Trading security for freedom.

not too many free dead people

Relax, Hillary ain't the President.

Office of Homeland Security? Maybe Office of Internal Security? Or maybe just Gestapo.

Dead people in collapsing buildings don't vote.

But in 8 years she may be....

Oxford Popular Dictionary:

homeland- one's native land

security- 1)the state or feeling of being secure; a thing that gives this 2) the safety of a State, organization, etc against espionage, theft or other danger; an organization for ensuring this.

Not trying to be a wise@$$. But I've been browsing the threads at Dem Underground and this is a popular topic there. They seem to think this is the beginning of some sort of nazi regime in the USA and that the use of the term "homeland" is a bad omen. The overwhelming and reoccurring theme at DU is fear. This is echoed again and again throughout their threads- "we're doomed" "I'm so scared" "this is so scary" etc. There is nothing intrinsically "evil" with the words and there is nothing wrong with calling America our homeland- it is. Nothing to be afraid of- in fact calling America my homeland is something I'm extremely proud to be able to do.

If the federal government would control our borders, we wouldn't have to welcome middle east terrorists into the country with open arms.

These people did not sneak in. THEY ARRIVED TO FIND AMERICA COMPLETELY OPEN. An estimated 11 miilion ILLEGAL aliens live here. Does that sound like security to you?

The federal government's response is to TAKE AWAY OUR FREEDOM instead of closing our borders.

OF COURSE evil powers that be will be very busy to capitalize on every shred of current events and future events to tighten their control addicted death grips on power. It would be wonderful to resist in every fitting way and to gum up the works as fitting wherever practical and called for.

This too is a war. . . . perhaps the bigger underlying war than the one with terrorism. Evil has always loved heavy handed control while it also urges on every kind of excess screaming for control. . . . squeezing all ends against the middle being a favorite strategy to produce the greatest angst and chaos.

It is wise to be vigilant against encroachments of control. Clever alternatives must be creatively thought of and offered, perhaps insisted on.

We ought to be wise enough to realize that as groups, as mobs, even as our own families, safety tends to loudly call for more support than so called casual freedoms. Few people in a "comfortable" society think beyond their comforts to priority underlying values, issues and forces. We ought to help our cohorts learn to think and to act accordingly. The people hereon are uncommonly gifted with insights about such values and issues. That gifting is a responsibility to so many willfully ignorant souls all around us.

We carry that responsibilty out best when our attitudes are suitably adjusted and our tones are thoroughly originated in and at least thickly wrapped in humility and caring.

This cabinet level Homeland Defense idea is going to create a monster. It will grow to become a massive agency with tentacles into every part of American life and will go far beyond the scope of what the president intends. Remember what happened to the Americans With Disabilities Act?

For someone whose been here a couple of months, you sure reached for the Nazi analogy rather quickly. 6000 Americans still lay buried in the rubble, and you already start with this crap. Tom Ridge is a distinquished American, a veteran, a conservative, pro-gun.

We are in an extraordinary time, facing the most evil of threats. Action is called for, and having someone coordinating the efforts to protect our borders and airports is a welcome recognition of the seriousness of our resolve.

Your comment, and reference to Nazi Germany, especially at this time in our history, is disgraceful.

-snip- What rot -- this is the Civil Defense that the libs disbanded over the last 30 years. It is NOT the GESTAPO.

BUMP!!!!!!!!!

Tom Ridge is a distinquished American, a veteran, a conservative, pro-gun.

In May of 1994, then Rep. Tom Ridge teamed up with President Bill Clinton, Sarah Brady (HCI) and Rep. Charles Schumer (D-NY) to pass the semi-auto gun and magazine ban. By casting his vote for the gun ban in a narrow 216 to 214 loss for America's gun owners, Ridge's one vote can arguably be blamed for its passage and subsequent inclusion in the Clinton crime bill of 1994.

In August of 1994, after GOA led a coalition of grassroots activists which nearly defeated the Clinton crime bill, Ridge continued his opposition to America's gun owners. He voted for the rule to bring the crime bill and its gun ban to the floor for a vote. (Ridge was one of only 42 Republicans to do so.) He then voted for final passage of the crime bill -- one of only 46 Republicans to do so.

In the Spring of 1995, Sarah Brady teamed up with newly elected Gov. Tom Ridge to push one of Pennsylvania's most restrictive state gun control laws in a long time -- Act 17. As Pennsylvania's Governor, Ridge presided over the passage of Act 17, and then signed it into law. GOA opposed this bill from its inception and teamed up with several pro-gun state organizations to lead the national charge against the bill. Act 17 registered and taxed long gun buyers and placed other restrictions on Pennsylvanians' gun rights.

Has his stance changed?

The GOA has a much better track record than does the NRA. Was Bush for mandatory trigger locks?

He is not pro-gun and your original statement places your knowledge in question. He is also not pro-life and he plays in step with the UN. It might not be a three strikes and you're out call be it does bring up reasons for concern, especially considering the potential scope and magnitude of his appointment and its possible impact on our liberty.