George Bush For President '08?

Quote:

---

The National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive, signed on May 9, 2007 declares that in the event of a “catastrophic event”, George W. Bush can become what is best described as "a dictator":

"The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government."

---

http://www.nowpublic.com/national_se...tial_directive

editorial on the subject:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/5/29/12921/7971

In best Jean Claude Van Damme "slow mo-NO" action sequence.. *ahem*..


NNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOooOOoOoOooOoOoOoooOoooOoOoOO... *water drink*.....OoOoOoOoOoOoOooOoOoOooOoO


Eh..what are ya gonna do :(

Move to amsterdam and live like kings?

I have been told by an American friend that these sort of powers have existed since Roosevelt. Apparently all American presidents have had the ability to rule the country without the injunction of congress or the senate. I'm no expert just a Scottish guy living in Sweden.

Not going to happen.

This reads more like the establishment of Martial Law.The closest precedent? Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War. The Constitution only allows for 2 Consecutive Presidential Terms. I don't see how he gets around elections.I don't put it past the foks, but I seriously doubt he somehow remains President in 2009. I'd marry a foreigner in a country with lax citizenship requirements I reckon.

OEC

The 2 terms Presidency amendment was passed due to Roosevelt's 4.

“catastrophic event” huh, like 911, or how bout that nice little flood?

what are the odds america is not gonna get fucked within the next year? not very good :(

wow the things people come up with south of the border

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Karl

wow the things people come up with south of the border

---

:1orglaugh :thumb:

well he IS the greatest president weve had since Ronald Reagan I aprove

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KilLAtomiK

well he IS the greatest president weve had since Ronald Reagan I aprove

---

i think a catastrophic event would be one in which there couldnt be a vote

like what if hawaii just sank then would it be fair to have a vote without one state participating

george bush hasnt killed us all yet so i figure stick to the devil you know

Glad I don't have to live knowing my vote elected in the person that has his finger on the big Red Button!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bohoki

i think a catastrophic event would be one in which there couldnt be a vote

like what if hawaii just sank then would it be fair to have a vote without one state participating

george bush hasnt killed us all yet so i figure stick to the devil you know

---

or if they lost the voting results for say, florida, and then declared the results without counting the votes and swtiched to new electronic voting machines that only show the results and don't allow anyone to view the actual record of who voted. then you could have the election without any of the states participating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morning Glory

or if they lost the voting results for say, florida, and then declared the results without counting the votes and swtiched to new electronic voting machines that only show the results and don't allow anyone to view the actual record of who voted. then you could have the election without any of the states participating.

---

thats stupid.. your stupid:rolleyes:

under 2(b) would that constitute the Republicans winning or loosing next term? And George Bush is technically a disaster. If they can not do 5(a),(b),(c), and (d) now how can they be expected to perform in a "Catastrophic Emergency"?

See what happens when you do not live in a democracy.

Thank God I am not an American.