Kartoffel Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 Okay, who didn't see this coming? And be honest now. It's just what we need, a Baptist minister with emergency authority over the elections. Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-religious, it's just that religion belongs in the churches and NOT in the government. Given this administration's record on elections, cronyism, and the separation of Church and State, a Baptist minister hand-picked by George W. Bush is the last person we need in that position.
Kartoffel Posted July 13, 2004 Author Report Posted July 13, 2004 Okay, who didn't see this coming? And be honest now. It's just what we need, a Baptist minister with emergency authority over the elections. Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-religious, it's just that religion belongs in the churches and NOT in the government. Given this administration's record on elections, cronyism, and the separation of Church and State, a Baptist minister hand-picked by George W. Bush is the last person we need in that position.
Matchoo Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 What if we did postpone the elections for a month or so? Is the ENTIRE U.S. population going to be trusted to keep the secret and not let the terrorist groups know that the election will now be in December instead of November? I can see it now: On November 1st, the terrorists strike a U.S city and wipe out 10,000 citizens. But we just point at them and laugh, "Ha Ha, the jokes on you. The elections aren't until NEXT month....." If we postpone the elections, they'll probably just postpone their attacks, and we'll then just show that the U.S. can be forced to change our lifestyle when we're threatened.
Matchoo Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 What if we did postpone the elections for a month or so? Is the ENTIRE U.S. population going to be trusted to keep the secret and not let the terrorist groups know that the election will now be in December instead of November? I can see it now: On November 1st, the terrorists strike a U.S city and wipe out 10,000 citizens. But we just point at them and laugh, "Ha Ha, the jokes on you. The elections aren't until NEXT month....." If we postpone the elections, they'll probably just postpone their attacks, and we'll then just show that the U.S. can be forced to change our lifestyle when we're threatened.
street228 Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 quote: On November 1st, the terrorists strike a U.S city and wipe out 10,000 citizens. But we just point at them and laugh, "Ha Ha, the jokes on you. The elections aren't until NEXT month....." LOL,!!! I seriously, would NOT put it past this administration,though: to try and USE their fear campaign to instigate some sort of INDEFINATE postponement. It (MEDIA GENERATED MASS HYSTERIA) has worked so WELL, for them thus far!! A postponement, would do WHAT, to the voter turnout?;and ,Of what societial class will it affect the most? ARE the questions, one should ask themselves! edit: and here is a link to help identify the DECIDERS(..the ELECTION's.. deciding vote): http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/13/...s.ap/index.html [ 07-13-2004, 02:02 PM: Message edited by: street ]
street228 Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 quote: On November 1st, the terrorists strike a U.S city and wipe out 10,000 citizens. But we just point at them and laugh, "Ha Ha, the jokes on you. The elections aren't until NEXT month....." LOL,!!! I seriously, would NOT put it past this administration,though: to try and USE their fear campaign to instigate some sort of INDEFINATE postponement. It (MEDIA GENERATED MASS HYSTERIA) has worked so WELL, for them thus far!! A postponement, would do WHAT, to the voter turnout?;and ,Of what societial class will it affect the most? ARE the questions, one should ask themselves! edit: and here is a link to help identify the DECIDERS(..the ELECTION's.. deciding vote): http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/13/...s.ap/index.html [ 07-13-2004, 02:02 PM: Message edited by: street ]
street228 Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 quote: Bush is a genious. There are many men, in history, depicted as such, and several were just as devious, and dangerous to common principle, as well; Thus, I will agree Bush, to be well versed in the political arena.
street228 Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 quote: Bush is a genious. There are many men, in history, depicted as such, and several were just as devious, and dangerous to common principle, as well; Thus, I will agree Bush, to be well versed in the political arena.
Kalshion Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 Funny Bush isn't the one who is going to delay these elections. CNN's artical is nothing more than democratic propaganda Wonder when someone will post a non-biased opinion (one NOT from the Communist News Network)
Kalshion Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 Funny Bush isn't the one who is going to delay these elections. CNN's artical is nothing more than democratic propaganda Wonder when someone will post a non-biased opinion (one NOT from the Communist News Network)
Supreme Cmdr Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 Well, so much for the separation of church and state.
Supreme Cmdr Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 Well, so much for the separation of church and state.
street228 Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 quote:one NOT from the Communist News Network I suppose, the statement above, is one of those "NON biased referances? REGARDLESS, of its propaghanda value, and to what party, it is intended to promote....the evidence of, and idea which; was being referred too, is relevant: to the subject, which the post was referring.
street228 Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 quote:one NOT from the Communist News Network I suppose, the statement above, is one of those "NON biased referances? REGARDLESS, of its propaghanda value, and to what party, it is intended to promote....the evidence of, and idea which; was being referred too, is relevant: to the subject, which the post was referring.
Kalshion Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 evidence? I hardly call a link from CNN 'evidence'
Kalshion Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 evidence? I hardly call a link from CNN 'evidence'
street228 Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 quote: evidence? I hardly call a link from CNN 'evidence' You, are obviously suffering from EXTREME prejudice, toward the source of the particular article, rather, than looking at the INTENT , in which the article was presented. and what the post was referring to, when the article was presented. I would assure you, that CNN is NOT the ONLY place which refers to this battle over the black and especially the hispanic vote.(a REPUBLICAN slanted viewpoint concerning THIS battle for votes, would have served EQUAL purpose)WHEW!! IT was the SUBJECT matter, which was being referred to, and NOT any politically biased slants, (percieved by you) in regard to YOUR politically biased views. You need to lighten up, and reread the ACTUAL meaning of the post, in relation to the article, along with verifiable FACTS, which were presented within the article. THERE is more to this WHOLE electorial process, than pure PARTINSEN biased viewpoints.
street228 Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 quote: evidence? I hardly call a link from CNN 'evidence' You, are obviously suffering from EXTREME prejudice, toward the source of the particular article, rather, than looking at the INTENT , in which the article was presented. and what the post was referring to, when the article was presented. I would assure you, that CNN is NOT the ONLY place which refers to this battle over the black and especially the hispanic vote.(a REPUBLICAN slanted viewpoint concerning THIS battle for votes, would have served EQUAL purpose)WHEW!! IT was the SUBJECT matter, which was being referred to, and NOT any politically biased slants, (percieved by you) in regard to YOUR politically biased views. You need to lighten up, and reread the ACTUAL meaning of the post, in relation to the article, along with verifiable FACTS, which were presented within the article. THERE is more to this WHOLE electorial process, than pure PARTINSEN biased viewpoints.
Kalshion Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 Street I've read the article from Fox News, and I can tell you right now that the two articles are different in a way, similer in another. But there is one thing that set's the two apart CNN like's to falsify reports and add there own information, or did you leave out the minor detail when you posted the link Street? In the media you're suppose to REPORT the news, not REPORT it AND add you're own information
Kalshion Posted July 13, 2004 Report Posted July 13, 2004 Street I've read the article from Fox News, and I can tell you right now that the two articles are different in a way, similer in another. But there is one thing that set's the two apart CNN like's to falsify reports and add there own information, or did you leave out the minor detail when you posted the link Street? In the media you're suppose to REPORT the news, not REPORT it AND add you're own information
Steve Schacher Posted July 14, 2004 Report Posted July 14, 2004 This is the same speculation that occurred in 1997-1998 when the President Clinton signed executive orders transferring power to FEMA (under Janet Reno's Justice Department) should a disaster occur. Back then, it was under the guise of a calamity due to Y2K. Still, the same conspiracy theories of an "October Surprise" resulted, but never happened. An interesting question left unanswered still is, what would happen if there were a MAJOR attack -- not an Amtrack explosion that kills 150 people, but, say, simultaneous explosions of dirty bombs in NYC, LA, SF, DC, Boston, Chicago, Miami, Dallas, Houston, St. Louis, etc.? Or, what would happen if one of the candidates were assassinated just weeks before the election? The last time we saw something like that was in 1968 when Robert Kennedy was killed. With Kennedy, though, he was still only a primary candidate. The actual party nominee had not been chosen yet. Now, for my own conspiracy theory, I would suggest that if we do wind up postponing the election, it will be at the request of the Democrats, moreso because their candidate is losing badly in the polls and want to buy more time than because of a Bush power-grab.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now