What would you do IF Bush turns out a dictator?

would most likely be laughing my butt off telling my friends "I Told You So!" all the way to the nearest exit to Canada. No way I'm going to stick around if that kind of crap does finally emerge. As for some kind of revolution, Ill let everyone else keep that pipe dream.

Ditto...

Originally posted by Gazrok

would most likely be laughing my butt off telling my friends "I Told You So!" all the way to the nearest exit to Canada. No way I'm going to stick around if that kind of crap does finally emerge. As for some kind of revolution, Ill let everyone else keep that pipe dream.

Ditto...

If the US becomes a dictatorship how do you think running to Canada is going to help your personal situation? If the situation here is reversed you won't be very welcomed back by the people who had to do the reversing.

If you're willing to laugh and run away then this country doesn't mean anything to you now, so you shouldn't be worried about whether Bush is good or bad or who's lying and who's not. If the country isn't worth defending against Bush as a dictator, it's certainly not worth worrying about with Bush as president.

Originally posted by taibunsuu
You guys probably forgot. Clinton blah blah blah blah

Dont you get sick of this?

"Bush is setting fire to babys!!"

"Yeah, but remember Clinton and his Cigars?"

"Bush is kciking OAPs!"

"Yeah, but you seem to forget, Clinton was an evil commie"

For #s sake get your head out of your arse and look at the Government.

Opposition government is not a defence for a #head like Bush, If he was doing something wrong then you should NOT allow him simply because you didn't like Clinton.

The lengths you extreme Republicans will go to....the rest of the World are laughing at you because you are so Blind to your own mans faults.

So stop using Clinton in every political argument, it's immature and pointless.

Its not possible to learn who aspires to be a dictator until they actually become one. Most dictators came into power by first winning the people, with promises of protecting them, saving them, etc.
They're cunning and loveable.
Keep your eyes open

Originally posted by chebob

Originally posted by taibunsuu
You guys probably forgot. Clinton blah blah blah blah

Dont you get sick of this?

"Bush is setting fire to babys!!"

"Yeah, but remember Clinton and his Cigars?"

"Bush is kciking OAPs!"

"Yeah, but you seem to forget, Clinton was an evil commie"

For #s sake get your head out of your arse and look at the Government.

Opposition government is not a defence for a #head like Bush, If he was doing something wrong then you should NOT allow him simply because you didn't like Clinton.

The lengths you extreme Republicans will go to....the rest of the World are laughing at you because you are so Blind to your own mans faults.

So stop using Clinton in every political argument, it's immature and pointless.

Maybe if you read my post you'd see it was sarcastic before altering my quotes and writing an insulting rant. I guess the photoshop of Clinton dressed up like Noriega and Bush marching through the desert with the 3rd ID wasn't obvious enough for you.

Well it's not like it would be a surprize

"If this were a dictatorship,
it would be a heck of a lot easier,
just so long as I'm the dictator."
December 18, 2000

"To occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our coalition,
turning the whole Arab world against us and make a broken tyrant
into a latter-day hero ... assigning young soldiers to a fruitless hunt
for a securely entrenched dictator and condemning them to fight
in what would be an un-winnable urban guerilla war.
It could only plunge that part of the world into even greater instability."
A World Transformed (1998)
George Herbert Walker Bush

Originally posted by torque
If you're willing to laugh and run away then this country doesn't mean anything to you now, so you shouldn't be worried about whether Bush is good or bad or who's lying and who's not. If the country isn't worth defending against Bush as a dictator, it's certainly not worth worrying about with Bush as president.

Originally posted by taibunsuu
If the US becomes a dictatorship how do you think running to Canada is going to help your personal situation? If the situation here is reversed you won't be very welcomed back by the people who had to do the reversing.

I'm going to address both of these at the same time. I wouldnt stand and fight for this country right now because quite frankly it would be in vain. I have seen a nice crossection of people and most don't have the spine to stand up and do something real, and never will even when they are faced with the proverbial put-up-or-shut-up situation; so why would I toss my life away for a lost cause? Now if there were a real chance of at least coming close to making a difference, then I may be inclined to join the efforts, but as some hokey song once said "you gotta know when to hold em, know when to fold em"

As for running to canada, consult some of the people who love to bash canada as the 51st state, they love to talk about how barren canada is in some parts. Those are the areas that appeal to me; places where I can hunt, fish, trap and live in peace without putting up with people in general.

I'm more concerned with Bush as a piss-poor president now than I am with him becoming a fascist dictator, because just like all these terroirst attacks that are supposed to happen nothing has panned out so far, and I doubt it will. Bush is so inept a leader now that he couldnt manage things as a dictator. Now if by some fluke chance ole shrub grew a brain and somhow did set himself up as a Dictator and the climate of limp-wrist couch-commandos remained, then that to me says its a good time to fold my hand and push back from the table for the night.

There is a simple fallacy liberals and democrats are leaving out.....

If Bush was a dictator, why in the heck would his administration, including him..., back up every individual's right to bear arms?

Do you and I have the right to bear arms? The Bush administration's Justice Department recently answered with an emphatic ``Yes.''

As gun-control advocates cried foul and gun-rights supporters cheered, the government filed Supreme Court briefs May 6 in two cases, officially weighing in on the debate about the Second Amendment to the federal Constitution. The Justice Department rejected the executive branch's longtime position that the right to own guns is a collective right given to state militias, claiming instead that the right belongs to individual gun owners.

The ``current position of the United States is that the Second Amendment more broadly protects the rights of individuals, including persons who are not members of any militia or engaged in active military service'' to ``possess and bear their own firearms,'' the Justice Department said.

The briefs acknowledged that the government was reversing several decades of its own constitutional policy, as well as challenging trends in the lower courts since the 1930s.

This policy, though a break with the recent past, fits into a long historical tradition. Americans from the Founding Fathers to the early 1900s took for granted that the right to bear arms is a right of individuals -- not of the states or the National Guard.

Excerpted from.
www.mercurynews.com...

Lets see what a great man who fought for the freedom of his country said about the right of citizens to bear arms.

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest."

-- Mohandas Gandhi

Excerpted from.
www.quotedb.com...

Lets read about the opinion of other scholars about this issue.

"One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offense to keep arms."

-- Constitutional scholar Joseph Story, 1840
.......................
.
"The bearing of arms is the essential medium through which the individual asserts both his social power and his participation in politics as a responsible moral being..."

-- J.G.A. Pocock, describing the beliefs of the founders of the U.S.
...........................

The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."

-- Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story of the John Marshall Court
.........................

"To disarm the people... was the best and most effectual way to enslave them."

-- George Mason, speech of June 14, 1788

The above quotes and more can be found at.
pages.sbcglobal.net...


I mean, many if not most liberals (mostly liberals) and a few democrats are saying they are awake, and everyone else is a sheep and asleep because we back Bush, who according to them is a dictator.....

So tell me, how exactly do you control a country that is armed to the teeth? and why would you support the right of every individual to bear arms if you want a dictatorship?

Now.....what is it that democrats have been trying to do about guns??? Now that is the question, and if you know the anwser, and if you see their past dealings with communist countries perhaps you will realize which party is the most likely to breed and leave America open for a dictator to take over.

BILL CLINTON (President of the United States)
"We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans to legitimately own handguns and rifles...that we are unable to think about reality." -- Bill Clinton, USA Today, 11 March 93, pg. 2A

Excerpted from.
www.gmu.edu...

"When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans ..."

"And so a lot of people say there's too much personal freedom. When personal freedom's being abused, you have to move to limit it. That's what we did in the announcement I made last weekend on the public housing projects, about how we're going to have weapon sweeps and more things like that to try to make people safer in their communities."

--President Bill Clinton, 3/22/94,
MTV's "Enough is Enough"

Excerpted from.
www.geoffmetcalf.com...

Let me quote in here what some dictators said, and did about the right of people to bear arms... This is what a real dictator would do.

The people of the various provinces are strictly forbidden to have in their possession any swords, short swords, bows, spears, firearms, or other types of arms. The possession of unnecessary implements makes difficult the collection of taxes and dues and tends to foment uprisings.

-- Toyotomi Hideyoshi, dictator of Japan, August 1588

"Armas para que?" ("Guns, for what?")
-- Fidel Castro, a response to a Cuban citizens who said the people might need to keep their guns, after Castro announced strict gun control in Cuba

Excerpted from.
www.gmu.edu...

For other quotes on guns.
www.trtnational.com...

I'll leave you with one last quote.

No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms.- Thomas Jefferson, proposal for Virginia's constitution of 1776.

Excerpted from.
www.newspeakdictionary.com...

Now, my own quote..... "if you want to look for a sure sign of dictatorship....watch out for those who wish to take your rights to bear arms.."

oh, to find what Kerry stands for in this issue try the following.

www.nssf.org...

And the following.

www.sportsmenforkerryedwards.com...

Now, with Kerry's known flip flopping manouvers, would he change his mind once (and if...) he is president? To quote what Kerry would most likely say..
"....yes....no...yes...no...humm...i have said it many times and it cannot be clearer...yes...humm no...."




[edit on 28-9-2004 by Muaddib]

Originally posted by Muaddib
There is a simple fallacy liberals and democrats are leaving out.....

If Bush was a dictator, why in the heck would his administration, including him..., back up every individual's right to bear arms?
[edit on 28-9-2004 by Muaddib]

So why did Saddam not take the weapons away from his people?

[edit on 28/9/2004 by Sauron]

The simple answer is that people kill people, guns don't. So, controlling how people think is always going to be more effective than controlling their access to weaponry.

If it came down to nuts and bolts, what's your AR-15 going to do against Apache helicopters and police 'dazzlers' that can permanently blind you from three miles away?

Better to have 'elections' that do almost nothing to change the national model and simply exchange one replaceable part of the machine with a slightly different but altogether identical part of the machine.

Why do you think the media made such a huge deal out of making Howard Dean look like a moron? The field was levelled down to one bonesman or the other.

"Vote for PRESIDENT! Or vote for PRESIDENTE! Exercise your right to vote for PRESIDENT/E!"


[edit on 28-9-2004 by taibunsuu]

You're not hanging with the right crowd, then. If it shook down to a revolt, I know I'd only have to grab arms and get to the end of my driveway to be picked up by the others going off to fight against it.

Personally, I don't think the military would side with him. The whole idea is rediculous so it's really just blowing smoke anyway to speculate on it. But if he had no military, he'd be hosed. I can't see the American military turning on its own country to support a dictatorship forming.

So you've gone from "I'll laugh and say I told you so to all my friends as I run to Canada" to "I want the peace and wide open spaces of Canada". Stick by what you said at first. There's nothing wrong with leaving what you feel is a lost cause. Everyone must do what they must do. Some won't feel the need to try and fight back and some will. It's all in what it means to you. It's no reflection on anyone if they wanted to call it a day. My point was that those not willing to fight against a dictatorship taking over certainly shouldn't be breaking a sweat over what any presidents do. If dictatorship doesn't inspire you to fight then democracy shouldn't either.

If Bushed turned out to be a dictator and america would fall into dictatorship...then who would "liberate" america ? lol....Canada? HAHAAHHHHA

Canada would be too busy processing the enormous influx of people from the US to help those remaining behind.