Here it is - Freepers float idea of halting elections

[monobrau]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1099072/posts

Hey, they're not all complete idiots, and there are far more against than for, but even seeing a few chime in to support this is disgusting.

Check out this rocket scientist:
"Absolutely and even more so. America needs a strong leader. Pres. Bush has proved his worth. Ketchup man hasn't."

[mikeysnot]

1. My fav..

"Hillary has been president for 8 years and it's time to replace her... the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy sets up some terrorist threats right before the election and Hillary suspends them - indefinitely!"

God, the drug addict windbag sure know's how to feed them thimble brains...

Vast Left Wing Conspiracy!!! Watch out here we come..... cough.

[Kimber Scott]

3. I hope we do elect Hillary as president someday

just to watch these roaches roll over and die of their self-imposed hillaryphobia.

[Chelzek]

2. I think if anything major ever does happen

elections should be delayed around a month.

Why? I don't think it's a good idea to have a population in a panic go to the polls and vote for something they might regret later. It is established fact that people in a panic state do not act rationally.

[Betty]

4. What if we have a second attack

two weeks or a month later? Keep postponing? Don't give these evil shitheads any ideas.

[Chelzek]

12. If it ever happened

that attack after attack was coming (on a large scale) it would more than likely be appropriate to declare a state of emergency and suspend elections. In such an emergency situatio you could not continue on like everything was fine. Of course I don't even entertain the idea such a pattern of attacks would ever happen.

I should remind you the constitution allows for suspension of rights in states of emergency.

[stepnw1f]

45. Actually...

that's when 'We The People' march down to Washington, a few million, throw Bush's ass out of the White House, and demand we have a President with credentials, take his place.(NO EXCEPTIONS)

[paulk]

46. if we had elections in the middle of a civil war

and then later in the middle of WW2, I don't see why a terrorist attack would warrant a delay this time around.

[liberalhistorian]

5. They sure seemed to have

managed to see through the bullshit and voted rationally in Spain! Of course, the shit they're catching for it from all corners of this country sure shows you how far behind we are, doesn't it?

[Jacobin]

6. ya mean like the 2002 elections?

Plenty of panic there.

a year didn't matter.

[Chelzek]

9. Different degrees

A lot of people I knew for a few days after sept 11th would floating ideas of putting muslims in camps. A short time later (when they got out of a panic) they were ashamed to admit that had even though about it. If a vote was held that day they likely would have voted that way, but would have regretted it not long after.

[mouse7]

21. Sure.... they were still traumatized from 9/11 images

Lots of people had lots of strange reactions to watching footage of thousands of people dying over and over and over and over. It was horrible, and the medical profession stated openly there would be a millions of legitimately-diagnosable cases of PTSD caused by the media coverage of 9/11 alone.

It makes what Dumbya and his neo-con friends did to manipulate people afterwards that mch more unforgivable.

[RapidCreek]

49. Would the people you know...

have floated the idea of arresting Bush for treason...for flying his business partners, the muslim Bin Laden family back to Suadi Arabia?

Would they, at the very least have floated the idea of firing Condoleeza Rice and George Bush for their cavalier fialure to accomplish that foremost task which each is employedd to perform, to protect the American public?

Would they seek to fire these two...when both have made every effort to impede even a kangaroo court investigation into that failure?

RC

[TNOE]

7. Not a good enough reason

If Spain did it - so should America. Are you saying Americans are weeker, dumber, etc.? NOT. Many many many Americans are on to this regime - and will vote the liars out - regardless of a terrorist attack or not.

My LTEE today:

Americans could learn a lot from Spain. Despite a terror attack on the eve of their election, they stood up for democracy, held their election and voted out their President who ignored their millions of voices against the war and demanded answers as to who it was who attacked them. They came out in the streets in the millions. Americans unfortunately did no such thing, we allowed the Patriot Act and the suspension of our liberties. In the words of Donald Trump, I hope America yells loudly and collectively this election “Bush You Lied - You’re Fired”.

[lastknowngood]

11. Americans have less info the Spannish are watching news

from all over europe and the world, the morans here are just watching faux and CNN.

[PaDUer]

36. We're not playing w/ normal people....

yes, we'd like to vote this entire mug team out, BUT, knowing the dirty games they've played and are playing..I hate to say this, but....it's almost a given that there's going to be another hit..And, yes, they're going to do everything they can to cancel the elections, and they WILL succeed, as they've succeeded right along...the ONLY thing we can and should do is--IMPEACHMENT...Treason...and a long list to go along...We can NOT assume they're looking forward to the elections..they're playing a game just as I've stated how many times in this forum, permitting people to think they're voting, when they're not due to their good ole' voting machines. Sure, you go to vote, but does it count--NO. If we're hoping and praying to oust them in November, think again...We've been fooled too many times while they're lol.. What's that saying?--Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me..I don't know about any of you, but I'm tired of being played for a fool...These mugs KNOW the people are going to sit down and shut up, as they've seen over and over again...

[Bridget Burke]

8. How do you define "major"?

A Civil War? We had one & elections continued. World Wars? We've had two, so far.

There's no Constitutional precedent to cancelling and/or postponing elections.

However, this new movement may be good news. It appears that a "major" event might have been allowed, since it would remind everybody why they had to vote for Bush, Jr & ensure his election. Since events in Spain show that people might choose not to vote for somebody who's a failure at security & a liar to boot--the plan is being re-thought.

[Chelzek]

18. I am talking about something at home

as you well know. Tell me, if the Germas had landed on american soil do you REALLY believe we would have been holding elections? "Oh hold on adolph! Tell your forces to wait outside DC while we vote!"

And of course I define major as major. (i.e. not a car bomb that goes off) Something along the lines of a city being vaporized by a nuke for instance. Or a full scale invasion.

"There's no Constitutional precedent to cancelling and/or postponing elections."

Agreed, but the constitution allows for congress and the executive to make certain calls as they see appropriate. If a city ever went up, and there was reason to believe it may occur again in short period of time, extreme action would have to be taken to safeguard other citys. No, it should not be permanent action. And no, I don't find it likely to ever happen - but this is a what if kind of thing.

[Bridget Burke]

22. So, we can rely on congress & the executive to decide?

The ones who'll be up for re-election? No, sorry.

Please remember that it's the Executive's duty to see to security. This administration has proven they can't be trusted in that area.

[Chelzek]

26. Hmmm...

So you are saying the elected congress would suspend elections forever? Yea right.

So you are saying if a city had a nuke go off on election day, or was under full scale invasion you would not support suspending elections? What about the people in the surrounding areas? They just don't get to vote? Sucks for them I guess. Speaks volumes regarding how much you are really concerned about a fair vote.

"Please remember that it's the Executive's duty to see to security."

Please lets get real. Ok Bridget. I have a dime. You are the executive branch of the united states. In 10 minutes I am going to drop the dime SOMEWHERE in the united states. You have no idea where I am. Find me and stop me in time. Oh what's that? You failed. Well, I'm holding you responsible. After all you SHOULD have been able to stop me. Oh wait - to make it even more fun, you have no idea who I am or even when I will be at X place. Find me now. You have impossible standards. Please tell me who (other than a god) would be able to do what you ask?

[Bridget Burke]

29. Don't you think your president is god?

What kind of Republican are you?

True, nobody's perfect. But we have the example of 9/11 before us to prove just how good your president is in preventing/handling terrorism. He's not to be trusted.

[Chelzek]

34. How do I alert you?

I'm a republican because I don't think the executive branch can stop every single "attack" by a random nutcase?

Who's the republican here? Who just started slinging mud rather than acknowledging that no one can stop something 100% of the time? I'm not going to let bias overcome common sense.

[RapidCreek]

50. Your boy made no effort to stop it 33 minutes after the attack was

under way....he sat on his ass and read the Hungry Catapiller.

That being said. He and his minions were warned by Iraeli, French, German, Russian, Jordanian and Morrocan intellegence that Al Queda was planning airborne attacks.....and he did nothing....he ignored them. I won't even mention warnings from our own FBI....and the Clinton administration.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0523/p11s01-coop.html
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/051602_liewontstand.html

RC

[prolesunited]

10. Frankly

I think the people in Spain acted quite rationally, don't you agree?

Does anyone recall that the Sept. 11 attacks happened at election time and Guiliani "graciously volunteered" to stay on as mayor to steer them through troubled times.

I don't agree with postponement. It just opens the door even wider for manipulation of the people's will.

[prodigal_green]

13. elections were postponed on September 11

That was primary day in NYC. I had gotten up too late to vote that morning. I asked a cop as I was crossing the bridge (with 100,000 others) if the polls were still open--no, they were closed. I don't think we got to vote for at least a week or so after that.

[Chelzek]

23. Uh oh

I guess NY must be flying the swastika for the state flag now as some people here suggest. <sarcasm> Of course some people seem to think NYC should have had a vote going on as all hell was breaking out.

[Walt Starr]

14. Hell, why not just do away with elections altogether if you don't trust

the electorate?

Fucking fascism is the answer to all our woes! Take away freedom and instill Bush as DickTater for life!

[liberalhistorian]

16. HEAR! HEAR!

HEIL BUSH! HEIL CHENEY! HEIL AMERIKA! Finally, somebody talking some sense around here!:evilgrin: :bounce:

[Chelzek]

19. <sigh>

Spain delayed elections. I don't see them flying a swastika today. Why would the US be any different? Do you HONESTLY believe if elections were suspended for a month we would become fascist? Please people get real.

[Bridget Burke]

25. Please explain your statement.

When did Spain delay elections? During their Civil War? Under Franco? Maybe.

They didn't delay last week's election & made the right decision.

[Chelzek]

28. I could have sworn

CNN stated they were going to delay 2 days. I stand corrected if I heard incorrectly.

[Bridget Burke]

31. You heard incorrectly.

The Spanish elections went off as scheduled. They vote on weekends--it's a good idea to encourage high turnout.

[Walt Starr]

27. When did Spain delay elections?

When should we delay elections?

We didn;t delay elections in the midst of a civil war or a world war, why fucking start now?

[Chelzek]

30. What reason was there in the world wars?

Were we being invaded? Were enemy forces on US soil during an election?

There was no reason then. But of course if German forces were outside DC on election day you can be damn well certain elections would not have been going on in DC or the surrounding area. Probably the entire nation.

[Bridget Burke]

32. So what army is getting ready to invade?

You're awfully eager to come up with far-fetched scenarios in which voting would be just too complicated.

Maybe you know that your guys are going to lose big.

[Chelzek]

33. Wrong question

This is a what IF scenario. My original statement was IF there was ever a national emergency elections should be suspended. I NEVER made the claim there was some imminent threat as your question suggests. But IF there was.

I assume you now conceed the point that if an american city(s) is about to be invaded elections should not be going on?

"Maybe you know that your guys are going to lose big."

I'm pretty sure that insult is against DU rules. Yea, I MUST be a republican because I think elections should be suspended in major crisis situations. (invasion/nukes/etc) I guess I must be the ONLY one who would not be voting if my city was about to be invaded or was seriously attacked.

[terryg11]

41. IF we were going to be invaded,

then maybe elections should be postponed but anything short of tht I can't imagine why we would. As W.S responded to your other post, why should we start now? The civil war was more of a threat to national security than 911 and elections still took place. WWII may very well hve been more of a threat to us yet elections were still being held. I'm not saying 911 wasn't a big deal, it was a huge deal but those were terrorist attacks, not potential invasions or coups. American life went on as it would have under almost any other president

wht you could question is tht Lincoln and FDR held elections because mayhap they knew as a sitting president during a war they would win. Tht's a very good point but only if George W. doesn't postpone elections (which by the way I dont think he will).

[Chelzek]

43. I agree

"then maybe elections should be postponed but anything short of tht I can't imagine why we would"

That was my point from the start. If something MAJOR happened. Of course some people like to spin things.

"As W.S responded to your other post, why should we start now?"

I never said we should except if something major were to happen. Frankly I don't consider 911 to be "major" enough to justify suspended elections outside of NYC for any extended period of time. I do think, however, that if it were election day in november when it happened something should be done to insure NYC voters had a chance to vote. That might involve holding elections a few days later for the entire nation, or letting NYC "vote late". It would also be a good idea in order to let people vote outside of passion.

"WWII may very well hve been more of a threat to us yet elections were still being held."

It was never a threat at home. Unless we were holding elections in Europe there were no grounds to suspend them. Now if we had German tanks in the streets here that would be a different story.

The civil war is a different matter as well. Most of the nation that held elections (depending on how you define the nation at that point) was relatively safe. The south didn't have means to reach most places within a very short period of time as we do today. It was much more predictable in that regard.

If we had a civil war today people all the way in Texas could come to Maine on the same day. Or just send a couple rockets. I would say it would be much less safe to have elections in a civil war today vs the civil war of the past.

[Bridget Burke]

47. Weren't "we"* invaded in an earlier conflict?

They got as far north as Gettysburg.

(* Most of my people weren't here yet.)

[Walt Starr]

53. Read history, we had been infiltrated by saboteurs

or "terrorists" if you will.

[Art_from_Ark]

58. Seems to me the Army of Northern Virginia was pretty close to DC

in 1864, but there was still an election.

[Love Bug]

24. Well, yeah, the Patriot Act is proof of that!

I think most of congress voted for the piece of shit legislation because of the emotional fallout after 9/11. I little time and things might have gone differently...

[Catherine Vincent]

37. So you wouldn't mind shrubnuts staying in office another month?

What are you smoking?

[Chelzek]

38. Ummm

I trust you are aware the president does not leave office the day after elections in november? He is still in office a month after the election... Nice strawman though. A delayed election of a month would not change the time anyone had a seat in government.

[RapidCreek]

51. Really? sais who?

RC

[RapidCreek]

52. Really? Sais who?

RC

[John BigBootay]

42. No. I have to trust the people...

We're not babies. We're not stoopid. And we can't let terror get in the way of the "important" things-- like elections.

And beer.

[Skittles]

55. that would explain 90% approval ratings

for our moronic, unelected piece of SHIT "president" right after 9/11.

[liberalhistorian]

15. Someone oughta tell

that brainless idiot that "ketchup man" has MORE than proved his worth, so much so that "oil-and-daddy's-money-man" could never catch up in a hundred million years.

Anyone who spent two years in the jungles of Vietnam and who braved direct machine-gun fire to rescue colleagues, who could have easily used his family name, connections, and money to get out of Vietnam but who was one of the rare rich kids who didn't take advantage of that, and who's spent decades doing great work on the foreign policy and national security committees, has more than proved his worth.

And as opposed to what? AWOL Chickenhawk using daddy's name and money to get out of Vietnam and not even bothering to show up for his last year of TANG duty?

Strutting around in a fake flightsuit aboard an aircraft carrier when he's never spent one fucking damn day in a REAL uniform, and when he's so cavalier with the lives of U.S. soldiers?

Fabricating lies to get us into a preplanned, preordained war with Iraq (he'd planned it from the first day of his presidential "selection", we all know that), causing the loss of hundreds of Americans and thousands of Iraqis while ignoring the REAL center of terrorism and Al-Quada?

Cutting veteran's benefits left and right, not giving them the necessary equipment to do their jobs, even charging them for their food while they recover from wounds, and not even bothering to attend one single military funeral or address himself to the families of those who've lost their lives in his little fantasy war game he's playing for his own amusement political ambitions and for the benefit of his big oil buddies?

THAT'S how he's proved his worth? Will somebody PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE check the brain cell levels of these ignorant wingnut freakers before they REALLY do some harm?

[derby378]

17. World War II / Pearl Harbor

Seems like I remember we went ahead and held Presidential elections in 1944, right in the middle of an actual war - and only three years after Pearl Harbor. Hannity and the FReepers are so delightfully ignorant of what America is capable of.

[rogerashton]

20. Vast left wing conspiracy --

as Gandhi said about western civilization, "It would be a good idea."

[Catherine Vincent]

35. Isn't it ironic?

When Clinton was president, the freepers were sure that he would halt elections and declare martial law. Ironic that it could actually happen now that resident chimpy is in the WH.

[seabeyond]

44. and trample constitution to impeach

adn we could legitamately impeach bush adn just chose to vote him out

[prolesunited]

48. What is even MORE ironic

is the fact that these freeper morans are actually ADVOCATING that now. Even if it were the Dems in charge, I would never push for a one-party system.

[hexola]

39. To be fair...the seem to wholy against it....

This could be a rare moment of unanimity between DU and FR.

[sendero]

40. Why oh why...

... do you guys go there? It is well established that most of them are drooling morons. If they wanted to do such a thing they'd have no bloody clue as to the legal ramifications, the practical obstacles, nothing.

It's like listening to a bunch of three year olds saying there should be a law that the ice cream man must come twice a day and sell Nutty Buddy's for 1 cent.

Who the f cares?

[Offshore Bush]

54. In all fairness, they're almost unanimously against this.

A lot of them naively believe that Kerry is no match for Bush and that the election isn't a threat to Bush to begin with.

[Timefortruth]

56. What is interesting is that one of their own, a spokesman of the

talking points floated this idea first. There is something going on and * wants to lay the groundwork early. Convincing the base early will go a long way to convince them to walk in lock step when the time comes.

[ComerPerro]

57. FReepers get off on fascism and totalitarianism

As long as their guy is in power, they don't care how many rights are stripped away. They are just happy to serve.