Bush seeks to federalize emergencies

Discussion in 'Politics' started by JGrubbs, Sep 27, 2005.

  1. JGrubbs

    JGrubbs
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    4,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    President Bush yesterday sought to federalize hurricane-relief efforts, removing governors from the decision-making process.

    "It wouldn't be necessary to get a request from the governor or take other action," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said yesterday.

    "This would be," he added, "more of an automatic trigger."

    Mr. McClellan was referring to a new, direct line of authority that would allow the president to place the Pentagon in charge of responding to natural disasters, terrorist attacks and outbreaks of disease.

    "It may require change of law," Mr. Bush said yesterday. "It's very important for us as we look at the lessons of Katrina to think about other scenarios that might require a well-planned, significant federal response -- right off the bat -- to provide stability."

    <snip>

    But stabilizing a crisis might require federal troops to arrest looters and perform other law-enforcement duties, which would violate the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. The law was passed in the wake of the Civil War and Reconstruction to prevent the use of federal troops from policing elections in former Confederate states.

    The White House wants Congress to consider amending Posse Comitatus in order to grant the Pentagon greater powers.

    Source: The Washington Times
     
  2. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,894
    Likes Received:
    294
    I don't like it. Not all governors are incompetent as Blanco.

    But you have to expect this response with all the screaming that was being done blaming the federal government for the initial slow response to Katrina.

    I like the principle behind "posse comitatus" and hate to see it completely eliminated because the governor of one state did not understand her role in a disaster and was unable to function adequately.
     
  3. just-want-peace

    just-want-peace
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    5,502
    Likes Received:
    40
    AMEN!!!

    Can't you just see the potential for abuse under a Janet Reno type executive----very scary!

    What's even more scary to me is this request is more in line with a democratic president; very scary indeed!

    The lines between the parties are becoming more & more blurred. :(
     
  4. JamesBell

    JamesBell
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2005
    Messages:
    226
    Likes Received:
    0
    We had to see this one coming. How long can you blame the White House for a failure of local and state government without getting a response from the President? The media is pushing Bush into this one, like they have on other issues such as DHS. The conservative Bush seems to be a memory. He is enlarging government at every turn, and still getting killed by the left. I hope he wakes up and remembers what the federal government is supposed to do, and then sticks to that.
     
  5. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
     
  6. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,894
    Likes Received:
    294
    Well said, Brother Bell. [​IMG]
     
  7. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Be careful, or you'll be accused of Bush bashing. :rolleyes:

    [​IMG]
     
  8. fromtheright

    fromtheright
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/2844.JPG>

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2002
    Messages:
    2,772
    Likes Received:
    0
    This bothers me:

    (1) the problems with the federal response to these disasters has been blown way out of proportion, IMO, and it seems clear that most of the problems had to do with an incompetent Governor and a crazy mayor, with a not inconsiderable amount of corruption thrown in.

    (2) the Federal Response Plan (recently overhauled, now the National Response Plan) has not been to take over emergency operations but to render assistance as requested by the states and localities. It is dangerous and flouts our federal system to take primary control of the efforts and...

    (3) even more dangerous to put the military in charge. Even as one who wears the uniform, there are all kinds of problems with doing this, not least of which is the control of the Posse Comitatus Act prohibiting US military involvement in law enforcement. I can assure you the military is not excited about such a mission as is now envisioned. The military is about killing people and breaking things. It is touching to see military helicopters flying SAR (search and rescue) missions and saving civilians, but they are doing so in support of a civilian chain of command. The heavy hand of the military has no business being in charge in a civilian "theater".
     
  9. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    I figure we can start playing Taps for the Posse Comitatus Act. It really isn't compatable with the Patritot Act(s) and the final phase of the Amerikan police state both parties have been busily building up to in the last few decades. Remember, good guys now wear black masks carry German submachine guns and run in "wolf Packs".
     
  10. fromtheright

    fromtheright
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/2844.JPG>

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2002
    Messages:
    2,772
    Likes Received:
    0
    poncho,

    Does the PATRIOT Act give any powers to the military? Just asking, I don't know.
     
  11. ballfan

    ballfan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    405
    Likes Received:
    0
    First the Federal government is critized for not being "first responders".

    Then there's objection when they decide to go ahead and take over the role of first responder.


    Does that make sense?
     
  12. Joseph_Botwinick

    Joseph_Botwinick
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    17,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    LE,

    I like that picture of you. [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  13. fromtheright

    fromtheright
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/2844.JPG>

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2002
    Messages:
    2,772
    Likes Received:
    0
    ballfan,

    Does that make sense?

    Sure it does, it's two different groups of people demanding two different things.
     
  14. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    That's hard to say FTR. There are so many pieces of legislation related to the Patriot Act(s) that were passed as riders on other bills it's really tough to keep track of them all.

    From what I can gather though these Act(s) have given too few people too much power.
     
  15. fromtheright

    fromtheright
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/2844.JPG>

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2002
    Messages:
    2,772
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not to dispute your second point, but you said we could play Taps for the PC Act because of its incompatibility with the PATRIOT Act. If the PATRIOT Act doesn't give any powers to the military then it is not incompatible with the Posse Comitatus Act. Right?
     
  16. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    I said it is hard to tell if the Patriot Act(s) (there is more than one) and the many pieces of legislation related to it that isn't written in the Patriot Act(s) themselves gives power to the military.

    Maybe I should have said the Posse Comitatus Act is not compatable with the growing police state mentality of the federal government. Which when reading the Patriot Act(s) and related legislation gives us a glimpse into that mentality. Lets not forget the Poindexter Total Information Awareness idea that was closed down because of public awareness and was later resurrected as Terrorism Information Awareness same program different name different source of funding. This is how it works FTR, they propose something, wait for a reaction in favor or against and act accordingly, either way the proposed idea or law gets passed changed or repealed under it's original name with fanfare or after a name change and under the radar, if one source of funding is dried up another can always be found. The left and right both do this. Clinton made his plays, now Bush is making his.

    We can easily make this into a left vs right issue blame the other sides actions and justify our sides actions and play by the globalists rules of total engagement in the paradigm something I refuse to do any longer BTW.

    One thing seems clear to me the left would like us disarmed and the right isn't afraid to use confiscation. The PC act gets in the way of that mentality. Whether one Act has direct ramifications on the other is moot, I reckon it will soon be clear that the federal government wants total control and they have been working towards that goal for a long time while we were eyeing the "other sides actions" with paranoia and working to promote alot of the same things for "our side" with confidence.


    Bush is even after habeas corpus. If the HC and PC are eliminated what are we left with?

    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page

Loading...