Santos and Bush

[wu-su]

I am fascinated by the similarities between Mayor Santos and our own President, George Bush. The fact that both are obsessed with full and total control of their respective governments, the fact that both are consumed by this concept of absolute power and that they both seem to yield this power to their own advantage and at the expense of others, is remarkable. They both seemingly do not have any regard and respect for people that they see as being beneath them. Who would imagine that Kearny’s democratic leader could be more akin to his republican rivals?

The recent Supreme Court decision, Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld, sends a clear message reaffirming our republic while it strives to put President Bush’s omnipotent executive branch in check. Yet in Kearny, with Mayor Santos in complete control of his legislative branch, a legislative group that refuses to uphold its own powers and obligations, and then yes, the Mayor’s rule over his own administrators, and with no Court to rein him in, he lavishly has full domination of the city. He can, at will, manipulate, influence or oppress any aspect of his administration. And now, as a spiritual advisor to County government and power brokers in Hudson County, his power is even more so.

There are no checks and balances in place, no opposition, no opposing party, no one who disputes his rule at a city meeting, so the Mayor can stage-manage every card in every deck at his disposal. He can pontificate all he wants, he can argue all he can, and no one will ever really challenge him or really win because he has control of his kingdom.

wu-su

[Guest Guest]

There are no checks and balances in place, no opposition, no opposing party, no one who disputes his rule at a city meeting, so the Mayor can stage-manage every card in every deck at his disposal.  He can pontificate all he wants, he can argue all he can, and no one will ever really challenge him or really win because he has control of his kingdom.

wu-su

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Maybe it's time for a coup? ;o)

[Guest Loki]

So, you are concerned about your perceived abuse of power by the President and Mayor, yet find solace in the recent decisions of our own Supreme Court??????

I will always be more afraid of those who NEVER face the electorate, i.e. the Supremes. The recent decision you cite bestows rights upon detainees that they themselves would never consider extending to prisoners under their own watch. We are supposed to treat them with accordance to the Geneva Convention. A few things come to mind: first, they are not uniformed combatants, second, do the names Daniel Pearl and Nikolas Berg ring a bell, finally, how does the US Supreme Court confer onto these people rights spelled out under the Constitution.

The Constitution gives the individual rights that are meant to protect them from their own government, hence, the Bill of Rights. Since they are not US citizens, they are not covered by the Constitution. Should they be treated humanely? ABSOLUTELY, but regardless of the views prevalent in the media,we are at war, and if these people re held, too bad.

This Supreme Court has overstepped their bounds with impunity. (Particularly fond of the emminent domain decision.) Their duty is to interpret the law of THIS land, not to right new laws from the bench. We elect legislators for this purpose.

[Guest Guest]

This Supreme Court has overstepped their bounds with impunity.  (Particularly fond of the emminent domain decision.)  Their duty is to interpret the law of THIS land, not to right new laws from the bench.  We elect legislators for this purpose.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"to RIGHT new laws"? You might also note we elect legislators to WRITE new laws, not the executive branch, nor do we elect the executive branch to interpret the law. The lack of an extended, loud uproar from the Republican Congress

would seem to indicate they don't share your view that The Supremes have over-stepped their bounds.

[Guest Guest]

So, you are concerned about your perceived abuse of power by the President and Mayor, yet find solace in the recent decisions of our own Supreme Court??????

I will always be more afraid of those who NEVER face the electorate, i.e. the Supremes.  The recent decision you cite bestows rights upon detainees that they themselves would never consider extending to prisoners under their own watch.  We are supposed to treat them with accordance to the Geneva Convention.  A few things come to mind: first, they are not uniformed combatants, second,  do the names Daniel Pearl and Nikolas Berg ring a bell, finally, how does the US Supreme Court confer onto these people rights spelled out under the Constitution.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The fact they're not uniformed combatants, would not civil law apply and they therefore must charged, not just held?

[Guest Guest]

This Supreme Court has overstepped their bounds with impunity.  (Particularly fond of the emminent domain decision.)  Their duty is to interpret the law of THIS land, not to right new laws from the bench.  We elect legislators for this purpose.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have to disagree, the fact that The Supremes, in virtually everyone of their annual sessions, manage to piss-off those on both sides of the aisle seems to indicate they're doing a reasonably good job as intended.

I agree that the current abuse of eminent domain is horrid, it should be a signa to people to INSIST their legislators pass laws that will prevent it and withstand Supreme Court review.

[Guest Mort]

I am fascinated by the similarities between Mayor Santos and our own President, George Bush.  The fact that both are obsessed with full and total control of their respective governments, the fact that both are consumed by this concept of absolute power and that they both seem to yield this power to their own advantage and at the expense of others, is remarkable.  They both seemingly do not have any regard and respect for people that they see as being beneath them.  Who would imagine that Kearny’s democratic leader could be more akin to his republican rivals?

The recent Supreme Court decision, Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld, sends a clear message reaffirming our republic while it strives to put President Bush’s omnipotent executive branch in check.  Yet in Kearny, with Mayor Santos in complete control of his legislative branch, a legislative group that refuses to uphold its own powers and obligations, and then yes, the Mayor’s rule over his own administrators, and with no Court to rein him in, he lavishly has full domination of the city.  He can, at will, manipulate, influence or oppress any aspect of his administration.  And now, as a spiritual advisor to County government and power brokers in Hudson County, his power is even more so.

There are no checks and balances in place, no opposition, no opposing party, no one who disputes his rule at a city meeting, so the Mayor can stage-manage every card in every deck at his disposal.  He can pontificate all he wants, he can argue all he can, and no one will ever really challenge him or really win because he has control of his kingdom.

wu-su

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I see one likeness both their actions are being scutinized by a AUSA's

[Guest Guest]

wu su... i don't see the similarities....GW is a GREAT leader.

[Guest BushBacker]

The fact they're not uniformed combatants, would not civil law apply and they therefore must charged, not just held?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Supreme Court should stay the hell out of the war. The president is the Commander-In-Chief and is doing a hell of a job. We don't need some liberal gray-beard deciding on how to fight it. The closest they ever been to a war is watching MASH on tv.

[Guest Guest]

The Supreme Court should stay the hell out of the war. The president is the Commander-In-Chief and is doing a hell of a job. We don't need some liberal gray-beard deciding on how to fight it. The closest they ever been to a war is watching MASH on tv.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In other words they've been closer to war than that little chickenshit pissant cowboy.

[Guest Loki]

In other words they've been closer to war than that little chickenshit pissant cowboy.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you have a RATIONAL point make it. Otherwise, the discussions hits an incredible downward spiral.

[Guest Guest]

wu su... i don't see the similarities....GW is a GREAT leader.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're obviously either blind or delusional.

GW couldn't lead a one man band.

[Guest Guest]

The Supreme Court should stay the hell out of the war. The president is the Commander-In-Chief and is doing a hell of a job. We don't need some liberal gray-beard deciding on how to fight it. The closest they ever been to a war is watching MASH on tv.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"hell of a job"?

He's taking the country down the path to hell.

You Wanker's just can't handle it when the Constitution interferes with the cowboy's inflated ego.

[Guest Guest]

The Supreme Court should stay the hell out of the war. The president is the Commander-In-Chief and is doing a hell of a job. We don't need some liberal gray-beard deciding on how to fight it. The closest they ever been to a war is watching MASH on tv.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah, he's doing a wonderful job.

One of the local papers reported WalMart had over 8,000 applications for less than 400 jobs. Nice work with the economy cowboy, better cut the rich folks taxes some more, Rolls-Royce needs more sales, don't you worry your pea-brain about people losing their pensions and having no affordable medical care.

[Guest Guest]

If you have a RATIONAL point make it.  Otherwise, the discussions hits an incredible downward spiral.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

OK, BushBacker said "The closest they ever been to a war is watching MASH on tv. " about the Supreme Court.

The POINT is that's at LEAST as close and probably closer to war than the brave defender of the Alabama skies has ever been.

[Guest Loki]

Yeah, he's doing a wonderful job.

One of the local papers reported WalMart had over 8,000 applications for less than 400 jobs.  Nice work with the economy cowboy, better cut the rich folks taxes some more, Rolls-Royce needs more sales, don't you worry your pea-brain about people losing their pensions and having no affordable medical care.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As taxes got cut, tax revenues INCREASED. That's right, more money into the US Treasury because of taxes. Never let truth or facts get in your way. Have you, by chance, considered a future in journalism?? You have all the right credentials.

You want to criticize the government, I'm in. They ALL spend to much of OUR money. Government never made a dime that they didn't take from someone elses pocket.

[Guest Guest]

If you have a RATIONAL point make it.  Otherwise, the discussions hits an incredible downward spiral.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The point is what a HYPOCRITE BushBacker is, he whines that the Supremes should leave the CinC alone because they haven't been involved in war when that's also the case with the CinC, by his own choice.

[Guest BushBacker]

If you have a RATIONAL point make it.  Otherwise, the discussions hits an incredible downward spiral.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Throwing personal insults is the democratic strategy. When you don't have the facts on your side, resort to name calling.

[Guest Guest]

Throwing personal insults is the democratic strategy. When you don't have the facts on your side, resort to name calling.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Name calling? Like Kool-Aiders? The FACT on my side is YOU are a HYPOCRITE!

[Guest Guest]

As taxes got cut, tax revenues INCREASED.  That's right, more money into the US Treasury because of taxes.  Never let truth or facts get in your way.  Have you, by chance, considered a future in journalism??  You have all the right credentials.

You want to criticize the government, I'm in.  They ALL spend to much of OUR money.  Government never made a dime that they didn't take from someone elses pocket.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'll consider journalism when you consider a course in reading comprehension. I made no comment about government income. I commented on the fact they're doing little for the average Joe and I'll stand behind that.

[Guest Guest]

"spiritual advisor to county government and power brokers" are you crazy? He is the Clerk to the Freeholders which he only got considered for because he was mayor (like Dan Sansone) and he had Al Cifelli giving him the push...spiritual advisor..he advises no one..just a clerk

[Guest BushBacker]

Name calling?  Like Kool-Aiders?  The FACT on my side is YOU are a HYPOCRITE!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Using the term "Kool-aider" is simply refering to an addiction effecting all left-wing, bleeding heart, tax and spend democrats. It's not "name calling", it's only stating the facts.

[Guest Guest]

Using the term "Kool-aider" is simply refering to an addiction effecting all left-wing, bleeding heart, tax and spend democrats. It's not "name calling", it's only stating the facts.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

YOU are a narrow minded, delusional, hypocritical, anal retentive, fascist leanong, little WANKER!

It's funny how you peoplw complain about government spending, why don't you explain the current deficit when the cowboy entered office with a healthy surplus? Republicans cry less government and it's bigger now than ever. That's a FACT, you know, one of those things that escapes your attention?

[Guest Guest]

Using the term "Kool-aider" is simply refering to an addiction effecting all left-wing, bleeding heart, tax and spend democrats. It's not "name calling", it's only stating the facts.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A bad thing as opposed to your addiction to lapping up lies like a kitten at a bowl of cream?

BTW, I notice you hero did a quick FLIP-FLOP on the treatment of prisoners at Gitmo. About time he was reminded he's not authorized to make his own law.

[Guest Guest]

Using the term "Kool-aider" is simply refering to an addiction effecting all left-wing, bleeding heart, tax and spend democrats. It's not "name calling", it's only stating the facts.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're so full of crap you must have brown eyes. When you name call you claim facts, when others claim facts you whine name calling.

Here's a FACT, not a name call

YOU are a HYPOCRITE