Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
"And they have two years, why not try to change the Constitution so their butt-boy can stay in office?"
Because it took 7 to 10 years for any sort of ratification element on the ERA & that failed miserably due to time-limited ratifications, rescinding of ratifications, & partial legislature ratifications. And that was just so:
SECTION 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. "SEC. 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
You think they'll move that swiftly for a destruction of term limits in this climate? HULLZ NAW. Also, new amendments don't take immediate effect; there's usually a designated start point, as seen (again) by the ERA:
"SEC. 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification."
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I just wonder how many people who voted for Bush would suddenly abandon him at the prospect of having him in office indefinitely.
Either way, whaddaya think -- is what's going on in American government more like what Palpatine did in Star Wars, or more like what Gaius Julius C�sar did after crossing the Rubicon...?
--Jonah
-------------------- "That's what I like about these high school girls, I keep getting older, they stay the same age."
--David "Woody" Wooderson, Dazed and Confused
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
This thread seems more than a little paranoid.
quote:Sure, there will be massive vote-rigging on a scale that'll make 2000 and 2004 look like. . . umm, simile fails me. And there will be a place in the overall plan for random-yet-calculated security alerts; but they'll just be to slow down the voting process in key Democratic areas, or to provide a dstraction while ballot-boxes are switched or packed or tampered with. And it'll all go unreported...
The 'key Democratic areas' tend to be densely populated cities such as New York or Los Angeles, which are therefore the most likely to suffer actual terrorist attacks.
As for the media, the mainstream media hates Bush and is willing to report anything that will make him, or the Republicans look bad. Do we all remember the fraudulent Air National Gaurd letter a few years back? CBS's response was essentially 'yeah, the letter's a fake, but an old lady said it sounds like something the now-deceased commander would have said'. As for massive ballot tampering, the mainstream media went nuts over wiretapping and the tracing of international financial transactions, do you honestly think they would turn a blind eye to full-blown ballot tampering?
As for what's going on in American politics, the same thing is going on that has always gone on: the two parties fight it out to determine who will end up in temporary control of the Executive and/or Legislative branches. This tends to involve extensive mud-slinging, name-calling, and accusations. The only (somewhat) major world leader who is currently trying to become president-for-life a la Fidel Castro is Venezuela's Hugo Chavez.
-------------------- "Having is not so pleasing a thing, after all, as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."
Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
Only a little, I was striving for so much more than that.
Chavez has problems with his nemesis on the loose now. I wonder if the CIA helped with that, just to keep Hugo off balance.
I have lost all respect for the president of this fair coutry, and I mean the position, never had any for the man.
-------------------- "You are a terrible human, Ritten." Magnus "Urgh, you are a sick sick person..." Austin Powers A leek too, pretty much a negi.....
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
If the republicans win again, it will be for two reasons- They'll capitalize on irrational fears or/and the Democrats will campaign on a platform of "look how bad Bush is!" instead of making a plan (any plan!) for improving our country's situation and rallying behind that.
I truly think that if the Democrats were to go all year without pointing out Bushco's obvious failures (the media will report that anyway), and focused on promoting a plan for returning troops home, improving homeland security without sacrificing civil liberties (i.e. through improving imtel networks) and working on a imigration standard that actually works, they'd win by a landslide.
But it wont happpen- too many prominent Dems are in it only for themselves- at their party's (and nation's) expense.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Ooh, we got a wingnut. To sum up: "Blah blah blah, liberal media elite, blah blah blah, Chavez."
quote:The 'key Democratic areas' tend to be densely populated cities such as New York or Los Angeles, which are therefore the most likely to suffer actual terrorist attacks.
Which makes them all the more likely places for bogus alerts to take place, disrupting the voting. After all, why waste such an opportunity? And terror alerts needn't be restricted to places where the darkies live, fear knows no boundaries, especially with you lot (one woman having panic attack on plane => plane diverted with fighter escort? For fuck's sake) - hell, I was living half a mile away from the IRA bomb in the Strand back in 1990; I slept through it. . .
posted
Ah, but Lee, that wasn't real terrorism. Real terrorism began on 9/11 when God's nation was attacked by the evil Islamo-facists and the weak willed Liberal European media types that simply fail to understand this are traitors, pure and simple. VOTE REPUBLICAN, WAR IS PEACE, BUSH IS SMART.
Seriously, Islamic terrorism is a serious threat but the monumental cock-ups made by the US government in particular in dealing with it since 9/11 are almost unbelievable. Almost everything, from the rhetoric of senior Republicans to the half-arsed, ideaologically driven Iraq invasion plan that bore almost no resemblance to the likely military situation to the fact that anyone who disagrees with the 'Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld is always right and have made no mistakes' line is automatically smeared by Republicans as being 'unpatriotic' at the very least. The manifest and disgusting failure of senior government officials in the US to take reponsibility is amazing. And not in a good way.
And then we have our own Dear Leader, who appears to do everything Dubya tells him to (even down to replacing our Foreign Secretary) without considering the consequences for this country in general and our armed forces in particular. Our forces are still having to make cuts to pay for operations which are being carried out with an absolute minimum of equipment. Not to mention that much of the equipment that we do have is knackered. If we're going to do these things, at least give the forces the money and equipment to do so properly instead of concentrating on cheap political ploys like a mass pardon of deserters from teh Great War on the strength of a few (and not that many) having been 'shell shocked' and a monumentally outdated view of the British Army's performance in that war as being one of 'lions led by donkeys'. And you don't even want to get me started on the farce that is MoD procurement.
I'll calm down now.
Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Ooh, we got a wingnut. To sum up: "Blah blah blah, liberal media elite, blah blah blah, Chavez."
Yes, a wingnut and a proud member of the Vast Right-wing Conspiracy. I may even be a religous nut. It can't hurt to add at least one dissonant voice to the chorus, right?
Does the majority of the US media lean towards the left or not? There have been a variety of studies (not to mention plenty of anecdotal evidnece) that show that the vast majority of journalists and journalism majors favor the Democratic party. Ted Turner, the founder of CNN, is a self-acknowledged socialist. And the New York Times is certainly not on Bush's side. I only bring it up because the thought that a left-leaning media would look the other way in the face of a Republican plot to tamper with the election, when past actions show that they are willing to jump on anything that appears out of sorts, is pretty silly.
As for a massive Republican conspiracy to rig up terrorism alerts along with a simultaneous attempt to stuff ballot boxes, I seriously doubt the Republican party is anywhere near organized enough to even consider it. The party has been divided over issues such as immigration, the handling of the Iraq war, education, etc., and seems to be having a hard time deciding who should be running for President. Personally I would like to see Rice up for the candidacy.
-------------------- "Having is not so pleasing a thing, after all, as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."
Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
No matter what the journalists themselves think, the media are going to report the things that their advertisers will approve of. That's where the money comes from, and the news is a business. And guess which party has the majority of the people running the biggest-paying advertisers?
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
Condoleeza Rice will never be president. Why? She's too fucking ugly. No joke.
Does the majority of the US media lean towards the left or not? No. It leans toward whatever serves its self-interest at the time regardless of political lines. Network was prophetic in more than one area. The days of Arthur Vandenburg & Carr Van Anda, Walter Cronkite & Edward Murrow are over.
i have for quite some time persisted with the theory that the true seat of power in this nation resides not with the president (who is infact a figurehead placeholder) but in some decentralized non-essential positions that no one really ever thinks about. Lieutenant Governor of Idaho, say, or comptroller for the State of Vermont.
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
Da_bang80
A few sectors short of an Empire
Member # 528
posted
I thought it was aliens...
At least that's what Discovery channel thinks
Anyone remember when Discovery was the playboy channel for your family pet?
-------------------- Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change. The courage to change the things I cannot accept. And the wisdom to hide the bodies of all the people I had to kill today because they pissed me off.
posted
Yes, they do, a hold over from the rebellion. Since they were to have no vices calling them a vice gov'ner didn't make since.
-------------------- "You are a terrible human, Ritten." Magnus "Urgh, you are a sick sick person..." Austin Powers A leek too, pretty much a negi.....
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
Lieutenant governor is very important lately. Lots of governor scandals. Point in case: Connecticut's governor, John fuckass rowland, was indicted for all sorts of graft (Oh, BIG fucking srurprise, he's from Waterbury, people...!) & he finally made a wise decision & stepped down. Who took over? The lieutenant governor, Jodi Rell (nice lady, lives in Brookfield, next to where I grew up.)
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
-------------------- "I am an almost extinct breed, an old-fashioned gentleman, which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-bitch when it suits me." --Jubal Harshaw
Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
