Probably not extreme.
By "more extensive" could mean in numbers. Hyperbole? Maybe. But probably not extreme.
On the other hand, we already have a precedent for martial law. It only awaits the presidential definition of "enemy combatant" to deprive anyone and everyone of their civil rights.
Since the Bush Administration has decided that not liking them is a valid reason to attack, it's not a far stretch to figure an "enemy combatant" is one who has argued against them, who ran for office against them, who MIGHT, if given the chance, take a position against them.
Arf