There is an article in the July 19th edition of Newsweek relating to Ridge's examination of what needs to be done in order to delay the November election -- putatively in case of a terrorist attack at election time.
To delay the election would be the greatest terrorist attack of all. There can be no circumstances, short of the assasination of all the candidates that would warrant delaying the election -- what is it now? First they steal the election and now they want to make that permanent?
Every dictatorship that started by a democratically elected administration retained its power by "delaying" the election for supposed external threats. In recent history, we have Italy, Germany, the Soviet Union -- to name a few prominent ones.
I can't imagine a more important thing at the moment than to make a stink about this "examination" -- or is it a plan -- of how to destroy our Democracy and hand the terrorists a victory by turning our country into exactly the kind of police state that they want to create for the world.
Even more likely is that this is part of the grand plan of the 'pod people' from outer space who arrived here on earth several years ago and are already walking among us, unnoticed, assimilating our citizens one by one...
First....an "assasination of all the candidates" would *not* be grounds for delaying an election. The populace does *not* elect the President and Vice President. The state-appointed electors do, when they convene as the Electoral College. These electors are not even constitutionally required to select the candidate that their own state's population selected. They can select *anyone* they wish.
How was the 2000 election "stolen"? Please do not give the old, lame argument about the popular vote; as that does not determine the outcome of the Presidential and Vice Presidential elections. The 2000 election was not the only time that the winner of the popular vote, failed to win the electoral vote. It has happened before, most notably in the election of Rutherford Hayes, I believe. (where even "wheeling and dealing" was done, to get state electors to change their selections...).
The U.S. Constitution was followed, and adhered to, in the 2000 election.
Now, if you *really* want to clean up the process....then help repeal the
Huh? "Several Years Ago"? Dude...where have you been? Their advance scouts have been here since 1947, (re: "The Roswell Expedition"). And what do you mean "assimilating our citizens one by one"? Haven't you heard all those stories about whole families and communes/cults mysteriously vanishing? They are grabbing us in *bunches*? And the "bottled water craze" over the past decade? It is part of *their* plan. It turns out, that the fluoridation in our tap water....defeats their Invisibility Shields!!!
I floated this idea about six months ago, and gunner said I was
*nuts*, that this would never happen under any circumstances.
Jim
================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================
As one may recall..election issues have been primarily a Democratic one. As one recalls the 2000 Florida election results, offered up by a an election department owned and operated by the Democrats..and of course the Democrat polling places intentionally kept open long after the legal closing time..so more Dems could be ferried in to vote..again..and again..
And then we can discuss the Daley Machine..where party loyalty extends to even those long dead .......
We can indeed discuss other prime examples.....the Military votes of the 2000 election, for example?
Gunner
That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there. - George Orwell
Also, this funny observation. It seems that *only* the Democrats have to organize all those "Get Out The Vote Drives"; in order to get their "constituents" to show their support...lol.
The GOP wants to do GOTV drives in churches. They're fairly desperate about it, actually. I believe there's some new GOP legislation that would loosen the regulations on non-profits, to allow churches to engage in outright politics that is currently illegal and would jeopardize their tax-exempt status.
And supply them with booze and smokes to show up at the bus....roflmao!
Gunner
That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there. - George Orwell
Ive heard that they are indeed taking a page out of the Democrats playbook and are considering doing this. Of course they can used the First AME Church as a shining example of mixing Democrat politics with non profit churches.and then there is the NEA....but thats not a church is it.....
Btw..what again is the church is Jessie Jackson pastor of?
The next thing that might happen is if some big wig dies they can turn the funeral into a political rally...oops..already happened...Welstone wasnt it?
formatting link
C. Stolinsky Tuesday, June 12, 2001 Doctors describe a rare condition in which a person cannot see anything to one side. Some patients can see clearly to their right but are unable to perceive anything to their left. This disorder has its counterpart in politics, where it is regrettably common. Perhaps this is why many believe that America has a Far Right but no Far Left, ultra-conservatives but no ultra-liberals, and a Religious Right but no Religious or Secular Left. Much is heard of the threat from the Religious Right, and many express fear of Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell. Yet if the real fear is of intrusion of religion into politics and breach of the "wall of separation" between church and state, there should be equal fear of the Religious Left:
Years ago some liberal clergy were leaders of the movement opposing the Vietnam War.
More recently some liberal clergy supported the Marxist government of Nicaragua and opposed aid to the Contra rebels.
World Council of Churches often took anti-American and pro-Soviet positions ? for example, silence on the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, but opposition to U.S. aid to the rebels.
National Council of Churches supports the Castro regime and reportedly paid for the lawyer who urged Elian Gonzalez?s return to Cuba.
Officials of mainstream Protestant denominations testified before Congress in favor of strict gun-control laws, declaring opposition to all killing, even in self-defense.
The Pope persuaded a governor to commute the death sentence of the murderer of a man, his wife, and their disabled grandson.
Cardinal Mahony of Los Angeles preached against ending racial quotas in universities and against ending public assistance to illegal immigrants.
Rallies for Democrat candidates are often held at liberal churches.
Michael Lerner, a liberal rabbi described as Hillary Clinton?s former guru, is said to have headed the Berkeley chapter of Students for a Democratic Society.
Hillary Clinton declared that we should look at children and see the face of Jesus, thus showing her concern for all children.
Liberal clergy declared that Clinton was sincerely penitent and that the impeachment inquiry should end.
Officials of National Council of Churches visited the White House and "laid hands" on then-President Bill Clinton to give him strength to resist the Republicans. (Not the devil ? perhaps they saw no difference.) All these activities are proper, but why are they never criticized by American Civil Liberties Union or the media, which loudly oppose the equally proper activities of the Religious Right? Does a Nativity scene on a city-hall lawn really threaten the "wall of separation" more than these examples? Does the "wall" have a door that opens only to the left? Or are some people unable to see any danger from the Left?
For perspective, imagine that the opposite occurred:
Imagine that rallies for Republican candidates often occurred at conservative churches.
Imagine that conservative clergy testified against gun-control laws and preached against public assistance to illegal immigrants.
Imagine that conservative clergy declared that President Ronald Reagan was sorry about the Iran-Contra scandal and that the congressional inquiry should end.
Imagine that Jerry Falwell persuaded a governor to let an execution occur and paid for the lawyer urging that Elian Gonzalez remain in the U.S.
Imagine that Laura Bush?s guru was a fundamentalist pastor who had been a far-right activist.
Imagine that Laura Bush said we should look at children and see the face of Jesus, thus showing her contempt for non-Christian children.
Imagine that conservative clergy visited the White House and "laid hands" on President Bush to give him strength to resist the Democrats. What would happen? The media would shriek against religious interference in politics, liberal clergy would thunder denunciations from their pulpits, the ACLU would sue, the Anti-Defamation League would warn that the Inquisition was about to be re-established, and TV would swarm with law professors wailing that the Constitution was in grave danger. But why would this be intolerable, while the reverse is not only acceptable but invisible?
A single example from hundreds....
formatting link
(just look for the word Church) snicker...
Im absolutly fascinated by the continued calls of Separation from Church and State by the Left..particularly in light of so many of them campaigning from the pulpit....
Gunner
That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there. - George Orwell
I said that it would not happen. And it wont. As I recall, you spewed something about Bush declaring himself Prez for life...
Feel free to bring up the original posts with both our comments and we can discuss it.
Btw..the use of the word Putatively is an interesting usage. Its often used in propaganda.
Gunner
That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there. - George Orwell
So you are going to make a catagorical statement again, that there is no way they will delay or otherwise put off the november election?
Jim
================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================
Ah here we go. Feel free to ignore my other post on this subject then.
I think we both know what was in it. I would have a tough time digging it out, even with google, because I am positive it was under some BS off topic thread that had mutated. If you can find it I think you will find that I did NOT say anthing about prez for life. Just that he could take advantage of a terrorist threat/attack and improve his chances. I suspect his people have worked that scenario already, playing 'what if.'
================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================
Strength hell. They should give him some damn brains.
Besides, all those neocons are sitting around waiting for the Rapture.
Jim
================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================
I thought Republican theory was that a major terrorist attack would swing votes to Bush. Commander in Chief, don't you know. Maybe they're starting to worry that an attack would swing votes _away_ from Bush, eh?
So, he's looking at a "what if"? As I recall, considering worst case scenarios and determining what can and cannot be done ahead of time is part of Ridge's job.
What easy pickings: Damn the administration for daring to think about the unthinkable, then damn them for not having the foresight to prevent the next terrorist attack.
Speaking of Newsweek, how come you didn't mention this tidbit: "The selection of Sen. John Edwards as John Kerry's running mate has raised concerns inside the FBI and among civil-liberties groups that the North Carolina senator will use the campaign to promote his controversial proposal to create a new domestic spy agency."
I guess "Good Americans" like you would have nothing to fear from the Kerry-Edwards Gestapo. . .
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.