Originally posted by pjslug
...but this one is different because as I posted elsewhere in here, towards the end of the directive he mentions where a previous one (or several) have hereby been revoked.
Originally posted by Essedarius
Originally posted by NGC2736
It is not any one line in this document that is damning. I feel that it is there very ambiguity within it that tells us more.
Timing in politics, just as sex, is everything.
Originally posted by Essedarius
...I don't think Bush has the support or charisma to pull off the kind of grab you're talking about. Bush will become an asterisk in history as the worst president we've ever had and that is about as ingrained in the history books as he is going to get.
Originally posted by loam
But that is not to say he has not made it easier for future leaders, that have the 'charisma' or 'support' that bozo lacks, to abuse power.
Originally posted by gottago
9/11 has worn off, and they need an even bigger shot, like junkies, to shock the public back into submission.
My personal scenario: definitely before 2008 election, a dirty bomb in a 3rd tier city of about 100,000 to 200,000 inhabitants. Shocking but expendable, and won't dent the economy.
Then whump! State of emergency/martial law, election suspended.
Sorry to be glib, but it's almost a foregone conclusion.
Originally posted by Houtchens
I am no supporter of the presidents foreign policies but this arguement is full of baloney. You accuse him of a power grab but in the case of New Orleans, he did not act because the GOVERNOR did not give him the authority to do so. It can't be both ways. In my own opinion, the government is not there to bail out folks who not only refuse to heed warnings and but also refuse to acquire flood insurance in an area BELOW SEA LEVEL NEXT TO THE OCEAN. It's like people living in Kansas who don't have tornado insurance NOR a storm cellar. If Clinton were in office and the exact same thing happened, these accusations would not be made, and you and I both know it.
Oh and by the way, it's not like he has not kept your body safe from harm in the 6 years after 9/11. Forget the cells that have been disrupted and the LAX and Fort Gillam disasters that were diverted.
Personally, I don't think that a dictatorship would be such a bad thing considering that we already kill over 1 MILLION people in this country every single year. Compare the statistics. You won't hear about that from the whining entitlement folks though. To me, it is the height of hypocracy to complain about those who died from a storm while remaining blind to the unborn children who are sacrificed to the god of convenience with shredders, chemicals and screwdrivers.
Now, all that being said I do not think Bush is a good president- I would rate him as extremely poor. For more on my opinion in these matters, please use this link: houtchblog.blogspot.com...
Originally posted by piacenza
I beleive GW Bush just signed his own death sentence without knowing it.
We all know he is a puppet and not the smartest...Who is going to benefit the most if GW Bush is killed in a catastrophic event...Yes him...
Is he planning to murder the president to grab absolute power in the US?
It just makes sense...
Originally posted by TheBorg
Originally posted by darkbluesky
DG, When President Bush leaves office next year, and his successor recinds all of his Draconian laws and directives will you admit you may have been a wee bit paranoid?
You do know that's not going to happen, don't you?
You know what would be even better? If we could find out who's really calling the shots, and see to it that they don't get to anymore. The president can't do this alone I'm afraid. He needs help from somewhere. I'd like to know from where, and from whom.