2008 election

Post Reply New Topic

This is an article that first appeared in Hustler Magazine in Feb. 08. I won't bore all of you with my addle-pated opinion on this; (unless, of course, any one asks. ), but I am more interested in the opinions of others.

Feel free to rant; but please just try not to attack each other. Pull in any other evidence in support of, or contrary to. Debate, or just sound off an opinion. This is wide open, save the initial restriction about nasty with those of a different opinion than yourself.

Have fun.

P.S.

The link I provided was just the first site I found that reprinted the article. I would have gone right to the Hustler site, but thought too many would be distracted, or offended by the booty/booby pics. Sorry if I spoiled any ones fun.

Will Bush cancel 2008 election?

It's a load of crap that only an idiot would believe. The exact same rubbish was promulgated in 2004, 2000, 1996, and probably every four years before that, too. I first saw it in 1988. When a Democrat is in office, it's conservatives who pull this stupidity. When a Republican is in office, it's liberals who pull this stupidity. The stupidest part is that there are so many morons willing to believe it.

Yes, if you believe it, I'm calling you a moron. This is an old pack of trash that resurfaces every four years regardless of who is in charge.

[quote="Dogbrain"]
Yes, if you believe it, I'm calling you a moron. quote]

Okaayyy.... what part of 'don't get nasty with those who disagree with you' are you having difficulty with? If you are not capable of civility in this thread, please leave.

I understand the need to flout restrictions, but sheesh.

Your opinion up until that point was interesting, but after that last bit any validity or credibility you may have had to me was thrown at the window by your obvious disdain for the ground rule (singular mind you), I had set, and an apparent combative state of mind. Go troll somewhere else please.

This is the political equivalent of "vaccines cause autism" and deserves the same amount of respect.

Sigh.

In your opinion, the opinion of the people who wrote the article, (and those who agree with it) warrants the same amount of respect.

Fine.

I never said I agreed or disagreed with the article, or your opinion for that matter. I simply put the subject up for debate and general discussion. I am getting the impression that you are having a difficult time separating my opinion from the opinion of those who wrote the article. The fact that I put up a rule, and you blatantly disregarded it, leads me to suspect that you may be laboring under an assumption about my motives, and opinion on the subject. Your general contempt and caustic attitude deepens that suspicion.

If you feel I am not worthy of respect for doing that; again that is your opinion, and more power to you in it. But it is antagonistic and unnecessarily so, to start name calling people who disagree with you in general, and blatantly disrespecting not only a topic of discussion but the person who broached it. Besides, if the topic, and the person who put it up was so worthy of contempt, why bother posting in the thread at all? To put it simply; I wasn't trying to pick a fight. Why are you?

I see no purpose in doing so, except perhaps to underline your own sense of superiority. The point of this thread was not to allow you to blow off steam by calling people names. Nor was it to give you an avenue to demonstrate your perceived superior grasp of political trends and circumstance by putting down the intelligence of an entire (hypothetical) group of people. It also wasn't presented to give you an opportunity to show disrespect to someone (i.e. me), because they presented a subject (not even a perspective mind you, just a subject) that you think is hogwash. It was put up as a subject for discussion that was (in my opinion) a little silly, and mostly for fun, and an opportunity to think outside of the box for a moment.

Although there is no doubt that the current administration has the motivation to circumvent the election Obama is close enough in his indicated probable action as executive to not vary all that much from the Bush initiatives insofar as Israel and the Middle East is concerned and it is probably not worthwhile for the people in control of the economic levers in the USA to allow too open a destruction of the present legal system as Obama, whatever his declamations, looks not eager to totally upset the current applecart. The conservatives in both the major parties and in the Supreme court no doubt have sufficient control to satisfy the basic current programs. Unfortunately this probably will not be enough to turn the country around to prevent the general decline of the economy and the ultimate demise of US international strength...but this will take a few years at minimum.

Now that would be a real kick in the pants, wouldn't it? Don't really think it will happen, and would resist an illegal extension of the Bush Administration if it did. We had an election during the Civil War, with CSA troops active in areas where campaigning was taking place. Of course, Lincoln was running for re-election, whereas King George II has nothing to lose.

We shall see, eh?

Hmmm... Resist how? Just curious. I would resist too. Okay... I would b***h alot. But in the end what could be done?

Assassination?

Purely hypothetical of course, since this would not ever happen. But if it did, assassination really would seem like the right way to go, regardless of who it was trying to cling to power.

Assassination of course is one element of revolution. Considering how unresisting the general population has been to the leaching away of basic constitutional civil rights and how powerful electronic surveillance has become it would require a huge amount of general suffering to spur a revolution. A US dictatorship probably could maintain general suffering at a low enough level to prevent any real revolt. Black people suffered a great deal before civil rights laws mitigated their condition to a degree yet no real revolution ever got much momentum. The Black Panthers was the closest it ever came and brutal executions by the establishment quashed that pretty quickly.

Agreed!

How could I possibly not ask when given such a broad hint? Please do tell (if your opinion really is addle-pated, I will regret asking).


I find the stuff on vote rigging and the Bush/Cheney/Rove attitude to democracy credible. I still don't buy the prediction of an open coup. I think the appearance of democracy is important enough to enough politicians and their backers that an open coup is unlikely. It is possible this was not always so. There is a claim that there was a coup attempt in 1934. Don't know how credible the report is.

Anyway, I think today a more likely tactic is increasing corruption of the political system, like in Zimbabwe. They still have elections, but the effectiveness of elections approaches zero. The USA still has a long way to go before getting to where Zimbabwe's political system is, but it's still where Bush/Cheney/Rove have been driving the country.

I wrote a response to this on Monday. Spent an hour and a half on it. It was great. Funny as hell. I pushed the wrong button when I posted it #$%@&*! !!.

Gone.

So, instead you get this crap. (Sigh. Gromit, I would like to apologize in advance.)

So, my opinion in short, is that a suspension of the 2008 election is a possible scenario. Not very probable mind you, but possible.

I think that Zimbabwe was a good example. I think you are correct that a quiet and long-term insinuation of this corruption into our government and the consciousness of the populace is probably more likely. It would certainly be the smart thing to do. Unlike so many others, I am not of the opinion that this country is being run by idiots. There are some of those to be sure, but not many.

I agree that there is currently no necessity for a bloody, or bloodless, or generally overt coup. Just rig another election.

Done.

Over.

Problem solved for another 4 years at least. The republicans have their mouth-piece-McCain in the white house to further their "AGENDA" (For World Domination! Mwa ha ha!), and the rest of us are left to shake our heads, or scratch them, or pat them and rub out tummies while we are picketing... something in protest of the crumbling of our democracy, the economy, or just the fact that McCain is a jerk... pick your pointless, babbling, poison. Blah... Blah... Blah...

Now, the insinuation of this article would present a scenario more like Argentina, or (Yes. Unanimous eye rolls here. I understand. I really do.) Nazi Germany.

This problem with this article is that it is predicting a possible future event based on past allegations that are difficult to prove. (I would like to take the time here to mention that I,m convinced that the Republicans stole the election in 2004. Just to get that out of the way.) It is also speculating a fear-based scenario, which throws objectivity out the window. Ultimately what is feared is the swift, brutal, and absolute change over of a 'free-state- to a 'police-state'.

However to further prop up the possibility of such a speculated event, I would offer these:

-The FISA bill.

-The U.S.A Patriot Act. (Now, the President has not exploited a fraction of the diametrically vaguely/specifically worded potential in the U.S.A Patriot Act. It has been sitting there quietly like a loaded gun since 2001. Which, to my mind adds credibility to the speculation that this administration is biding it's time, and will destroy our civil rights slowly.)

-A recent article in The Washington Post: U.S. May Ease Police Spy Rules; More Federal Changes Planned. (As soon as I can find a link to this one where I don't have to sign up as a member, I will post it.)

...and last but not least. This one really got me.

-A $384 million contract between Halliburton, more specifically KBR, (a.k.a Dick Cheney's baby), and The Department of Defense to build facilities across the country with... (This is great! You'll love this.) "...detention and processing capabilities to augment existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations Program facilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or..."(this last bit is what really gets people frothing at the mouth and breaking out the spray paint and cardboard.) "to support the rapid development of new programs. (my italics thank you.) Which of course begs the obvious question; 'What New Programs need $384 million worth of razor wire?' I would however, like to point out here that $384 million, while pretty impressive, is really not that much money in terms of implementing government programs. I wouldn't (quite) start crying 'Dachau' yet.

The problem here is that most of this is based on speculation. Period. It takes a sort of 'conspiracy' for granted; or the "AGENDA" as I've styled it here. If you want to look into the credibility of this worst-case-scenario possibility you have to wade through survivalists, and anarchist militant basta... err... I mean Freemen, a bunch of begging-for-Armageddon-fundamentalists, some hysterical libertarians, and a spattering of chart-obsessed (and equally hysterical) economists. Then... You get into the really fun stuff; like reptilians, the Illuminati, and aliens. (Woo Hoo! The End is Nigh!) Loads of fun. But not very productive.

Because, once you take a conspiracy for granted... Well... 'If they can do that then they wouldn't balk at doing this which leads to this, and this, and this... and, you may be left gibbering under your kitchen table with your gun, your stash of Chef-Boy-Ardee and trusty tin foil hat. So the credibility factor quickly drops to squat-ola.

Also, once you start wondering about what an administration may do, you are left with the unfortunate task of trying to sort out a career politicians true internal motives/psychology. Phrases about 'herding cats' come to mind, and it's only a few short steps back to aliens.

So, again. Long story short I think it is possible. Unlikely. But possible enough that I will be watching history unfold itself this November with a few flutters.

I think it's too conspiracy theory. Besides, no tangible proof. Which, ya know, ya need to prove that. I'm just sayin'.

As for the current candidates, McCain is too old, and Obama sounds too inexperienced. (Socialism? This is bloody America! What are you, a Commie? </kidding>)

I think Bush taking over might be a good thing. But a lot of people really, really want him gone.

just wondering...but does the whole russia thing change the potential for elections?


MOSCOW (AP) - Russia says its response to the further development of a U.S. missile shield in Poland will go beyond diplomacy.

Russia's Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying the U.S. missile shield plans are clearly aimed at weakening Russia.

The U.S. says the missile defense system is aimed at protecting the U.S. and Europe from future attacks from states like Iran.

The United States and Poland signed a deal Wednesday to place a U.S. missile defense base just 115 miles from Russia's westernmost fringe.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

And the EXACT SAME conspiracy theory was floated claiming that Clinton would do this. I leave it to those of us with at least three firing neurons to draw the inevitable conclusion.