[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [OT] facism gaining ground in US

From: Pierce T . Wetter III
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [OT] facism gaining ground in US
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 10:14:43 -0700

On Jul 12, 2004, at 7:54 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:

* Tom Lord: index.html

I don't think this leads the way to facism.  Certainly, you have rules
for emergencies when large parts of the executive or legislative are
killed or become unavailable in some other way.  I think talking about
a terrorist act on Election Day is stupid because it might give some
people ideas (kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy).  However, I suppose
the Bush camarilla just wants to keep a general climate of fear
because fearful people are more likely to vote conservative.  From
this point of view, it's important to talk about terrorist acts twice
a week or so.

It wouldn't hurt for an election to be delayed say, a week, because of an attack. That's not fascism, that's prudence. Postponing elections _indefinitely_ is fascism. While Madrid is one issue, what about an attack ON election day that prevented people from voting?

What if a large scale power outage in California completely unrelated to a terrorist attack prevented everyone in LA and the Bay Area from voting, because the new-fangled voting machines didn't work? With 95 electoral votes, that's 20% of the whole... It would make sense to have a "do-over" in that case, even though California will probably go to Kerry.

Its worth pointing out that they're responding to something that has already happened: The primary elections in New York were delayed because of Sep. 11. So the administration isn't necessarily fishing for fascism, they're responding to something that already happened.

Note that Congress has the power to change the election laws at any moment, and it would take Congress to do so. The constitution doesn't say _how_ elections should be conducted, merely that they be conducted, and that Congress gets to decide how that should happen. It would be perfectly reasonable for Congress to allow the DHS to delay an election a week without involving congress, if "substantial numbers of voters were unable to vote".


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]