Freep this poll on Homeland Security.

CNN ^

[Sparta]

Cnn.com has a poll on Homeland Security. Freep it. It's down on the lower right hand side.

[kcar]

I would guess No. The wager that a massive government bureaucracy will help protect us by compiling a supersized database of the things we buy and the stuff we write on the internet seems like a long-shot to me.

[JulieRNR21]

Wonder if the DU know what Osama bin Laden said about their idol in a letter attributed to him:

"Who can forget your President Clinton's immoral acts committed in the official Oval office? After that you did not even bring him to account, other than that he 'made a mistake', after which everything passed with no punishment. Is there a worse kind of event for which your name will go down in history and remembered by nations?"

[nicmarlo]

Although not in the list you posted (I've been a life-long Republican), I voted "no." Until we close our borders, and that clearly is not their intent, there is no "homeland security."

[coton_lover]

You are absolutely correct!! I view homeland security as a trashing of our constitution. I voted no!!

In the years to come, this forum will probably become a place where government spys will look into to see who they can take in and of course, these poor people, who had no intention of doing anything wrong, will be shown as enemies of the state (terrorists). The media will go along with it and show everyone that these people are the evil ones. This is just the government's way of getting us ready for the one world government or one world communism.

Who says communism is dead? It has found new birth in the United States.

[MedicalMess]

I voted "yes". And while I feel security will be improved, I also believe we will experience many more attacks due to greater numbers of attempted attacks as this war broadens.

Security can greatly increase while experiencing a rise in successful attacks at the same time. I think Cheney would say the same thing.

[Texasforever]

DemonRAT Underground is yet to "dupe" this poll,

Hell the DU will vote right along side of you.

[Texasforever]

don't get this bill. How is a new office, with up to 200,000 employees, supposed to make government smaller? How is a new office supposed to make Americans feel safer when this government won't enforce our borders?

You may want to gain at least a basic understanding of what the HSA is before you vote anyway.

[breakem]

off course I voted no also, don't fit into your group of no-nos, you might add a category of thinking perople.

[breakem]

..........if not spelling people.

[Texasforever]

don't fit into your group of no-nos, you might add a category of thinking perople.

I am curious, what knowledge of the HSA did you call on to make your decision to vote no?

[breakem]

we are adding this new monstrosity because Clinton did not kick some FBI upper management butt and because he castrated the CIA. Until the issue of management ethics and accountibility are handled, they're just reshuffling deck chairs.

[breakem]

I explained my position after you posted. I reviewed a summary of the bill and the divisions which make up the new agency. I believe we are in this mess because of mismanagement and lack of direction from the white house in the 90s.

I think we could have shored up our national defense without a new agency. If management continues to cover and promote subbordinates who are unethical and incompetent, it won't matter how it's organized or what you call it. If we continue to allow an open flow of people through our borders, it won't matter either. There is no right way to do a wrong thing.

[Texasforever]

I think we could have shored up our national defense without a new agency.

The best way to improve the functioning of the 22 departments involved is to place them under a single point of accountability with a common mission. That is what the HSA is designed to do.

[breakem]

I'm curious also, you did not ask that idiot who made the blanket comment about no voters what he knew about the newdepartment.

[Cultural Jihad]

"Thank you for validating our commonly-held ideology."

[Joe Hadenuf]

If management continues to cover and promote subbordinates who are unethical and incompetent, it won't matter how it's organized or what you call it. If we continue to allow an open flow of people through our borders, it won't matter either. There is no right way to do a wrong thing.

It's just not in the agenda to secure our borders, and protect our sovereignty. This is clear.....

[breakem]

We're approaching it all wrong. Let's see who gets appointed to what and hold our breath. Meanwhile a few thousad a week will keep coming in, including moslems.

[breakem]

Woody's right about 1 out of a hundred. I haven't seen you get one right yet. If I had to decide on an issue by who agreed with it, I can assure you that your endorsement would lead me in the opposite direction.

[Texasforever]

I'm curious also, you did not ask that idiot who made the blanket comment about no voters what he knew about the newdepartment.

If you meant the one that talked about democrats, greens, communists, and libertarians it is a true. There is nothing wrong with blanket statements if based on fact.

[breakem]

Well you're just as ignorant as he if you think everyone in those groups agrees on this issue. Just as every conservative here doesn't agree.

Now you've really peeked my curiosity, why would you put yourself in such a stupid position?