The question is finally asked: Should the election be cancelled?

[Faygo Kid]

You knew it was coming. Here's the FReepers first crack at it, and to their credit, most are opposed. But watch the drumbeat. On Limbaugh. On Hannity. O'Reilly, too; and Coulter and Malkin are givens. The threat to our nation is so great only George W. Bush can assure our security; that's the argument. Any kind of attack - a 7/11 blown up, say - and you will really start to hear this. Haven't heard Limbaugh now that I am (finally) working again, but Hannity is definitely going down this road. After all, look what happened in Spain! Anyway, you think this is tinfoil? I think a few months from now, it will be reasoned debate, and after that, a fait accompli if there is an attack. Well, look for lots more.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1099072/posts

[Lefta Dissenter]

1. WHAT DID I JUST SAY

EARLIER TODAY!!?! And everyone thought I was nuts!!! (well, that's still a distinct possibility...)

[JanMichael]

2. If I've said it once I've said it a thousand times: Go for it.

If that's the game they want to play then let's play it.

[Malva Zebrina]

3. there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Bush will and can do this

He has shown complete disdain for the American people and it's democratic process.

He will not win the election in any way; He will realize this and then proceed to do this and it will give him the hard on of his lifetime.

If past resistance to the crimes of
Bush is any indication, he will get away with it.

[Cobalt Violet]

6. He will do it. No doubt about it.

He will look for any excuse to do this. Just as he found an excuse, a shabby one but still an excuse, to invade Iraq. And his machinery is already in place to spin it and brainwash Americans into thinking this is good.

[eleonora]

4. Argh...

I DOUBT something like that would happen. BUT if it does, I'M MOVING to Europe!

[Faygo Kid]

7. Just don't take a ship called "St. Louis"

That's the one that the Jews took to escape the Nazis in the late 1930s. The U.S. turned them away; they thought they had a deal with Cuba, and it didn't work. The captain, rather than return to Europe, wanted to run it aground. The few lucky ones went to Britain, then Canada. The rest went to France, Holland, Belgium, etc. Their fate? Ever hear of Anne Frank? There will be no escape in Europe or anywhere else from George W. Bush. Best stay and fight here.

[Sugarbleus]

33. I've been reading in another

website/blog where the authors are urging people to GET OUT OF AMERICA NOW. They feel like something bad is coming down the road in any case. These folks also use the German Jews example on how getting out while the gettin's good is better than waiting until it's too late and there's no place to run to. Just a thought.

[Emillereid]

34. What's this other blog?

I have been feeling the same way -- I think if Bush* stays in office, the boot of fascism will completely come down and we might not have the luxury of leaving.

[dusty64]

43. Yeah, unfortunately most

people (including myself) haven't the economic means to leave thanks to our rightwing regime's amazing handling of the economy. Hopefully a country nearby would be willing to accept us as political refugees if things get really bad.

[NoPasaran]

5. I say yes

Bush should step down and ask John Kerry to assume the Presidency without delay.

[patricia92243]

10. Hey! Great, wonderful answer!

[stopthegop]

8. same things were said about Clinton..

it was tin-foil lunacy then, it's tin-foil lunacy now...

[Faygo Kid]

11. When was it discussed then by rational people?

Perhaps you think this is irrational. Fine; I agree that Bush would rather rig the election to assure its outcome. But I remember the election in 2000, and figured he would be no worse than his father. Wrong. Well, I asked for it (the tinfoil accusation), but I never have been, and will not be now, a tin foiler (first in my law school class in Constitutional Law. But, I don't buy that as an excuse for reason either). Only conveying what I have heard. Please start to listen.

[stopthegop]

12. I do listen... a lot..

let me be clear..I believe that at this time believing Bush or the right will try to cancel the election (doubt it could be done) is prima facie evidence of a person who's hatred of Bush has pushed him beyond the realms of reason..don't know who that does or doesn't apply to..just that it's nuts...

[maggrwaggr]

18. a lot of people in 1933 felt that way about Hitler

and look what happened.

"could he really be THAT bad?"

The answer is yes.

Read your PNAC again. These are people who advocate invading countries on multiple fronts at once. Why? Because we can.

[Faygo Kid]

23. It's not nuts. I hope you are right.

But, we have never seen a presidency like this. I am 50+; I thought Nixon was dangerous (and he was), but we have simply never seen, in my lifetime (or before, I am an avid American history nut, if I am a nut at all) an administration as reckless as this. I truly worry for the children that have to face a world defined by George W. Bush - here and elsewhere (my daughter is 27. She will probably be alright). I hope you are right. I depend upon you to listen to the messages that are coming out from the GOP. Their most slavish voice, Sean Hannity, is starting to talk this way. He is now the Golden Boy; Rush has too much baggage. Karl Rove is a corrupt genius. Just listen. That's all I ask, for now.

[Sugarbleus]

37. Very well said Faygokid...........I've been around for a long while

also. I don't have a crystal ball to know what will happen, BUT I'm not closing my mind to such possibilites because history shows us that things like this do happen. You can fool me once........

Today, I'd rather risk being called a nut because I keep my mind open to any and all things, than to be ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL and let the "enemy" sneak up on me unawares.

The Price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance...

[MrMonk]

14. Irony?

Is it ironic that the same people who expected such an evil from Clinton appear to be the same suggesting it might be a good thing for Bush to do?

[stopthegop]

15. maybe ironic...but nuts either time...

[peaches2003]

9. Absolutely

I've been saying it for 2 years. First there will be many threats of terror attacks with the color code elevating to the highest- red? Then if it still doesn't look like Bush will sweep at least 49 states he will invent a threat of such proportions Congress will 'postpone' the election. The sheep will be so scared and need his Highness to protect them so much they will go along. As will the Supreme Court. They gave him his first term and will do the same for the second.

[maggrwaggr]

19. these people don't care about rules, or laws

they are a crime organization, plain and simple. They do as much as the world lets them get away with.

That's the bottom line.

Elections? HA! Elections are for suckers, right?

[JohnOneillsMemory]

36. FEMA is authorized to take over all 'during national emergency such as war

time with massive demonstrations and civil disobedience.'

They are ready to do it the hard way, at gunpoint and using all those concentration camps they've been maintaining for years.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/camps.html
REX84 and FEMA Camps-CLICK

If local law enforcement can't control the streets, the military is authorized to use everything they've got at their disposal to subdue the population:

"This direct support of civil disturbance control operations is to be used by the Army, USAF, Navy, and Marine Corp. with an airlift force to be comprised of MAC Organic Airlift Resources, airlift capable aircraft of all other USAF major commands, and all other aerial reconnaissance and Airborne Psychological Operations. This is to include control communications systems, aeromedical evacuation, helicopter and Weather Support Systems.

If any civil disturbance by a resistance group, religious organization, or other persons considered to be non-conformist takes place, under Appendix 3 to Annex B of Plan 55-2 hereby gives all Federal forces total power over the situation if local and state authorities cannot put down said dissenters."

http://www.uhuh.com/control/garden/htm .
Operation Garden Plot-CLICK

That's right. Our own military has already been authorized to turn on us when the going gets weird.

Remember the truckloads of young Chinese soldiers trucked in from the countryside to squash the Tienamen Square protesters?

I've seen film of the people surrounding the trucks en route pleading with the child soldiers not to turn on their own people. For a while the soldiers were emotional and confused and they turned back. But after a few cycles of this, they come in the night and SLAUGHTERED the protestors by the hundreds and thousands.

This is my fear of the draft. There will be enough new military to set like dogs on any large scale domestic resistance.

Be very afraid.

[MissMarple]

13. They would have to amend the Constitution. Or, suspend it. OOPS!

Now that would open an interesting can of worms.

:evilgrin:

[maggrwaggr]

20. they don't give a rats ass about the constitution

these people think the law is for others, not for them.

I repeat, they will do whatever the world lets them get away with.

[damnraddem]

16. Let's see: elections went on as per schedule ...

during the Civil War, when the country's existence was in question;
during WWII, when the country and its allies were fighting for their lives;
during the Cold War, when there were Commies under everybody's bed.

We know who the terrorists are -- in the WH and on Freerepublic.

[struggle4progress]

17. Brooks is working the angle too

See
Al Qaeda's Wish List
I am trying not to think harshly of the Spanish. They have suffered a grievous blow, and it was crazy to go ahead with an election a mere three days after the Madrid massacre.
<snip>
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/16/opinion/16BROO.html?th

Of course Brooks has recently spent most of his time repackaging the worst RW garbage in sweet-smelling wrappers and using his NYT position to serve it up.

It is not tinfoil, though I cannot see how anyone could ever consider it reasoned debate.

[The Magistrate]

22. That Was A Striking Thing To Read This Morning, Sir

That Brooks would write such a thing means it is being talked about in leading reactionary circles....

"People getting their fundamental interests wrong is what American politics is all about."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[struggle4progress]

26. If you call me sir again I'll be sick to my stomach

[PassingFair]

30. LOL

n/t

[goforit]

21. YES!!!!......Let IMPEACHMENT take its place!!!

:bounce:

[Faygo Kid]

24. In a Tom Delay world? Best guess again.

The GOP controls both houses of Congress. They control most of the governorships. The Supreme Court is hanging by a thread. The FCC wants to know where the money is, and we know where it is. I think we ought not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. I believe that the likelihood of an honest election is at best 50-50 right now. At best. Impeachment? Get real, with all due respect to someone I agree with.

[Q]

25. The interesting part is that they're bringing up this issue...

...when there's no indication there will BE a terrorist attack before November. It SOUNDS as if they're warming up the people for the possibility.

- Remember...the US is already in a state of NATIONAL EMERGENCY...and only a very small step away from martial law.

[struggle4progress]

27. Agree 100%

[Faygo Kid]

28. Thanks. You get it. Listen carefully.

They will try to manipulate the election - Diebold, the GOP secretaries of state in the states - but if all else fails, you have nailed it. Their campaign, and their Golden Boy (no longer Rush) Sean Hannity are already beating that drum.

[kentuck]

29. Yep! Just like FDR cancelled the elections during WWII...

But that was such a minor affair compared to Dubya's 'war on terrorism'....

[SilasSoule]

31. Presidential Election of 1812

Weren't we also in a war and on the verge of fending off a British occupation during this time?

[Donkeyboy75]

32. My first reaction is

damn, you all are crazy! But then I'm thinking...weak Democratic leadership, all too afraid to look unpatriotic because they always let the 'pukes dictate the terms of public debate. Hmmm...national togetherness after a terrible terrorist attack.

But, it takes a lot to pull this off, and I just don't think they can do it. If most Freepers are against it, meaning that even these sheep can't be swayed, then I just don't see it happening.

[VolcanoJen]

35. Let's Talk Scenarios!!

I posted something like this in another thread...

My first instinct is to state that it just can't happen, my friends. And if it did, we will, as we always have, take to the streets. However, a November Presidential Election is not guaranteed by the Constitution, the way I read it.

Article II, Section I of the Constitution states "The Executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his office during the term of four years."

So, essentially, the Supreme Court could tell the Chief Executive, on January 20th or so, you must leave office. To hold office longer than four years is unconstitutional.

The White House would have no other choice than to secede the office. Constitutionally, the current Speaker of the House (per the Presidential Sucession Act of 1947) would become the President on January 20th.

Now, here's a scenario: Dennis Hastert becomes the 44th President. He names George W. Bush as his vice-president under the privileges afforded him by the 25th Amendement. Then, as soon as Bush is approved by the Congress, Hastert resigns. Under the 25th Amendment, George W. Bush becomes the 45th President, appointing a new vice-president.

(Remember: Ford/Rockefeller were never elected, but rather, both were appointed to their offices.)

There is one more scenario. A new Speaker of the House is chosen on January 3rd, 2004. If the people rebelled against the suspension of the Presidential Election, and voted overwhelmingly for a Democratic Congress, it is quite possible that Nancy Pelosi could become the 44th President.

There also exists the issue of Electors. Don't forget that the States can assign Electors any way they wish.

Article II of the Constitution states that "Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors.

Although currently, each state legislature agrees that the electors will be determined by the popular vote of a presidential election, they are constitutionally free to change that to any manner they choose.

A state legislature could hand this power over to the governor of the state, for example. Electors really aren't bound by any particular national election date; more importantly, they are not constitutionally bound to popular vote or opinion.

[Sufi Marmot]

38. Rather than cancel the election, my bigger fear...

is that if there is a major terrorist attack after, say, August 1st, it will inhibit Kerry's ability to campaign effectively against Bush. If we have a serious attack that kills more than ~50 people and shuts down a major city for a while, there will be a strong push (from the GOP/media) to suspend campaigning and "get behind the President in this time of national crisis", just like after 9/11. Leading Democrats would feel pressured/obligated to "suspend partisan politics for the sake of national unity". I'm sure we can all hear these words coming out of Joe Lieberman, Joe Biden, or Harold Ford.

By the time the smoke cleared and the dust settled (literally), Kerry would probably not be able to overcome the jump in Bush's approval rating that would occur due to the media telling Americans that they must support their President during a crisis. They wouldn't even need to cancel the election, and Bush might coast to victory on the votes of the traumatized. Given the number of Americans who were convinced Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11, I'm not optimistic that a significant portion of voters would do the logical thing and vote out the administration who had failed to protect them (twice).

I hope to hell Kerry and his retinue have a contingency plan for this, should, God forbid, the worst occur.

-SM

[tobius]

39. what do you mean?

"I hope to hell Kerry and his retinue have a contingency plan for this, should, God forbid, the worst occur."

which is worse?-
a major terrorist attack here or inhibiting kerry to campaign effectively?

[Sufi Marmot]

41. "the worst", meaning a major terrorist attack...

My point is, that if something awful happens (again, on Bush's watch, for the second time...) I don't want all this "national unity/support the President" crap. It SHOULD be a campaign issue, especially since instead of focusing on real terrorism we just wasted 600+ lives and 87 billion dollars screwing around in Iraq. If anything should get a sitting president booted, it's consistent failure to prevent domestic terrorism.


-SM

[Demnocrat]

40. FUCK

:mad: :mad:

[Vernunft II]

42. But wouldn´t that be giving in to the terrorists ?

I think the Bushistas can be slaughtered over this if done right.