(no subject)

[apocalypsos]

What. The. FUCK.

Okay, look. Let me help you idiots out, since I'm really starting to think you've got the attention span of a puppy. You do not take away our elections.

I'm going to repeat that, but with more cursewords. You asswipes do not take away our fucking elections.

Remember a few years ago, when we had that big nasty terrorist attack and you all made such a big stink about us going about our normal business afterwards because if we didn't, the terrorists win? You can't do that, and then wait until now, scream at the top of your lungs, "OMGWTF teh skye is fallin!!1!1!!", and say, "Well, I guess we're just not going to have elections this year." NO. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

And I'll tell you right now, I'd be saying the same shit even if I were voting for you. Expounding on the superiority of democracy to every other country on the planet and then even so much as thinking about cancelling the elections? That takes such incredble balls, I can't begin to describe it. *seethes for the rest of the night*

Comments

[adjectivegirl.livejournal.com]

I think frankly, that they simultaneously have the stupidest wankiest balls in the universe and are the most piece-of-shit cowards ever to crawl out of primordial slime. Becoming rather accustomed to paradoxes with these pathetic excuses for Americans humans.

America had elections through lots of wars, dicksmacks, and not one administration quailed, curled into a corner, and decided to cancel democracy because it rained. GOD, I hate these fuckers. But how do I really feel?

[apocalypsos.livejournal.com]

You realize, of course, that even if they have it, the second Kerry and Edwards show the slightest hint of a lead, the Bush administration will contest because of a terrorist threat. *eye roll*

And while I'm predicting shit, I still call the weekend of the DNC for when they whip out Osama. (Frankly, I was a little surprised they didn't do it for July 4th, but I guess they need the boost at the polls too much to bring him out early.)

God, I hate this administration. I can't even think of one good thing it's done in four fucking years.

[gehayi.livejournal.com]

I am convinced that Bush will either declare himself the winner (in his patented "who cares if I don't have the Electoral College votes to win this election?" kind of way) or will suspend the elections because of an alleged terrorist threat.

Either way, he's going to be president the day after the elections. That, I CAN guarantee.

[gruyere.livejournal.com]

I can't even think of one good thing it's done in four fucking years.

They didn't have you executed.

[malhablada.livejournal.com]

Ok. I'm not up on the current legislature, but if the elections are canceled or postponed or something, does The Dubya get to stay on as Default!President until it's "safe" again?

Because it seems like they could keep creating reasons that it's unsafe to hold the elections for a really long time...

Great. He cheated his way into office, and now he's gonna fucking STAY there. He's like that one fucking kid who would never be "it" when you were playing hide-and-seek, no matter HOW you proved it was his turn.

*settles in next to you to seethe*

[apocalypsos.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure on that one, either. I *think* he does, but then again, if he does, and he thinks it's going to endear him to anyone and make his poll numbers rise, he's got another think coming.

[thebratqueen.livejournal.com]

I've been saying for at least a year now that it won't surprise me in the slightest if Dubya makes sure there's no election held this year. Ten bucks says we get a sudden attack on the day before and - whoops! No elections. Not in the middle of a war, after all.

[apocalypsos.livejournal.com]

Tell me about it. It's one thing to think they'd pull something like this, but to actually hear them say it out loud is disgusting.

[feath.livejournal.com]

Where did you see this? And what happened to the UN? Some senators asked the UN to come in and make sure the voting was not screwed up?

[arden-ranger.livejournal.com]

The UN had to decline.

The United Nations would not deploy a observers mission to monitor the American Presidential elections in November as requested by some Democrat Congressmen, UN officials said.

"The policy and practice is that the United Nations responds to requests made by national governments and not by the legislative branch," a UN spokesperson said.

"Besides, the observation must be mandated by the 191-member General Assembly as the activity also affects the sovereign jurisdiction of that country," the spokesperson said confirming the receipt of the letter from the Congressmen.

I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure Bush is so despised worldwide that getting the GA to agree to it wouldn't be that big a chore.

[marag.livejournal.com]

::blink:: Okay, now I'm going to have to take a look at the legal implications here. I'm not sure an American government *can* postpone elections, at least not without the Supreme Court going medieval on their ass. Isn't it in the Constitution?

::goes off to look::

BTW, I have to admit that despite my firm belief that Bush & Co. are evil, I never thought they'd consider something this evil.

[gehayi.livejournal.com]

Elections must be held--it's in the U.S. Constitution, yes. But since when has the Shrub given a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut about THAT?

[marveen.livejournal.com]

at least not without the Supreme Court going medieval on their ass

*coughAndrewJacksoncough*

Wouldn't be the FIRST time the Executive branch has defied the Judicial Branch...ever hear of the Trail of Tears and the court case that preceded it?

(Don't mind me, I got here via a friend's journal.)

[fyrdrakken]

You mean our Supreme Court? The once with so many justices appointed by the Shrub's daddy that it handed him the election when the recount starting showing that Gore should be the winner?

[suaine.livejournal.com]

Hmm, yeah, some of my friends have been saying this for years. Matter of fact, so have I, but it's pretty candid for the government to confirm it like that.

This might have been brought on by the article in the NY Times a few days back that was talking about how there's no plan B for possible attacks on election day. Something else I noticed in the NY Times a day or so later was an article about how Osama is preparing for another attack - all, of course, very vague and unspecific. Makes the perfect set-up.

I doubt anyone is going to allow for the UN to come in and watch the elections like they would in other countries. The elecetion officials were sent away in 2000 after all.

[mike-smith.livejournal.com]

I've reread the piece about three times, and I've yet to see the part that says anything about cancelling the elections. The interviewer's question was about holding the elections as planned, and McClellan's response is that that's the goal, but there shouldn't be any guarentees.

Now to _me_, that makes it sound like the administration would be open to the possibility of postponing the elections, or even holding them early, or just somehow doing them differently to ensure greater security. That in itself seems rather dubious, since I don't think the federal government even has the authority to do that, and it would take some kind of massive terrorist operation to disrupt a process of this scale.

Still I think it's a gross overreaction to think McClellan is seriously hinting at doing away with the election altogether. Rather, McClellan is simply (perhaps needlessly) covering his ass, saying yeah, everything should be fine, but I don't want to swear on a stack of Bibles just in case meteors hit the Earth on November 2 and destroy every American Legion building in the country.

"But the full intention is to move forward and hold those elections." I like that the Daily Kos highlighted this sentence, but I appear to be the only person who actually read it. No, no, if the White House Press Secretary can't guaren-damn-tee it, then obviously martial law has been declared, and--how did you put it? Oh, yes, "OMGWTF teh skye is fallin!!1!1!!"

Honestly...

[gehayi.livejournal.com]

I read it, but it doesn't sound very optimistic to me. "Well, we intend to hold the elections, but we can't make any guarantees that they will be held."

Intentions don't mean an awful lot. Every year, I INTENDED to get As in math. Every year but one, I got Cs. My parents were not particularly impressed by the fact that I INTENDED to get As. What I DID get is what concerned them.

You can INTEND to do almost anything, and still not do it.

[jenboo.livejournal.com]

Yes, the article said that the full intention is to move forward and hold the elections as planned, but what about the other side of that coin? The road to Hell was paved with good intentions, so the saying goes, and for all their intentions, they might just decided that it's too dangerous for poor threatened Americans to go to a polling place on election day.
There is an implication there that can be taken by reactionaries as a threat to *not* hold the elections. I hope to hell the reactionaries are wrong.

I have a theory that the enemies of the US in the Middle East would be very happy to let this year's elections go through because of the likelihood that the current administration will get their asses kicked and be out by January 2005. I suspect that 'they' (whoever they are) would be less pissed off at this country if the idiots in the White House and Cabinet (the same idiots who incidentally invaded their country for no good fucking reason) were out on their ears.
I personally can only hope this is true and vote for the Kerry/Edwards ticket come election day.

[sabotabby]

Georgie-Porgie to America: YOU WILL FALL AT MY FEET THIS INSTANT AND CROWN ME EMPEROR, OR SO HELP ME GOD I WILL TURN THIS BOTCHED REPUBLIC AROUND AND EVERYONE WILL GO TO BED WITHOUT ELECTIONS!

Re: your icon.

[arks.livejournal.com]

Totally off-topic. But did you know that turkey was plastic?

[shad1234.livejournal.com]

While I agree that there's not too much of a reason to seethe so completely just yet (keyword: yet), to be quite honest I wouldn't put it past GW and his administration to be looking into a way to get around elections for a little while. Probably until his legislation banning gay marriages and any kind of abortion get through Congress.

Aside from that, it's unlikely that anyone would allow that to happen anyway. If the elections were postponed, there would be a slight..muttering of the general population. If they were canceled, there would likely be a public outcry rivaled only by the secession of the south. Yeah, that's a pretty extreme example, but even the die-hard supporters of Bush would raise an eyebrow and go "what the fuck?" over that.

Be that as it may, the most likely scenario if something were to "happen" to the elections is that Congress would remove Executive power from Bush in January 2005 once his term ran out. The problem with the Supreme Court getting medeivel on anyone is that there are no precedents at all for something like this, and not even the Constitution outlines any kind of "Plan B". All the Court could say pertaining to the constitution is that elections can't be "canceled" but beyond that, they can't make or pass any kind of legislation.

I would hope that, even though the House is controlled by Republicans, they would see that by supporting any kind of decision to postpone or cancel elections, they were going to lose seats in the House, Senate, and likely the Presidency for at least the next few elections. That may not be the most honorable reason for going against their President and party, but if it keeps something like this monstrous issue from happening, I'll take it.

For now, try not to seethe too much, and remember that Politics is 98% covering your own ass.

[anxietygrrl.livejournal.com]

It's like Marc Maron says: Dubya will declare himself Emperor for Life. He also says Dick Cheney is an evil robot. I love Marc Maron.

I wonder how these people can be all "Be a good little backward country (unless of course you're a friendly dictatorship, or anywhere in Africa) and take this nice 'democracy' we're shoving down your throat!" when they don't seem to have a fucking clue what democracy really means.

My favorite recent tidbit is the whole "Psst, hey Pakistan! Be a pal and try and round up some terrorists for us during the Democratic Convention!"

Just... blargh. Don't get me started, man.

[kittikattie.livejournal.com]

Hah. He does that and he can right guarantee a impeachment, or any other sort of thing that would not only remove him from office but put him down as the worst president ever. As my boyfriend said, "[H]e realizes he's piloting the Titanic and he just wants to make sure no lifeboats work at all."

(I added you to my flist a few days back; hope you don't mind.)

[serai1.livejournal.com]

I sure hope you're right, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Seems the only thing that will get America even thinking about impeachment is a guy getting some extra-marital nookie. A little thing like curtailing our rights - nah!

[serai1.livejournal.com]

Um, is anyone here really all that surprised by this? I mean, think about it. This fucker and his cronies stole the election in order to get his ass in the Big Seat. You seriously think they're going to give it back? Shit, I saw this coming the minute they started that "war on terrorism" circle-jerk. "Terrorism" is the BEST excuse in the world for any totalitarian bullshit, because no one knows when such acts will happen, or where, or who will perpetrate them, and yet the government can always CLAIM they know - no proof, see? And they've got this idiotic sheeplike populace so scared of their own shadows, they'll happily fall on the ground and expose their throats just to be saved from the Big Bad Monster Ghosts.

The tiger has stripes which fade into the background. This makes the worried man see tigers everywhere. - Vietnamese saying