Bush to be Dictator...

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by SeniorGeek, May 24, 2007.

  1. SeniorGeek

    SeniorGeek Below the Line

  2. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    I always find these types of speculative articles and the hidden message behind them interesting. "There is a chance Bush could take control of the us in case of a catostropic emergency therefore we should disike him even more then we normally do."
  3. SeniorGeek

    SeniorGeek Below the Line

    You Benevolent Dictators always seem to stick together.
    A better summary might be, "Bush has created a path to total control in case of a catastrophic emergency". I do not see a suggested reaction, so the reader is free to choose hate, fear, disgust, denial, love, envy, lust, gluttony, etc.

    The hidden message includes future administrations. If Bill Clinton becomes the First Lady, do you think Hilarity will not be tempted to make use of this rule? Would Ron Paul rescind this edict, or leave it there just in case?

    We can't write off the possibility that any of the candidates might become our President. Remember Carter's nomination & election?
    Last edited: May 25, 2007
  4. diesel96

    diesel96 New Member

    I don't know about "us",however we should ask the victims of Hurricane Katrina if Bush took control in a catostropic energency.
  5. Overpaid Union Thug

    Overpaid Union Thug Well-Known Member

    The Libs threw Bush to the wolves for not doing enough for the victims of Katrina, yet, are now going to call him a dictator if this directive goes through? The directive in question will make it easier for the president to coordinate with all of the branches of govt. in the case of an emergency where as before the local govts. were supposed to get the bulk of the responsibility. He is trying to make it easier to help people in the event of another natural, or even man made, disaster and is going to be labeled a dictator. Now that is funny.
  6. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    It's funny how some people like to point fingers at Bush and blame him for every single ill resulting from Katrina. Should he get at least some blame? Sure, absolutely! However IMO what has been totally missed in this entire scenario is the real problem and that is the total and absolute failure of a central planning system to provide and solve all problems including major catostropic ones like Katrina.

    So far regarding successes in the aftermath of Katrina, the greatest successes have come from the private sector and just plain folks helping out other folks in need. It does beg one to question if the average citizen wasn't bogged down paying excess taxes because of massive gov't debt caused by nothing more than vote buying schemes of the politicans, foreign policy screw ups and endless wars and then finally, the govt's own measures of shutting down efforts to expand the so-called "free energy" movement with the sole purpose of protecting an industry with a massive footprint on K Street combined with the fact that the energy product they produce is a huge revenue stream for the gov't, it's no wonder we are where we are. The failure in not Bush alone but rather this whole idea a massive Federal power under the guise of central planning.

    Something to consider in this energy debate. We have a massive amount of debt and the interest meter runs so fast it's incredible. With that in mind, every gallon of gas sold brings in an amount of tax revenue based on a percentage. The more gas sold, the more tax revs Uncle Sammie and the boys get and with such a huge revenue stream and when you consider the amount of debt and the fact the so-called balance budget or budget surplus as they call it barely hangs by a thread when we have it, what happens to that revenue stream if all of a sudden the amount of gas across the country reduces by 10%? What would happen if it went bigger? And why the need if we had fuel cells to have large scale distribution for hydrogen? Tax Revs baby, tax revs!

    Think it out folks, think it out.

    You know we never even discussed the fact that New Orleans is in reality built in a place it shouldn't be in the first place because Nature is to unpredictable and all factors considered, it's not very smart. Same is also true of those high rises, etc. built right on the beach also the gulf coast. Why should my tax dollars be used to build something back that at some point in the future another Katrina is going to wipe out anyway?

    Stupid is when you keep doing the same thing over and over again that always results in failure!