Absolutism?

[HARDCORE]

?ABSOLUTISM??

Granted, harsh times require harsher solutions - ?BUT!!?

The ?Separation of Powers? is an essential concept in retaining checks and balances, in my opinion! When any one aspect of government, be it Executive, Legislative or Judicial, demands more control than it?s bureaucratic peers, the danger is ever present for a complete takeover of power. Even if the illusion of shared control continues to exist, the reality may be quite a different story!

Some believe that 9/11 not only chronically displayed a need for change and awareness in
government, but also the opportunity, be it vague, for abuse? After all, when one unites a multitude of once semi-autonomous government entities into but a single body, and that policing body is controlled by but a single entity or faction, does not an inherent danger of abuse exist?

It seems, at least according to some in our Senate, that the President is demanding greater
management flexibility [control] of the estimated 170,000 employees of this ?Homeland Security Department?? As a matter of fact, Senator Majority Leader Tom Daschle, echoed the fears of many from both parties [and abroad] when he said, and I quote:

?Bush?s proposal is a Power Grab of Unprecedented Magnitude, and one that would undermine the non-political [?] government civil service system, threatening unions and their protections of (at least) one-third of the workers!? [But will it stop there?!]

Now to my way of thinking, it makes no difference what political party harbors such a questionable agenda. The bottom line here is that ?Homeland Security? is rapidly plunging into ?No Man?s Land!? That sacred trust territory that has, for over two centuries, defined our rights and responsibilities as Americans. In a word, this Homeland Security is beginning to wreak of an infant secret police!? [opinion] And no secret police can be long contained, not even by it?s creator[s]!

To quote Daschel again: ?We?re not going to roll over when it comes to principles and beliefs that we hold to be very, very important!? [Non-partisan, American words to live by, perhaps?]

Hell, even Tom Ridge, the ?Presidential Front Man? for ?Der Homeland Security? said that his department needed broader powers!? Now where and when have we heard this statement before?! And to quote the President: ?Homeland Security is not just a matter of re-configuring letterheads and addresses!? What then, is it a matter of re-configuring Mr. Bush, the Constitution perhaps? [Just a rhetorical question?]

Even the Republican Leader in the Senate [Trent Lott] has openly predicted [according to AP] that the President would bring enough political pressure to bear to ?Get What ?HE? Wants!?? Am I to assume that what the people want, does not even enter this equation! Bottom line - ?under the guise of National Security, many rights could soon become history. In fact, if I read this correctly, we may soon [as it is in the penal system], have no rights at all, only removable privileges!

Was not Orwell?s first name also "George?? [1984]

VERITAS

[Keith_Hixson]

FDR during the war years. McArthur tried from a military position and needed to be fired. All through history we have someone reaching for more power than necessary. However, before we get too excited, the congress has to allow the President to have the powers and I see no one threatening to take away the Supreme Court's powers. I think everything is pretty safe.

Keith