What we can look forward to with four more years of Bush -- VERY SCARY!

[prolesunited]

This post is based on an article that appears in the Sept. 1 issue of the Washington Spectator, which is not available online. The comments are especially powerful because it is written by Bill Rentschler, a longtime Republican and widely published political analyst who has been nominated nine times for a Pulitzer. He worked on Nixon's campaign and served briefly in his administration.

His lead:
"Prepare yourself, fellow Americans, for historic change, the most dramatic and far-reaching change in your lifetime, a sweeping metamorphosis that may alter radically the distinctive, time-honored structure of the fabled American experiment, which has endured for most of the last 225 years."

He then talks about the growing influence of the religious right and Bush's invocation of God in his political life. This stands at odds with the mainstream Christians who were opposed to the war with Iraq. "President Bush has skillfully blended his religious exhortations and his decision to take the country into two wars," Rentschler writes.

He then explains how war, coupled with the religious overtones and reducing federal support for the states, fits into Bush's campaign strategy for 2004. "War demands the unthinking allegiance of the people, even as their personal problems in wartime multiply and expand. Those who dissent may be branded unpatriotic or disloyal."

But here's where it gets scary. Wrap your brain around this thought: "If Bush wins a second term, he and his neocon allies will have for more years to perfect their far-reaching scheme without further re-election worries and political compromises. The path will be clear."

Can you even imagine that?!?! Think of the devastation they have wreaked in all areas — economy, international policy, environment, judicial system, privacy, etc. And to think that this was with actually worrying about getting re-elected. Who knows what they have planned for the next four years if we allow that to happen.

Here are Rentschler's predictions:
• Cardinal objective is to establish American empire, with war high on the agenda. This is not the vision our forefathers had for us, nor most Americans who want a peaceful environment in which they can work and raise their families.
• We have "shaken, disconcerted" our closest allies, with those in charge incapable of developing a coherent foreign policy. "The result is policy based on the mindless certainty that might is right and the one remaining superpower is entitled to rule the world."
• And finally, "Solidifying the powever and wealth of Bush's chief political backers and contributors — the giant corporations, the extremely affluent, the evangelical right — will ultimately end, or seriously dilute, our long-held role as a nation supporting equal rights and opportunities for all."

Let that last statement sink in. Their intent is to put an end to the unique experiment in democracy that is the United States and replace it with theocratic oligarchy. As Rentschler points out, the tax cuts simply deepen the divide between rich and poor and push us closer to conditions found in Latin America or Arab states. The government will abandon its commitment to protect consumers and preserve the environment and personal liberties of citizens will be abrogated in the name of fighting terrorism.

Is this the country YOU want to live in?!?!? Hand down to your children or grandchildren? This is not some raging fringe leftist making these statements; this is a true Conservative in the Goldwater mode.

What do DUers think of his assessments?

[Systematic Chaos]

1. He's spot on!

What more proof do you need that we MUST regain some semblance of control over the political process in 2004?

[prolesunited]

7. That's one of the reasons I posted this

We need to focus on the REAL enemy. It is NOT other Democratic candidates or their supporters. Lately, we have more posts in GD tearing into the Dem candidates than Bush and his policies.

I just can't believe so many here are playing into the strategies of conquer and divide. Where are our priorities?

I also don't understand those who say if my candidate doesn't win in the primary, I'm staying home. ANY of the candidates are better than Bush and this vision for the future. Well, Bush may destroy the world, but at least I have MY personal principles intact. What is that?!?!?

I'm a very idealistic person, but when it comes down to two people, you just have to go with the one you're closer aligned with and then work like hell to bring about the changes you want to see. I know some people will argue this point with me — that things won't change if we keep pulling the Dem lever no matter what candidate they throw at us.

My response is after the past 2 1/2 years, do you see how big the stakes are here?!? This isn't some esoteric debate about principles. What they are planning will fundamentally change the U.S. and the world — and I certainly don't think that it's for the good.

Let's rewrite the saying, "I have seen the enemy and it is us." My mantra is: "I have seen the enemy and it is Bush."

[Skittles]

2. I've said it before

Bush Inc. didn't go to all the trouble to get their illiterate moronic puppet installed into the White House to have him just serve one term. Come hell or high water, they'll fight to have him reinstalled.

[King_Crimson]

12. Come Hell or High Water...

the Dems need to stand up against their thuggery if they attempt to re-install the bastard! If it means physical confrontation...so be it! If it is done honestly and is the will of the people, that's one thing. A repeat of the methods used in 2000 cannot be allowed to occur again. They got away with it once...we can't allow it again! It already seems that the one time we allowed it to happen was one time too many!

[ixion]

3. I think he's right on the money

If the neocons hold the WH next year (and Congress as well) we are in for an ugly ride. More War, More unPATRIOTic Act(s), more jobloss recovery, more lies, with unbridled concern for the consequences. :scared:

[quinnox]

4. Although I don't put anything past Bush

I disagree in reality if Bush won that these drastic scenarios would happen. Bush will not be able to hold onto power past 2008, and any war he wants to wage might be a harder sell depending on what happens in the congressional elections. I am not as pessimistic about Bush's possible second term effect as those items quoted, but I do think it should be avoided with all the strength Dems can gather in voting.

[kysrsoze]

41. I agree with you. Here's what I think is more likely....

1. Bush et al won't be able to get anymore soldiers. Anyone with any sense will dodge the draft, and we will then have some paid mercenaries take over - all answering to Rummy. I could even see things getting so bad that people (no, I'm not advocating it) potentially rising up in a coup against our own government, where we'll have National Guard people trading fire with angry U.S. citizens.

2. We will see at least one nuclear bomb detonated, possibly in the U.S., certainly elsewhere in the world

3. The U.S. economy will fall apart and life as we know it of shopping at Best Buy and Baby Gap will end.

4. Who knows what else?

Things will NOT go well for 99% of the country.

[quinnox]

50. I agree

Things will not go well in a Bush re-election scenario, although I don't forsee the doomsday scenarios, it certainly won't be pretty. The one bright spot is by 2008, the country will be so sick of the Repubs I can see a Hillary Clinton getting in the White House.

[bluestateguy]

5. And you can expect a draft

If he is elected in 2004. They will need a drafted army to fulfill their neo-imperialist conquest. They will override Pentagon objections, and institute a draft which will exempt women and be full of loopholes so the privileged can duck out of it.

[liberalpragmatist]

6. Here's another bleak vision

This is from a July 25 article in the National Journal. It's actually a nonpartisan article and most of it reads relatively neutral, talking about how Bush is redefining what his party stands for. IN that sense, it's not gonna make DU'ers happy, but wait till you get to the last section, which has a historian looking back on the Bush admin. from 2019 (Bush has won a 2nd term) -- it's a scary vision he has.

http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2003/0725nj1.htm

> "The war in Iraq went well, but the occupation afterward deteriorated into a slow bloodletting. Military personnel disliked and resented serving in Iraq; their families protested; the steady toll of casualties discouraged the public. Re-enlistment rates sagged and the military was pinned down -- all at a time when Bush was multiplying U.S. commitments. By the middle of his second term, American forces were spread thinner and scattered more widely than ever before, but readiness and morale were declining. In 2006, Bush was forced to float the idea of a military draft. His prestige never fully recovered from the ensuing backlash.

"America was weaker, yet the threat had grown. Bush's pre-emption policy was read, first by North Korea and Iran, and then by other troublesome states, as an invitation to arm up with nuclear weapons before Bush could stop them. One member of the 'axis of evil' (Saddam Hussein's Iraq) had been defeated, but by 2006 the other two had become nuclear powers, and other nations were rushing to follow. With so much nuclear proliferation on so many fronts, the administration found itself with few options but to downplay the very threats that it had once painted so starkly...

"Bush's domestic policies brought their own share of unintended consequences. Bush had argued that his dramatic expansion of Medicare contained new elements of competition that, over time, could be built upon to modernize the program; but interest-group politics ensured that nothing of the sort happened. Competition remained the small tail of a very large dog, a dog that developed a voracious appetite for tax dollars.

"There were no tax dollars to feed it. The demands of an overstretched military and an aging population, combined with Bush's tax cuts, had created a permanent fiscal crisis. Nor had the economy grown as hoped. Bush had let federal spending soar, both for the military and for entitlement programs, and the initial stimulative effects were more than offset by the economic drag of a burgeoning public sector. America was not Argentina, but by late in Bush's tenure it was clear that the alternative to becoming Argentina was to raise taxes painfully or cut benefits painfully or, more likely, do both. Voters felt angry and betrayed.

"The Republican coalition, united behind Bush in his days of early success, splintered and then fractured as his fortunes waned. The Reagan-Goldwater wing abhorred the centralization and carefree spending; business deplored the fiscal crisis and price controls; hawks were dispirited by the country's inward turn. Weary voters grew nostalgic for the Clinton era, with its prosperity and moderation. They wanted a change. In the Democratic landslide of 2008, they got it. The window for a Republican political alignment, open when Bush took office, had closed, probably for a generation.

[never cry wolf]

8. I agree with this except for one thing

the doom and gloom for shrub will happen in 2004, not 2008. it just HAS to!!!

[dofus]

13. Given the incredible control over the media

that the right-wing has been exercising, all the while promoting the myth of a liberal media, polls would show over and over again that Bush was very popular, even in the face of rising unemployment, unhappy soldiers, and perhaps even a draft.

Even though a majority of people that I speak to are clearly unhappy with Bush and his policies, we're all made to feel as if we're the only one. That sort of manipulation of public opinion will only get pronounced if Bush remains at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue after January, 2005.

My biggest fear is that somehow the actual voting will get cancelled next November. Some sort of terrorist action will require everyone stay home for a week, some kind of excuse will be put out there. Or if "voting" actually occurs, if most ballot boxes are electronic with no paper trail, and if there's no exit polling (as there wasn't in 2002) then stealing the election will be very easy for the Bush cabal. In which case Canada will find it necessary to close its border because of the millions of Americans who will be fleeing.

[Dan]

24. I find it amazing that people believe that Elections can be canceled...

based on some perception of terrorist threat or whatever.

Relax for a second and enjoy this: Election are County functions; they are not a factor of the Cities, or the Federal Government, nor of the State. Each and every County (or comparable entity) is responsible for staging it's Election. A threat unless Nuclear does not and cannot effect the outcome of another jurisdiction votes.

What possible threat could BS promote that dictates that all Counties throughout the U.S. are no longer able to accurately stage an Election? I would be amazed at the spin they would have to do to justify that action.

Each County has its own Election Manager - they of course have to answer to their respective County Executives, and subsequently the various State Auditors. But, given the independence of the systems - I would suspect that you have a greater threat with the voting machines than the ability of the Voters (You and ME) and our willingness to be a party to the democratic process.

[prolesunited]

26. Umm...

Perhaps we can believe that because it has happened before.

Perhaps you don't recall, but Sept. 11, 2001 was primary day in New York. After the terrorist attacks in NYC, the primary was cancelled statewide. Granted, it was rescheduled and held, but do you think it had the same momentum or voter turnout?

You wouldn't have to have things happen in every city, but if there was enough disruption in a few key cities, what do you think the result would be. Hypothetically, take out NYC, Chicago and LA, would there be a national election that day. And who would question it? They hate us for our freedoms. What better context for "them" to attack us than on a day that symbolizes our freedom.

Just in case you think my tinfoil hat is too tight, here's the documentation on NY:

New York, NY -- The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) approved $7.9 million today to the state of New York to assist the New York City Board of Elections cover expenses associated with canceling and rescheduling statewide primary elections on Sept. 11, 2001.

As a result of the collapse of the World Trade Center on primary election day, Governor Pataki declared a statewide emergency and suspended the elections. The elections were quickly rescheduled and held on Sept. 25.

http://www.fema.gov/diz01/d1391n148.shtm

BTW, I'm not one who ascribes to this theory, but then again I no longer simply just dismiss such statements. I used to hang out at Salon's Table Talk and after Bush took office, some of the posters began taking bets on how soon we would invade Iraq. If you recall, Iraq wasn't even a blip on the radar screen then. I just simply thought that they were delusional. It's obvious who turned out right, unfortunately.

[BelgianMadCow]

31. Thanks for those comforting words, but

But you are relying on Bush respecting the Law, and Guantanamo Bay proves otherwise.

Besides I wonder what options become available to the president if he declares Martial Law, a National State of Emergency and things like that.

On edit :
I found this chilling article about it :
Foundations are in place for martial law in the US
By Ritt Goldstein
July 27 2002

<snip>
FEMA, whose main role is disaster response, is also responsible for handling US domestic unreast.

From 1982-84 Colonel Oliver North assisted FEMA in drafting its civil defence preparations. Details of these plans emerged during the 1987 Iran-Contra scandal.

They included executive orders providing for suspension of the constitution, the imposition of martial law, internment camps, and the turning over of government to the president and FEMA.
/<snip>

[Q]

35. Elections were 'cancelled' in 2000 by the supreme Court...

- You should stop thinking in terms of elections being outright cancelled...but instead rigged and manipulated...with the American media there to help sooth the people.

[prolesunited]

40. C'mon, that little incident

Aren't you EVER going to just get over it? ;-)

I didn't think about that but you definitely make a good point. Even if a Dem wins, are they going to let him govern? They have established a pattern of trying to subvert democracy through impeachments, recalls and redistricting.

It frightens me to think what the future holds.

[dofus]

44. What prolesunited said.

In fact, on Sept 11, as I was watching TV, and somewhere shortly after the second plane hit, and it was mentioned on whichever station I was tuned to at the moment that it was primary day in NYC, I made the grim and sick joke to myself that now I knew the motive for what was happening.

In all likelihood the hijackers or ultimate planners of that day didn't really care that it was primary day, a pure coincidence here, but still, the voting was postponed. And remember how Guliani seriously put forth the idea he remain in office? And remember how at first many people seriously thought that was a good idea?

Flash forward to a right before election day in 2004. The terror alert has been raised to orange. Then there are car bombings in several cities around the country. The alert is raised to red. More car bombings, or some other acts of violence. The entire country is put under martial law, no one to leave their homes except for "essential" personnel. Election Day arrives. Now one of two scenarios can unfold. Either the election is held, but few people dare go to their polling places. You can be sure in that case the neighborhoods most likely to produce democratic votes will be the ones most tightly locked down. Second possibility is that the election is "postponed" for a later date, and somehow that later date never happens. The media pushes very hard to retain the current administration who've been doing such a fantastic job of fighting terrorism (their words). Polls show that 90% favor retaining Bush. Poll after poll shows that only a tiny minority think the election should still be held. Al Gore and Bill Clinton speak out in favor of retaining Bush. The Democratic nominee is strangely silent, saying only that these are difficult times for the Republic.

Hopefully the next 14 months will see the complete unravelling of the lies that have been told so far, and this above scenario in either version simply cannot happen.

[prolesunited]

45. Very plausible

I had forgotten they floated the idea Guliani remain in office.

But could you elaborate on why you included this statement in your scenario:
"Al Gore and Bill Clinton speak out in favor of retaining Bush. The Democratic nominee is strangely silent, saying only that these are difficult times for the Republic."

[dofus]

49. When I say that

(about Al Gore, Bill Clinton, and the as-yet unnominated Dem candidate) I'm putting forth what I see as a plausible scenario. Remember how Al Gore never real fought for Florida, how he was so much more concerned with playing nice than being President. Bill Clinton has also been to me an extreme disappointment in that he has barely said one thing against Bush's crimes while occupying the White House. I guess Clinton just doesn't feel like he can take a high moral position what with the Monica thing, but he's wrong and he should be pounding Bush and his crew regularly but doesn't.

And I wonder if any of the potential nominees would do anything but acquiesce to the scenario I've proposed. Well, Al Sharpton, God love him, wouldn't remain quiet, but we all understand quite clearly that he's not going to be the nominee.

Anyway, I'm essentially indulging in a little bit of fiction writing. I hope I'm so wrong that people here on the board will try to humiliate me forever. Of course, if that happens I'll just get a new screen name and start all over again. :evilgrin:

[Ani Yun Wiya]

46. What possible threat?

Just picture the effect of some suspicious "white powder" turning up at say a dozen or so polling places in various states.

Within the last couple of days news reporst have crawled out that imply that Usama is most interested in biolgical weapons for use in the US.

Can't you see the * crew just letting that concept sit on slow boil till next year?

How many people would want to go vote if their polling place is contaminated?

Now just imagine how * might take advantage of that little scenario.

[drb]

9. I think it's just possible...

...that we've already had our last "real" election. I think that if the polling numbers look bad enough for Whistle Ass about the middle of October, there will be some kind of Major terrorist attack just hours before the polls open, and the election will be "postponed." If Whistle Ass wins in 2004, it'll happen for sure in 2008.

[sexybomber]

11. and then anybody who mentioned it beforehand will get blamed

:tinfoilhat:

[Champion Jack]

10. You'll also get 4 more years...

Of this guy









.

[rucky]

17. Thanks...now I'll have nightmares for weeks...

...Looks like the Pod Person's mask is coming loose there.

[izzie]

14. Well I said something like that early on today.

Since I am still trying to get over Reagon and at almost 70 I will not have to live long with it but my grandchildren and children will but I do not know what you can do if this is what the people wish. I do not think the religious right understand that if we are sold out they will be the next on the list. The rich will get rid of them to keep power. Look at history. The Church went behind the royals to keep the power. The workers were out of it. Guess who won when it got down to who would have the most power. Church or royals? The one with the army.Our little thing with England started a new thing. Bush and Co may bring us back to the dark ages. That type of rules only lf you think in set ways, so that freedom is also gone.But we have another thing to worry about and it is our sm. pop in a world of want. Even gated spots are not going to make it. Look at India and the Brits. Yar I think this item has a lot of meat in it. We all should be talking class warfare, we are in the middle of it.

[prolesunited]

16. Thank you for sharing

your wisdom and insight. But the big question is, how do you get people to see the truth? I'm not talking about the hard-core Freeper types, but those who haven't been paying attention or those fooled by the rhetoric?

[rucky]

15. ANYBODY but Bush, Peeps!

Dean, Kerry, Leiberman, Carrot Top, a brain in a jar...It doesn't matter - Bush HAS to Go! Anybody who doesn't see the incredible importancde of the next election, and the absolute necessity to vote Bush out of office has not been paying attention.

Even in DU, a community of informed, intelligent, and left-leaning people - there are people here who still put conditions upon their vote. How many times have you heard "If (insert candidate here) gets the nomination, then (I'm not voting/I'm voting for Nader).

Then we see a string of flames running down the thread - back and forth about the candidates blah blah blah. then I start to think, "We are Fucked".

Okay, so Joe Leiberman isn't my first choice. Nor is Howard Dean, for that matter. That's because my FIRST choice is "NOT BUSH". I think this "not bush" fellow or gal would do a great job.

I know almost everybody here knows this, but it's gotta be said at least once a day. So next time you're frustrated because your favorite candidate said something stupid and you know he's gonna get flamed in 5 minutes, just read the above feelgood article and say to yourself..."Anybody But Bush". There, don't you feel better?

[prolesunited]

21. Thank you!!!

You obviously understand where my head is at. I think it all boils down to this statement:

"Then we see a string of flames running down the thread - back and forth about the candidates blah blah blah. then I start to think, "We are Fucked"."

[rocktivity]

18. "Cardinal objective is to establish American empire

with war high on the agenda..."

If the prime time coverage of the invasion and shows like M15 and Threat Maxtrix becomng part of the upcoming TV season are any indication, it is very much on their agenda to turn war (and its resulting economic and civic sacrifices) into a natural, organic, um, American way of life.


rocknation

[JPace]

19. "What do DUers think of his assessments?"

A rather gloomy prediction, still its worth
a read. Someone else could write a historical
view with a positive slant from our side but
after all it is fantasy.

What we have is today, and today democrats are
flocking around their chosen horses with spirited
debate. Its called democracy in action. When the
final horse is picked most democrats will (after
a short adjustment) support the candidate with
enthusiasm.

The pendulum is too far to the right and is slowing
down getting ready to swing back to the left......

get out of they way!

[TennesseeWalker]

28. They'd better learn to ride those horses well....

The Horsemen of the Apocalypse are already up and running on the Dark Side....

[BelgianMadCow]

30. I join in your optimism

but before the swing back occurs the beast will rear it's ugly head...I just remembered the All New National Insecurity Estimate on WMD is out any time soon...:scared:

[Eloriel]

20. It hasn't been the kind of country I want to live in since

Nov. 2000.

Thanks for an excellent, if terrifying report.

Eloriel

[sistersofmercy]

22. Thanks for the great article! I know repubs who vow to vote anyone but

Bush. Also thank you for your very nice message you sent, it meant alot to me! Uhhh, don't quite know how to reply to messages yet!

[prolesunited]

23. You're welcome!

If the message is still there, all you have to do is open it up and in the bottom lefthand corner, you'll see "reply." Click on that and a new screen will pop up, similar to the kind you use to post messages.

After you write you're reply, click send on the bottom. Then a screen will pop up saying that your message was sent.

Hope that helps!

[sistersofmercy]

25. Thanks that helps a lot! But I inadvertently erased the message trying

to respond! Well, actually come to think it may have been when I deleted a not so nice message somone sent me!

[prolesunited]

27. Check your inbox

:hi:

[BelgianMadCow]

29. "What do DUers think of his assessments?"

I think Rentschler's three predictions make up a good summary :
- american empire ? of course, PNAC
- alienated allies ? you bet, check my name :-)
- general RWingnut & fundamentalist policy : superfluous point

As far as I can see, all three are happening today already. The question then becomes, for how much longer ?
I too have the feeling that it may be for a looong time if Bush gets another term...so then the question is, will he get that second term ?

Well, I could say that depends on :
- the economy (upturn would be a break for Bush),
- the media (ai !) and us (hurray) to educate the public
- on how the conflict in Iraq ("Emerging Iraq" as CNN puts it :mad:) plays out(I'm afraid when US citizens stop getting killed, the public's "awakening" might reverse)
- on the voting system that is used for the election (BBV is truly scary)

So who can tell ?

Or I could say : If Bush gets another term, the US would become a Fourth Reich. But remember the masses cheering for Hitler - even though there may not be as much protest on air as you'd like, there aren't those masses pro at all. I believe a totalitarian state goes strongly against the true spirit of the ameican people, of which not all have forgotten the concept "freedom".

But call me an optimist.

[maggrwaggr]

32. Someone needs to start a rumor

that Bush intends to start a draft right after he's "reelected".

Let him deny it.

A draft would be a SERIOUS WAKEUP CALL to all those stupid baseball-cap-wearing pickup-driving young republican males out there.

They might actually realize that they're members of the human race.

[BelgianMadCow]

33. I heard this rumor

that Bush intends to start a draft after "re-election".

But I can't seem to remember where I saw that :-)

[prolesunited]

34. That's actually a GREAT idea!

Set it up as one of those e-mails that get passed around. They all have the same formula -- a friend of a friend's relative who is in the know. Throw in some crap about since Clinton decimated the military (b.s., but this will give it legitimacy for this crowd), that Bush will be forced to do this as soon as he's re-elected.

Might as well throw in that they are considering drafting gays and women will be drafted, so all those who hate homos* and feminazis* (their terms, not mine) will pass it on to their outraged friends.

Then end with a call to action. Which would they respond to better. That it's our patriotic duty to reinstate the draft and encourage them to support Bush or that if they love there children, grandchildren and relatives, that they should pass it on to stop Bush?

I know we have a lot of creative types here. This sounds like a worthwhile project to me and think how many people we all have on our mailing lists.

[sexybomber]

37. hooooo boy.

I would normally say, "let *'s true evil actions speak for themselves," but hey, desperate times call for desperate measures.

[sistersofmercy]

38. Great idea when and where to start, hmmm maybe I'll start with...

some repubs I know. "Can't remember the source but you know my pop works for dod, he's not saying but saw on the internet.....can always tell when something is not true b/c he'll say it's not true, know when somethings true b/c he says I don't know, don't think so!" I truly hate lying but I also agree with sexybomber, extreme times call for extreme measures.

[dofus]

42. How long would it actually take

to start drafting young men (and women) if a draft were reinstated? How long would it take to get the beaurocracy in place? Would there be draft riots? Would there me a mass exodus of young people to Canada and Switzerland?

I'm personally inclined to think that restarting the draft would be sufficiently difficult and time-consuming that it would be very difficult to do. But if this war-mongering crew currently in charge keeps on invading other countries, what else can they do?

It's occurred to me that a condition of attending any public college or university, or maybe even any one that accepts federal money which includes many private ones, could be serving two years in the military. If you can't prove you've served your time, you can't attend. Which would amount to a nearly universal draft. And then, because they really don't need all the 18-20 year olds who are normally in college, a series of exemptions can be set up which would effectively exclude the sons (and daughters) of the privileged classes.

If I can think of this, no doubt the evil overlords can also.

[kayell]

36. What we can look forward to with four more years of Bush?

Welcome to the Republic of Gilead.

[prolesunited]

39. Funny you should say that

I had the pleasure of hearing Margaret Atwood speak earlier this summer and she said that it bothered her too to see so many chilling comparisons between her book and present-day elements, particularly her "Eyes" and the logo first proposed by Homeland Security.

Her comment was something like this, "I wasn't trying to write them a blueprint."

Have you read Oryx and Crake yet? I enjoyed it immensely, although this one focuses more on the repercussions of genetic engineering and social stratification.

[phaseolus]

43. I picture a 'Scalia Court'...

...packed with justices like that idiot Moore, and that Kmiec guy who reliably reads the latest RNC memos whenever NPR calls him up...

[Hubert Flottz]

47. Welcome to the fourth Reich!

Simple as that!

[MiltonLeBerle]

48. I don't care WHAT the Junta will do if re-elected in 2004-

because if they are, I will no longer be living in this country anyway.

[oasis]

51. Look for the the draft to be reinstated.

Endless wars need endless troops.