Bush's Catch-22: Americans didn't "fire me"; but we can't protest?

[Carolab]

I watched Bush's interview on Hardball. His position now is that he has "our permission" to do what he is doing because we didn't fire him when we had the chance. Well, first off, we DID, but we aren't allowed to prove it. Second, we aren't allowed to protest what he is doing or protest the election. So, where does that leave us?

[cornermouse]

1. Working at grassroots level to start getting people

in position now to undo what he's done at the first chance. That's where it leaves us.

[Inland]

2. Leaves us ignoring Bush's theory that we live in an elective dictatorship

Bush's and right wing theory is that we live in a elective dictatorship, that after the election the president has four years to do whatever he wants.

So we can't protest the war before the war, because no decisions have been made, we can't protest while decisions are being made because it ties the president's hands and makes us look weak, we can't protest during the war because it is against the troops.

We can't disagree with the president during the term because we have to unite, we can't disagree after the election because he has been vindicated.

That leaves about six months where we actually get to speak up, which Bush simply fills with hate speech, swift boat slanders, lies, orange alerts, gay marriage amendments, and a thousand other things that get his ass another four years of elected dictatorship. After all, once he is voted in, who gets to say that his policies weren't approved? Nobody. Because the debate is over and Il Duce tells us what the election meant.

My question is, when Bush declares he is empowered to do whatever he wants for four years, where is our Congress? Why don't they stand up and say that they too were elected and they have something to say the next time Bush asks for a hundred bil to waste on Iraq or destroying SS? Because they, almost as much as the press, believes we have an elected dictatorhip.

Time for a big inaugural for Our Commander in Chief.

[Donailin]

3. royally screwed?

I saw his comments on NBC and the interview may as well have been like the ones on Jon Stewart. Since he was "re-elected" he feels he, and the rest of his cronies, are not accountable for anything. And that he's gottwen a free pass to do more crazy shit.

Another comment he made was that he feels people who elect him expect him to make big changes, hence his tackling of the social security and Iran "problem"

Personally, I think Iran *should* have nuclear capability, in order to prevent the asshole from making another monumentally stupid move.