's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions

Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )

A Modest Proposal: Suspend Elections until V-Terror Day(32 posts)

A Modest Proposal: Suspend Elections until V-Terror DayDale Brigham
Dec 1, 2003 10:31 AM
People, we are in a state of war against terrorists who hate us because we are free. I think it's a bad idea to have elections next year. They could just be postponed until we are victorious against the terrorists (V-Terror Day). I don't think anybody would really mind, for the following reasons:

1) Old Abe (Lincoln, not Vigoda) was reelected in the midst of the Civil War in '64 on a "don't change horses in the middle of a stream" platform. Why even take that chance? We are fighting for our very survival, people! Stay on the same horse!

2) Think of all the money we could save if we cancelled the '04 elections. And, all the political ads we could skip seeing and hearing. Who could be against that? Why take the chance that a new Paris Hilton reality series might get bumped for another boring debate. Sheesh!

3) Bush and the Repubs are going to win anyway, so why bother going through this whole thing. The economy is booming, we are winning the war on terror, and the recent state redistricting pretty much guarantees that no Dumocrats are going to spoil the party. Since it's a done deal, why not just embrace the inevitable and go with the flow?

And another thing, fer Gawd's sake, can you even imagine Howard Dean in a flight suit? Reediculous!

I'm with youmohair_chair
Dec 1, 2003 11:03 AM
No horrible TV commercials, no idiotic pretend "debates," and especially, no ranting and raving and demagoguery at Conventions. I'm sure the hookers will be upset, but no one else will.

Hey, people may not like Bush, but the devil you know is better than the devil you don't. Do you really want to take a chance on getting someone worse? Not me. Bush isn't the brightest bulb in the set, but he likes a good butt kicking (fly into Baghdad? bring it on!), and there's nothing wrong with that. I don't see any reason to go through the bother re-electing him. He's in for the duration, and he's wise enough to know when it's time to step down.
Stay the course! (nm)ColnagoFE
Dec 1, 2003 11:05 AM
re: Fear sells..jrm
Dec 1, 2003 11:08 AM
They don't hate us because we are free. They hate us because the Bush administration doesn't acknowledge Islam as a religion nor the states of the ME as sovereign. They see our "war" as a crusade and colonialism in order to reap resources.

Its the US that hates based unlikeness, assumptions and stereotypes. In most other parts of the world one has to do something in order to be hated.
I guess Carter & Clinton didn't "acknowledge Islam", either ...HouseMoney
Dec 1, 2003 11:42 AM
Iranian hostage crisis, Nov. 4, 1979
WTC bombing, Feb. 26, 1993
Khobar Towers bombing, June 25, 1996
U.S. Embassy bombings in Kenya & Tanzania, Aug. 7, 1998
USS Cole bombing, Oct. 12, 2000

What a specious (and simple-minded) argument you make! A bit naive, too.
Cater and Clinton Aren't President .....Dumba$sjrm
Dec 1, 2003 1:20 PM
Nice slippery slope attempt there sport. Its still colonalism and a crusade regardless of what your Fox news brainwashed brain thinks otherwise.
LOL! When you can't argue with FACTS ...HouseMoney
Dec 1, 2003 1:55 PM
... play the "Fox News" card! Priceless. You're the one who wrote "They hate us because the Bush administration doesn't acknowledge Islam as a religeon ...". I just pointed out, by citing several examples, that Islamic extremists have demonstrated their "hate" for us for quite some time. I didn't even blame it on Clinton & Carter; just used their administrations as points of reference.

So, who is brainwashing you, MoveOn, InternationalAnswer, your college professors, or some other Leftist group(s)? How will you be able to sustain your hate for the Bush Administration for another 5+ years?!

BTW, since you brought up "dumba$s": (1) "its" should be "it's", and (2) the correct spelling is colonIalism.
LOL! When you can't argue with FACTS ...bill105
Dec 1, 2003 2:03 PM
jrm's just mad because nafta sucked his job of being wrong to another country.
Oh.. back pedalling...jrm
Dec 1, 2003 2:19 PM
And more slippery slope.

Uh huh. Its not the nation of the United States that they hate its the policies of the state. By saying that that they hate the nation as well as the state assumes that Fox news or dubya are telling you that the two are the same. You are not the state....
Back pedalling? Hardly.HouseMoney
Dec 2, 2003 9:18 AM
Let's go back to what you originally wrote: "They hate us because the Bush administration doesn't acknowledge Islam as a religion nor the states of the ME as sovereign." So if they hate the (Bush) policies of the state, to use your words, did they also hate the policies of the state under Carter & Clinton? Heck, I'll even throw Reagan in there, too (Beirut Embassy bombing in '83). My point, as hard as it seems for you to understand, is that militant Islam has had an antagonistic position towards our "state" prior to the Bush administration.

"They see our "war" as a crusade and colonialism in order to reap resources." Still believing the liberal-babble that we're in this for oil, huh?! That's a new one.

What's hysterical is that you keep harping that I somehow get my positions spoon-fed by conservative sources (typical tactic, attack the source, not the facts), meanwhile you keep spouting the talking points & buzzwords of the Left. I've read enough of your B.S. to know you don't have an original thought in your head. What's your username on the DemocraticUnderground website? ¡Adiós!  
He could be the state.Spoiler
Dec 2, 2003 9:32 AM
I agree with what you are saying on the large scale. But on an individual basis, I think the person and the state can be the same.
If a person is responsible for the drafting of the policies or is a supporter of the policies, (particularly a blind, uninformed supporter) then shouldn't he be partial responsible for the reaction the policy draws?
If the policies draw negative reactions from other people sharing the planet with us, we should be adult enough to take a second look at the policy and get rid of it and it's author if it will make the world a better place. At some point we need to start sharing the planet with other people instead of directing it for them.
Dec 1, 2003 1:14 PM
i guess you missed those two airplanes flown into the wtc. they hate use precisely because we are not a muslim nation. what did the "bush administration" do to provoke the murduring islamists to crash 4 aircraft in 1 day? i bet those who lost innocent family in new york would just love to get a piece of your wisdom.
The bush admin did NOTHING to save those 2K livesjrm
Dec 1, 2003 1:33 PM
when they knew of a domestic and international threat to US assets ten days earlier.

And on 9/11 the bush family covertly got the bin laden family out of the US.

Dont give me this anti-american billshlt. its not wisdom its FACT.
oh, youre rightbill105
Dec 1, 2003 1:40 PM
with the crap intelligence they had, they were supposed to put 2 and 2 together. whatever. i guess we can be everywhere all the time 24/7. if someone has a car wreck, people like you blame in on bush. the california wildfires? must have been bush. where are your facts that the bush family got the bin ladens out of the u.s.? youre right, its not wisdom and your statements are un-american.

we were attacked. lets all hug and maybe they wont try to kill us.
yeah blame the intel..jrm
Dec 1, 2003 2:52 PM
They had 10 days prior to 9/11 to investigate the claims, Period. And they didnt. That is focked up.

Un-american? bbbbaaaahhhhhhhaaaaaaaa.
Dec 2, 2003 6:36 AM
i'll give you some intel. i am going to egg your house. now with that intel, i guess you will be sitting in your driveway waiting for me from now on every day of the year and will never sleep. or, you can try and decide if thats a threat i have made before and how many i make and how many have been carried out and how possible they are and if i have the means and if i meant your work rather than your house, etc.

yeah, you are un-american. i bet your french.
So its OK that 2K people diedjrm
Dec 2, 2003 9:46 AM
Because of the unperdictability of the data or the repetitveness of the threat. Thats pathetic.

Also they were getting these threats a month prior to the actual incident.

I came from Europe just like you did. I also pay taxes just like you.
hey, i was the one who brought up the 2k casualties.bill105
Dec 2, 2003 11:16 AM
its bad form for you to fein concern now. and hey, thats intel, some good, some bad and some you dont know what to do with. whether its the cia the fbi, whoever.

they we getting threats for all kinds of things way way before 911. none of them happened.

you must have just gotten of the ship from eurpoe too because you really cant spell.
hey, 9 11 happened...and we were warnedjrm
Dec 3, 2003 1:25 PM
Sorry, fifth generation irish. Oh nice spelling of europe there sport.
hey, 9 11 happened...and we were warnedbill105
Dec 3, 2003 1:47 PM
i guess you were by those voices in your head. maybe you should have ran for president. sport.
george bush-emperor for life.nmrufus
Dec 1, 2003 11:10 AM
Absolutely not, although I agree with your #3 ...HouseMoney
Dec 1, 2003 11:27 AM
Barring something unforeseen, President Bush will be reelected fairly easily in '04 (Note to that segment of Leftists whose lone issue is hating Bush: that's REELECTED, as in ELECTED for a second time).

Those in the electorate who want to vote for a "stay the course" platform can do that by voting for GWB. There's no need to suspend elections. Besides, there are some important Senate & House seats up for grabs, too.

On 9/11/01, there was a mayoral primary in NYC. Needless to say, it was postponed for about a month or two, but eventually it was held. There was talk of cancelling the general election and allowing Rudy Giuliani to stay in office for an extra year. That idea was squashed, and despite some bone-headed moves by Mayor Bloomberg, NYC has shown its resilience.
That's exactly what Bush wantsContinental
Dec 1, 2003 11:31 AM
So that he and his Cronies can take over the world's oil production. We must elect Howard Dean because he's a Doctor and will get us out of Iraq. A Doctor must be smart. I'm sure that he will put together a cabinet that is much smarter than Colin Powell, Dick Cheney, and Condi Rice, those idiots who don't have the best interest of the country at heart. It's all about oil. U.S. out of Iraq! U.S. out of Iraq!
That's exactly what Bush wantsbill105
Dec 1, 2003 1:16 PM
how old are you? 15, 16?
That's exactly what Bush wantsjrm
Dec 1, 2003 1:33 PM
Address the argument or go home.
That's exactly what Bush wantsbill105
Dec 1, 2003 1:47 PM
i am home
I predicted this two years ago; still getting hate mail.Cory
Dec 1, 2003 12:48 PM
A week or so after the Sept. 11 attacks, I wrote a column predicting that whatever happened, the Repubs wouldn't stop shouting about it until after the 2004 elections. When they introduced the terror-by-number color scheme, I said they'd never set it lower than yellow until Bush was re-elected (now I'm predicting it goes to orange next October, and how can we change leaders when things are so bad? But if we had effective leadership, shouldn't they be getting BETTER?).
For the record, I also warned that under the cover of terrorism, they'd push through a bunch of environmental, anti-civil rights and other legislation Repubs have long wanted, but would never dare promote in normal times. Been getting hate mail ever since, but I'm 100 percent so far.
Don't put ALL your money on a Bush win, though. I still think he'll pull it off, but I'm seeing a lot more questioning and disillusioned mail than I was getting even a few weeks ago, and I live in about the closest thing there is to a robot-Republican state.
No hate mail from me, Corymoneyman
Dec 1, 2003 1:27 PM
You're spot on with your predictions and your reasons. The Bush/Cheney Evil Machine is running full-tilt at the 2004 elections, and they will do whatever it takes to win. Their record on the items you mention - civil rights, environment, is deplorable.

And now, in the midst of all this, the news reports today are full of Bush pushing, again, for privatization of Social Security. It is unbelievable how this administration is ruining this country.

civil rights, environment??oldbutslow
Dec 1, 2003 7:15 PM
Please provide sources for your comments. BTW, the DU, Motherearth, et al, don't count.
prove itbill105
Dec 2, 2003 6:53 AM
name one person or tree thats been hurt by bush civil right or environmental policies. you cant.
Dec 2, 2003 12:10 PM
Not since the burning of the Reichstag has the ultra right used a national tragedy so cunningly to try to force their fanatical extremism on a nation.
Dec 2, 2003 12:21 PM
youre right, i feel so oppressed. i'll go home to my family in a house i bought from the money i made with a good education. i'll eat dinner and watch my big screen. i'll go to church of my own free will. i'll ride my bike this week too and its all bush's fault! its HORRIBLE, we're all doomed! i dont know how much more of this i can take!