He’s Kidding, Right?
by sarabeth at 6:00 am on November 13th, 2006 in '06/'08 Campaigns, Bush Man DateHere’s what I posted on election morning:
Let us hope and let us pray that we are not about to enjoy 19 consecutive quarters of the suspension of democratic rights in order to keep us free, in order to keep our wives and daughters from being ravished by very bad men indeed. (What the heck, our sons and husbands too.)
And I’m sure many of you were thinking: “Isn’t that a bit over the top?” But here’s what the President (of the people, by the people, for the people) told America the following Saturday:
…all Americans can take pride in the example our democracy sets for the world by holding elections even in a time of war.
Even? I’m sure you didn’t even realize that this was an issue. I’m certainly not aware of any democracy (or even “democracyâ€) which has ever cancelled elections because it was fighting a foreign war.
The chilling part of Bush’s statement, of course, is the suggestion that this was a serious option.
And how about this statement:
The American people made their decision. I respect the results. So does my Cabinet.
Has any sitting President ever felt it necessary before to announce that he will respect the outcome of an election? And the Cabinet talked it over first, did they?
Thank God they never had a Cabinet discussion about cancelling the elections given how we are at war and all. They didn’t, right? Bush would have told us if they did?
Douglas Saddlewood wrote:
During WW2 in Britain, the all-party government of national unity, suspended elections for the duration of the conflict because of the threat of invation by the Germans. While there are no means within the US system to suspend elections, most Commonwealth countries have the power to do so under certain circumstances. Canada for example includes this provition in its constitution: ” (2) In time of real or apprehended war, invasion or insurrection, a House of Commons may be continued by Parliament and a legislative assembly may be continued by the legislature beyond five years if such continuation is not opposed by the votes of more than one-third of the members of the House of Commons or the legislative assembly, as the case may be.”
Posted 13 Nov 2006 at 7:16 am ¶
sarabeth wrote:
Thanks! History has never been my strong suit.
There is, of course, a huge difference between the threat of invasion Britain faced during World War 2 and our current wars in and/or on Afghanistan/Iraq/terror.
Also, the Canadian constitutional provision you quoted doesn’t vest the authority in the executive. Not only can national elections be postponed only by Parliament, but it requires a two-thirds majority.
Posted 13 Nov 2006 at 7:33 am ¶
rob dunne wrote:
Thats a scarey observation sarabeth. Bush aka DumDum is a master at saying what he shouldn’t and muffing what he should. In light of the “thumpin” they knew was heading their way the Cabinet probably did meet w/ all options on the table– one being the suspension of the midterm elections. Afterall we are at war. And DumDum is the president– its the perfect combination– a pretend president in a make beleive war. I’m sure they realised that suspending the elections, like the jump in gasoline prices the day afer the elections would appear at best fishy.
Posted 14 Nov 2006 at 8:02 pm ¶