Judge rules that U.S. can detain non-citizens indefinitely

[slim 1,525]

FEMA, after dropping the ball in the aftermath of Katrina, hardly makes me fear their "domination" powers. They couldn't even coordinate a wide-scale relief effort. That makes me believe they would be incapable of occupation and implementation of Govt. authority. On a small scale, they'd probably be highly effective, (as they were in N.O. after a few days) but on a wide-scale (and dealing with millions and millions of people) probably not so much.

It is scary though to know that an agency exists that has the power to stand alone, and operate unchecked, especially in the aftermath of a catastrophic event, when we are at our most vulnerable.

As far as Hooters.... the founder was a genius. If you asked 100 guys what their favorite things in life are, I guarantee you beer and boobies would be on over 90% of their lists.

[Ban Hammer 13,333]

It is scary though to know that an agency exists that has the power to stand alone, and operate unchecked, especially in the aftermath of a catastrophic event, when we are at our most vulnerable.

sounds like a description of hillary

[slim 1,525]

Hillary is strong, but still has many checks.

FEMA, when operating under emergency management authority, trumps all Govt. agencies... even POTUS!!! (If Hillary is POTUS... I don't know if that would work so well, but that's beside the point.)

Back to the original issue here, groups like FEMA aren't going to be necessary to oppress the population if we allow ourselves to be "detained" without cause.

Edited June 17, 2006 by slim

[Fischkoepfin 1]

Hillary?? Why does she pop in almost any thread I start??? Let me repeat: the only way for her to become president is to switch parties and run as a Republican. Enjoy!

[Ban Hammer 13,333]

Hillary?? Why does she pop in almost any thread I start??? Let me repeat: the only way for her to become president is to switch parties and run as a Republican. Enjoy!

omg! don't say that! she'd hate bill clinton. oh wait, she already does.

[Fischkoepfin 1]

Hillary?? Why does she pop in almost any thread I start??? Let me repeat: the only way for her to become president is to switch parties and run as a Republican. Enjoy!

omg! don't say that! she'd hate bill clinton. oh wait, she already does.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Hillary?? Why does she pop in almost any thread I start??? Let me repeat: the only way for her to become president is to switch parties and run as a Republican. Enjoy!

And people still maintain that she's 'liberal'. Hardly.

[almaty 19]

Hillary?? Why does she pop in almost any thread I start??? Let me repeat: the only way for her to become president is to switch parties and run as a Republican. Enjoy!

And people still maintain that she's 'liberal'. Hardly.

i agree...she is liberal in certain as are some gop.// gop has no issue with welfare as along as it is te corporate variety..see the energy companies tax breaks etc

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Hillary seems to take any position whatsoever that will get her elected. Not really much difference from anyone else who runs for office.

2008 will be a very dirty campaign I think..

Edited June 18, 2006 by Fishdude

[Ban Hammer 13,333]

Hillary?? Why does she pop in almost any thread I start??? Let me repeat: the only way for her to become president is to switch parties and run as a Republican. Enjoy!

And people still maintain that she's 'liberal'. Hardly.

i'm certain that every conservative says this: see attachment

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Hillary?? Why does she pop in almost any thread I start??? Let me repeat: the only way for her to become president is to switch parties and run as a Republican. Enjoy!

And people still maintain that she's 'liberal'. Hardly.

i'm certain that every conservative says this: see attachment

Well that's about as offensive (and useful) as calling Bush/Cheney an outright fascist. And just as much of a misinterpration. Hillary IMO isn't that far removed from GWB, IMO.

Its the constant labelling I object to - Conservative and Liberal gets thrown around rather too much for my liking, and usually in an insulting context, which to me shows the simplistic understanding a lot of people have about political ideologies.

You just see - if Hillary comes into office, I think you won't find that much changes. She'll still be serving the interests of the super-rich, to the detriment of everyone else. But people at the end of the day will vote for whichever candidate, not based on a study of who better represents their interests, but who can say the right things on the right issues.

[Ban Hammer 13,333]

Hillary?? Why does she pop in almost any thread I start??? Let me repeat: the only way for her to become president is to switch parties and run as a Republican. Enjoy!

And people still maintain that she's 'liberal'. Hardly.

i'm certain that every conservative says this: see attachment

Well that's about as offensive (and useful) as calling Bush/Cheney an outright fascist. And just as much of a misinterpration. Hillary IMO isn't that far removed from GWB, IMO.

Its the constant labelling I object to - Conservative and Liberal gets thrown around rather too much for my liking, and usually in an insulting context, which to me shows the simplistic understanding a lot of people have about political ideologies.

You just see - if Hillary comes into office, I think you won't find that much changes. She'll still be serving the interests of the super-rich, to the detriment of everyone else. But people at the end of the day will vote for whichever candidate, not based on a study of who better represents their interests, but who can say the right things on the right issues.

so are you denying she said that? robbing from one to give to another? that's not what i'd call democracy.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Hillary?? Why does she pop in almost any thread I start??? Let me repeat: the only way for her to become president is to switch parties and run as a Republican. Enjoy!

And people still maintain that she's 'liberal'. Hardly.

i'm certain that every conservative says this: see attachment

Well that's about as offensive (and useful) as calling Bush/Cheney an outright fascist. And just as much of a misinterpration. Hillary IMO isn't that far removed from GWB, IMO.

Its the constant labelling I object to - Conservative and Liberal gets thrown around rather too much for my liking, and usually in an insulting context, which to me shows the simplistic understanding a lot of people have about political ideologies.

You just see - if Hillary comes into office, I think you won't find that much changes. She'll still be serving the interests of the super-rich, to the detriment of everyone else. But people at the end of the day will vote for whichever candidate, not based on a study of who better represents their interests, but who can say the right things on the right issues.

so are you denying she said that? robbing from one to give to another? that's not what i'd call democracy.

No, not denying it. I just don't think thats its a very representative comment to make the claim that she is a liberal (which again, is different from left-wing which the comment you posted appeared to suggest). She's said plenty on other issues that contradicts either of those positions. Like I said, she seems to support whatever position that will get her a vote. At the end of the day its all talk - and I say again, if she gets in (God forbid) you will likely find she is not much different to GWB et al.

[Ban Hammer 13,333]

No, not denying it. I just don't think thats its a very representative comment to make the claim that she is a liberal (which again, is different from left-wing which the comment you posted appeared to suggest). She's said plenty on other issues that contradicts either of those positions. Like I said, she seems to support whatever position that will get her a vote. At the end of the day its all talk - and I say again, if she gets in (God forbid) you will likely find she is not much different to GWB et al.

if she gets in office, hold onto your wallet. and i'll agree that she says whatever is necessary to get votes. but she has a strong record of pandering to the left.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

if she gets in office, hold onto your wallet. and i'll agree that she says whatever is necessary to get votes. but she has a strong record of pandering to the left.

I don't agree. She faces the same pressures as any other candidate running for high office - at the end of the day special interests represented by corporate lobbyists are pulling the strings, not labour unions.