# Elections to be postponed! Democracy is being killed.



## MTPheas (Oct 8, 2003)

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/ ... index.html

I first saw a story about this a few months ago--mainstream press today.

If they postpone or cancel this election, how will we be any different from any two-bit banana republic dictatorship?

Under the scenario being pushed by the administration, elections could be postponed only because of the threat of terror. Here's what I see happening, Kerry and Bush in a near tie in the polls, Tom Ridge is trotted out to tell the country that a terrorist threat is imminent and the election will be postponed. Like his announcement last week, no specific information will be provided.

Wake up people! Don't let this stand.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Blah Blah Blah, quit worrying the sky is not falling!

But before you start seeing black helicopters circling your house, at least consider the mechanics of the whole thing:

The only body that can change the date of federal elections is Congress.

Assuming the Supreme Court agreed, Congress could delegate this power to a federal commission if it so desired.

However, in a couple of weeks everyone goes home for the summer. They come back on September 3rd.

The current target for adjournment of the current congressional session is October 1st.

In other words, supposing that the Justice Department actually decided (suicidally, in my opinion) to propose legislation to create an election commission with the power to reschedule elections, Congress would have a grand total of four weeks to debate and pass it.

This is impossible, of course, unless the bill had essentially unanimous bipartisan support. *Which it wouldn't*.

Bottom line: short of a nuclear attack on Washington DC nothing is going to happen and elections will proceed as scheduled.


----------



## pointer99 (Jan 16, 2004)

i don't think that will happen or should happen.no matter the outcome let the process go forward. if they do this then the terrorist win.

pointer


----------



## B King (Dec 21, 2003)

I can't recall who the colored guy is that is in charge of the national election process. He is the guy who is asking what do I do if the country is attacked on election day?

He is asking for a process to be in place just in case. I say its just some common sense to have a plan "just in case"

What would happen if the polling booths in downtown Detroit or another geographically Minority city could not vote. Don't you think the Liberal party would scream it was not a fair election? I bet they would!

Funny, if nothing was in place for an emergency in this country the democrates would scream poor preparation and lack of leadership. Damned if you do damned if you don't.

We sure are a bunch of fickle Americans. We are becoming the French.


----------



## nilsmaster (Sep 26, 2003)

B King said:


> We sure are a bunch of fickle Americans. We are becoming the French.


YIKES!!! But so true!!!


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

"What would happen if the polling booths in downtown Detroit or another geographically Minority city could not vote. Don't you think the Liberal party would scream it was not a fair election? I bet they would!

Funny, if nothing was in place for an emergency in this country the democrates would scream poor preparation and lack of leadership. Damned if you do damned if you don't. "

Well it would be illegal to stop any city from having their votes counted, especially since detroit is predominately black, it would violate just about everything in place to give blacks equal rights. On the other hand there should be some sort of safety measure in place, say extra police, not shutting certain areas down.


----------



## MTPheas (Oct 8, 2003)

"can't recall the colored guy" Are you kidding me?! How do you expect to be taken seriously when you use the language of the 1950's?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

MTPheas

Do you notice how you jump on words and not content. I noticed B King couldn't recall a persons name and was using race to describe him. He could have said something else, but he used what he could remember. I don't see any racial intent in his comment, simple innocent description that shouldn't offend anyone. Now for content: did you notice that he commended that person for common sense. Evidently Bking respects that person. Therefore I can only surmise that you took this cheap shot because you couldn't refute his reasoning. I suppose I am the one that should be more tolerant. Right? Do all liberals see conservatives as unsophisticated ********? Or wasn't that your insinuation????????


----------

