Subject:
|
Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 3 Jun 2004 21:20:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1235 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
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.
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?
|
(puts conservative hat on;-) Well, first, I wouldn’t ever be happy that an
attack on the order of 9-11 would occur. Frankly, I share your suspicion
(if that is indeed where you are going) that an attack will occur on our
soil to influence our election (presumabley to elect Kerry), a la in Spain.
Unless the attack was something on the order of a nuke on Washington D.C., I
can’t imagine a good reason for delaying the election. Only a delay for
logistical reasons would be valid IMO.
I would also hope that if an attack occurred and Kerry were to be elected
(frankly, I think that is his only hope of getting elected), he would take
it as a personal insult and deal even more harshly with terrorism than
Bush.
But back to Bush-- if a nuke is detonated in D.C., I would have no problem
with Marshall Law until things were set right. What would be terrible would
be to have to deal with such a calamity on one hand, and have Liberal hacks
screaming “dictatorship” on the other.
JOHN
|
Ummm, I take it that you aren’t going to answer the question...
|
I didn’t expect a green-eyed inquistition...:-)
| |
Let’s see: you basically blamed Kerry for any attack (and ignored that
Americans traditionally rally around the incumbent if attacked, which means
any attack is actually an aid to Bush). And then hoped Kerry would attack
the attackers. And then described a worst case scenario and pre-apologized
that it any delays would be “just temporary” while working in yet another
attack of liberal “hacks”.
|
I think you misunderstood my post, -->Bruce<--, if not completely.
1. Assuming an attack came on, oh, for old time’s sake, 9-11 (al-Qaeda seems to
enjoy this kind of Islamic brand of numerology), I certainly wouldn’t blame
Kerry, I’d blame the perps.
2. Second, I think that there would be a very real possibility that Kerry would
win the election because everyone would blame Bush (as what happened in
Spain).
3. I wouldn’t like it if we were attacked, Bush got reelected, and then the Left
cranked up the rhetoric another notch at a time when it would be more important
than ever to come together as a nation (in the case of some nuclear disaster).
I wouldn’t even mind if Kerry got elected if it resulted in the Left taking the
war on terrorism more seriously.
JOHN
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) This is a point worth unpacking. Although the election in Spain was influenced by the train bombing, the fact that most of the Spanish electorate opposed the Iraq war was as least as important. In the US, the drumbeat for war was communicated (...) (20 years ago, 3-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) Actually, I understood you better than you did, I think. :-) (...) But you wanted to plant the notion that such an attack would be to aid Kerry, regardless of what Kerry would want. It was just the spin you had to put on it when it really (...) (20 years ago, 3-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) Ummm, I take it that you aren't going to answer the question... Let's see: you basically blamed Kerry for any attack (and ignored that Americans traditionally rally around the incumbent if attacked, which means any attack is actually an aid to (...) (20 years ago, 3-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
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
|
|
|
|
