Subject:
|
Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 3 Jun 2004 20:59:15 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1161 times
|
| |
|
|
Why is this a question for the conservatives?
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
> Here's a hypothetical:
>
> Let's suppose a major event occurs between now and November 2, something on the
> order of 9/11. Now let's suppose that Dubya's administration either postpones
> or cancels the Presidential election in the wake of the disaster, citing the
> need for consistent leadership and contiuity of policy, both of which would be
> compromised by a change of President.
That's not what the constitution provides for. An event on the order of 9/11
(without minimising how horrific it was) is enough to justify closing stock
markets, perhaps, but not enough to justify changing the election date, which is
constitutionally fixed.
It would take something that broke down basic structures (think millions of
casualties, or complete loss of communications and transport capability) before
I'd agree there is any justification.
> How would you Conservatives react to this? Would you be relieved, since it
> would mean an automatic extension of Dubya's reign (and near carte blanche to do
> whatever he wants with the Executive and Judicial branches)? Or would you cry
> foul, since it would amount to a declaration of dictatorship?
Is this a trick question? It is so obviously a third world style dictatorship
imposition that I'm sort of wondering why this is directed to conservatives! If
this hypothetical came up while Kerry was president, would you ask it of
"liberals" only?
> This is hypothetical, of course, but it's hardly impossible. Tommy Franks has
> stated on-record that a WMD terrorist attack might justify the abandonment of
> the Constitution in favor of military rule.
Why hasn't this been better publicised? That statement alone is justification
for voting the entire pack of them out.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) Because I already know the answer that *sane* people would give. 8^) (...) I accept this in principle, but my question is more along the lines of Would Dubya Try It? And if so, what then? (...) Sure, if we were looking at Kerry's bid for (...) (20 years ago, 3-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| Here's a hypothetical: Let's suppose a major event occurs between now and November 2, something on the order of 9/11. Now let's suppose that Dubya's administration either postpones or cancels the Presidential election in the wake of the disaster, (...) (20 years ago, 3-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
218 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
