate and outrageous behavior of the rats under the rug pretty easily, and make a W veto look like he is the bad guy with relatively little effort, in spite of Fox News and the internet.

If the GOP isn't willing to buy time on network news broadcsats to tell the American people the truth, the Rats will continue to get away with this.

[EricT.]

Just a deer that was unfortunate enough to make direct eye contact with Hillary.

LOL!!!! Great line!!!

HISSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!

[LibertyGirl77]

Bush's policy speech allowed the White House to bill taxpayers for a portion of the otherwise all-political trip.

WHY didn't they EVER point this out when Clinton did it? < sigh >

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

I'm sure glad Bush is planning on being President for life

You been a liberal all your life or you just starting out to look like one? because that was about a bonehead comment some people are so pissed hes doing a great job all thay can do is slur and slam him please before making bonehead comments DONT!!!

[baseballmom]

. We need an energy bill that encourages consumption [sic], encourages new technologies so our cars are cleaner, encourages new renewable energy sources,

I almost fell of the chair when I heard this !!! He was really hot about something today - and usually when he makes a faux pas like this he corrects it immediately. As someone who has watched most of his speeches for the past several months I know he meant conservation.

Wait until some enviro-whacky sharpie catches this misstep - they'll fry his butt for it.

[Aristophanes]

Are we still utting citizens of Japanese ancestry in camps? Of course not. When you are at war, you must do things that you don't do while at peace. Study a little history.

You sound a bit wistful there, W1. Too bad we can't put all these foreigners in a good camp somewhere for the duration, eh? Ah for the good ol' days!

[Aristophanes]

No you might say this is more of a 'I've seen what the national government has done with unobstructed power in the past 140 years and it continues to destroy the vision of a Republic' type of fears

You know, talk like that used to be the sure mark of a Republican (back when I was one.) Now it marks you as a conservative. 'Completely diff'rent animal, of course.

Isn't it too bad what FR has degenerated to?

[anniegetyourgun]

Sorry, I thought we were talking about the DEM objections to the President's propopsal. And let's face it, their only problem is the de-unionization of government personnel. To do so would be a direct hit in their funding mechanism - union dues. I suspect many like you are unaware that at this moment if the President wanted to move thousands of INS and border patrol personnel to a threat area within 24 hours, he is prohibited from doing so by collective bargaining agreements. The bottom line is that Americans haven't a clue as to how tied in knots the legislative branch has made this government. There are reasonable checks and balances, and then there is the fine mess we've made over the last 40 years.

But alas, I'm sure many said the same thing that you say, back when Truman required the miltary heads to reconfigure for streamlining and informational purposes. Furthermore, there is no circumventing the legislative branch involved.

I recommend you check out THIS document. And for further questions, seek out Sally Canfield, Director of Policy and Plans, Office of Homeland Security. The change is needed, overdue, and commonsense.

[rdb3]

5

[DallasMike]

So what does 5 mean? This is the second time I've seen it today. I'm clueless.

[hoosierham]

I agree with you on the insurance AND am incensed that Bush/Congress seem willing to tax me to support an airline industry that can't make it without subsidies. EVERYBODY can't be on some form of welfare, so I guess it is just the very rich and very poor who get a free ride off those who work steadily at ordinary jobs.

[Copperhead61]

Does that mean Dashole is Fredo?!

[Kath]

Really doesn't matter, it is not revelent. He can charge it off as an expense as long as he address some group somewhere on policy. Perfectly legal. Liberals should know, they were masters at it.

[Kath]

Could just mean the Enron crooks were smarter than the World Com Crooks. There will be arrest of Enron officials. Let them do the job right so it sticks.