I didn't know Bush had SIGNED this damned thing!!!!

[skypilot]

There were recently some threads about this "directive" of his which gives Bush dictatorial powers in the case of a national emergency. I hadn't heard anything else about it until today when a coworker told me that Bush had actually signed the thing. I happened on May 9th apparently.

This really creeps me out because I can't help but wonder why he's going for a power-grab like this this late in his presidency. And you know that this administration wouldn't want powers like this to carry over to a Democratic president.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55825

[Justitia]

1. Heads up - you might find a better link. I won't click on World Nut Daily. -eom

[The Count]

2. Yup. It was posted here - with a credible source.

[davidwparker]

3. the Iran thing isn't working out for them and they need an extension.

Let's see if another 9/11 "happens."

[babylonsister]

4. You might want to read the ACLU's opinion on this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1004138

[skypilot]

5. That might be reassuring...

...with someone else in the White House. Like I said, I find it unsettling that this is coming up this late is his presidency. I don't think you can ever be too paranoid with this bunch.

[babylonsister]

7. I totally understand your scepticism, but just wanted you to know that,

from outward appearances anyway, it might not be anything to get too worked up about.

But then again.... :shrug:

[wryter2000]

8. Hartman's been talking about it non-stop

It's up on the White House website, so it's real and really scary.

[skypilot]

9. He seems to be the only one.

Either this isn't as big a deal as I think it is or it's being ignored for some reason. When it comes to these lunatics this seems like a big deal to me. I'm suprised that I've heard nothing about this since May 9th. I haven't been THAT tuned out.

[wryter2000]

25. I didn't come to light on May 9

Someone on one of the blogs noticed it a week or two ago. I'm pretty sure some of the other AAR hosts have mentioned it. I'm not holding my breath until the "mainstream" media pick up on it.

[kestrel91316]

6. They have no intention of it carrying over to a Dem president.

If a Dem wins in 2008, expect Bush to pull some stunt that requires that he declare a "national emergency", cancel the inauguration, dissolve Congress, and run the entire government by the "unitary executive"/dictatorship he has always wished for.

I put NOTHING past these people. They are PURE EVIL.

[MonkeyFunk]

23. No

he can't do that, nor does this directive give him the power to do such a thing.

Paranoia may be fun, but it's not productive.

[kestrel91316]

27. Truth is, he can do anything he damned well pleases, and apparently

no one cares enough to stop him.

[OregonBlue]

10. Is anyone in Congress talking about this? Are they going to allow this power

grab without so much as a peep out of anyone? I don't get it, where are our Representatives on this?

[skypilot]

12. Is anyone in Congress talking about this?

Not that I know of. I don't even see that much mention of it online--except on the White House's webpage--and I've heard nothing about it on TV, not even on The New Hour with Jim Lehrer or on the BBC news.

[IDemo]

11. Every president for fifty years has had at least one of these directives

"Continuity of Government" directives go back to Eisenhower.
more ->> http://journals.democraticunderground.com/IDemo

[skypilot]

14. Your link...

...is to a journal entry that itself expresses the apprehensions being expressed in this thread. Like I said earlier, the fact that other presidents have done this is not reassuring this time around.

[IDemo]

18. Just trying to dispel some of the thinking around here that * just pulled this out of his ass

He was the first to actually use the COG after 9/11, and he now wants to call all of the shots from the White House bunker. But he didn't actually invent the concept, and it hasn't triggered a constitutional crisis during any of the preceding presidents (including Carter and Clinton) COG signings.

[skypilot]

19. I understand.

And I just noticed that it was your journal entry--I'm a bit slow sometimes. But I still wonder about the timing of this and the fact that this one seems to cut Congress out of the loop. It sounds less like continuity of government and more like a frightening enhancement of the executive branch (frightening, at least, in the hands of this particular executive)--or am I reading it all wrong. Quite honestly, those things are hard for me to read.

[IDemo]

20. It's misnamed

These directives, when actually implemented, create a "Dis-continuity of Government".

[skypilot]

21. "Dis-continuity of Government"

That's funny, I thought we already had that. Since January 2001.

[IDemo]

22. Discombobulation a' gummint n/t

[skypilot]

24. Oh, dont!!!

It hurts to laugh. And none of this is really funny.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

13. It sucks,...being afraid of what your own government may do to you.

I hate it.

[OregonBlue]

15. I just talked to Ron Wyden's office and they say that the Senate is aware of the concerns

regarding this directive. His office did not know what they are planning to do but said they are definitely working on it and something will be coming out soon. Call your Senators? Ask what they are doing.

[ComerPerro]

16. Sooo, to translate... they have no clue. LOL

[OregonBlue]

17. What she said was that they are well aware of the concerns. She was not privy to

what the actual plans are but said they are working on it.

[Igel]

26. It's not just a difficult read.

It gets tedious about 2/3 of the way through, but by then you'll have gotten past the 'scary' bits. So why listen to what everybody else says, relying on secondary and tertiary sources, when the primary source is a click away?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html

Note that there's a classified annex that is incorporated into this directive, NSPD 51.

It replaces a previous, completely secret, directive that probably said relatively similar things signed by Clinton in '98 (note, that was 5 years into his term). http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/pdd/pdd-67.htm .

[opihimoimoi]

28. Them Terrorists out there? What better way to destroy America by doing a threat/attack/etc to

initiate Bush into a BIG DECIDER forever....He would destroy us all...Everything he touches, every decision he made, every plans he conceived, are all bad or have been failures....ya would think he could LEARN?

Major signs indicate this Bush guy is confused and befuddled

The terrorists don't have to do a thing beyond the initial Bombing...Bush would destroy America all by himself....