akrako, you’re a European? Maybe not… Well, anyways, Europeans don’t understand America because you’ve been under the rule by Monarchs and Dictators for so long, and now you are under the Iron thumb of Socialism.
Well it’s a little thing called the US Constitution. Bush won based on the Constitution, it isn’t the first time a President lost the popular vote but won the electoral vote.
Not true…nothing in that quote is true.
Executive Orders must be approved by Congress.
As for Martial Law…
Let me tell you a little something about Martial Law…people, enact Martial Law.
It is not as if Bush or any President (Lincoln) has a large supply of Robots to declare Martial Law with.
If something is injust or unconstitutional, then Martial Law will fail because the people enforcing it (soldiers and the like) themselves would not enforce it. They would rebel.
Americans are very apt to rebel.
The reason no one is protesting is…Oh My God what a Concept…THEY LIKE BUSH!
Arako1, how can “the government” shut down all media, seize control of transportation, etc? “The Government” is a collection of individuals. What would have to happen is that PEOPLE would have to do it. Meaning, the president would order the army to seize the TV stations, newspapers, radio transmitters, ISPs, magazines, etc.
And then the question becomes, would the people in the army obey such an order?
Why do you think your fellow citizens who happen to be in the military would help a dictator seize power? What’s in it for them? Don’t you think most people in the military are in favor of our current system of democratic government? Don’t you think that if the president ordered the army to seize the TV stations that his orders would be refused?
Sure, Bush could declare himself dictator tomorrow and declare that all communication, transportation, and industry are now controlled by the government, and the constitution is suspended, and Americans are now slaves. But so could I. Except no one would listen if I did it. And no one would listen to Bush either. He’d be impeached by congress, and if he refused to vacate the White House the cops and secret service would go in and drag him out.
This is really just a fantasy scenario, aptly dubbed political porn. See, Bush must really be evil, because he’s going to suspend the constitution! And the only reason he’s president is because the American people are too sheeplike and stupid to stop him! Pure wankery.
Not to my understanding, but as I’m giddy from iron thumbery I’m happy to be corrected by the representative from the Shining Beacon of Democracy for Oppresed People Everywhere.
"The President’s authority to issue Executive Orders derives from powers both enumerated and implied by the Constitution, as well as from authority delegated to the President by federal statute. "
Congress can act farther down the raod, but we’re not talking about that here.
You clearly have no concept of conspiracy theories! I for one “have” no “worries” that “President” “Bush” “will” enact “Martial Law” “before” “the” elec"tion". And I use all terms in quotes loosely.
Eh… huh? What counts as rebellion for you, and how many people do you know who have actually been part of one? I know a guy who flew X-wings for a Rebellion, but he wasn’t American, and that was a long time ago…
The president’s disregard for Rule Of Law goes far beyond Jose Padilla. Consider the “Unlawful Combatants.” Hundreds of people, maybe thousands, are being held prisoner in an offshore military base. Some of them have been held for over two years now. Why are they being held? Well, there have been vague accusations that they are terrorists, or helped terrorists, but so far none of them has been officially charged with any crimes. They are planning to try them before a secret military tribunal. Executions will follow. (For all we know, these executions might already be taking place.) We don’t even know who these people are because the government will not release their identities.
Broken_Column, Executive Orders do NOT require ratification by Congress.
And if you reread akrako1’s post, he’s “here”, as in America. Besides, this is in the GQ forum so gratuitious put-downs about European society are out of place.
That said, the detention of Padilla and others IS being legally challenged in and is being reviewed by the Courts – it’s on the Supreme’s agenda right now. So it’s not as if even under the current circumstances GW is guaranteed to get away with it totally unchecked.
However as to the OP – could he suspend only the Presidential Election? The popular voting happens simultaneously with the election of the entire House of Representatives, one third of the Senate, a very large proportion of the Governors and State legislatures, and a brutal amount of local elections and referenda. You could justify delaying the whole enchilada for a few weeks in case of major attack, but that’s about it, things would soon become unmanageable(*). As for Martial Law, that proclamation is called upon where there exists a state of civil insurrection. As mentioned by others, the conspiracy-porn types were going over it with Clinton of all people, who really had no excuse whatsoever. Thanks also to those who pointed out to the 1864: Lincoln even HAD already suspended civil rights by executive fiat… yet the election went on.
(*Howevers, I must say Americans are NOT likely to rebel as in start a second Civil War. More like simply start completely disregarding directives from DC.)
FWIW I remember part of the Clinton conspiracy theory before the 2000 election was that he was going to use the chaos and disruption caused by Y2K (remember that?) as his justification for declaring martial law.
I don’t think Bush would try to cancel the elections. If a full-blown civil war couldn’t stop elections, then I don’t see how he could make the case that a terrorist attack would justify it. Even a major, 9/11-style attack wouldn’t even hold a candle to what was going on in 1864.
However, nothing in my last post came from the tinfoil hat crowd. It all came from mainstream newspapers and TV news shows, on the rare occasions that they’ve remembered about the situation. A quick check of Amnesty International’s website yields this article which summarizes the situation nicely.
The detainees are going to be tried before a military court marshal in Guantanemo, which will have the power to hand out death sentences and whose decisions are not subject to appeal.
God help us if this becomes an acceptable way to deal with prisoners.
If there ever were any single original intent behind the Electoral College history doesn’t record it. No question gave the federal convention more fits than the selection of the chief executive. The clause was argued back and forth, amended and reamended. In the end a compromise was reached which left the method of choosing electors ( and thus, how they themselves would choose ) up to the states.
There is no reason to assume, as I assume Polycarp does, acceptance of the idea, handed down to us by Alexander Hamilton that the electors were envisioned as wise men trusted to make an independent choice. Remember that Hamilton had long since abandoned the convention by the time the compromise was finally reached.
Actually, Sept 11, 2001 was an election day. It was Primary Election in most states. I went out and voted as usual that day. In fact, here in Minnesota, there was quite a surge of voters who showed up specifically to “show the terrorists they can’t shut down democracy in America”. (Some friends serving as election judges said many of those late voters were quite unprepared – not even sure who was on the ballot or whatever. But they showed up and voted!)
The elections where I live, Fairfax County VA are run by the county government. The President, or even the Governor has no authority to cancel, or delay the election. The legislature could do so, by passing a new law, which would then have to be signed by the Governor. The Commonwealth Supreme Court could order the results to be sealed, I believe, but the actual process of voting would take place anyway. Come to think of it, on a precinct by precinct basis, a local circuit court could order the ballot boxes sealed. But, the process would continue, and the results would be tabulated prior to sealing.
In the recent Virginia Democratic primary, I knew the exact count in my precinct. I was the Chief Election Officer for my precinct, and reported to election headquarters with my USB device, and an empty ballot box. I would have refused to deliver those to any authority other than the Fairfax County Registrar of Elections. The process is not so monolithically controlled as some imagine. In the Presidential Election, next fall, I will probably serve again, perhaps again as a chief, or assistant chief. You can pretty much count on the fact that my precinct is gonna vote. (Those that show up, that is.)
So, I am putting my money down on the short odds. No one is calling off the election in the fall. I have a hundred bucks for anyone’s one dollar bet. Any suckers?
Clinton didn’t have Cheney as VP, nor Ashcroft as Attorney General and neither did Lincoln or FDR.
Consider what has happened that would have been unthinkable, all in the name of preventing terrorism (although there is no evidence that it would and the 9/11 terrorists would have been caught if the inspections already in place had been done properly). No one may fly without identification. There are regulations in place (although not yet implemented) to extend this to trains and buses. No one may fly if their name or a similar name appears on a secret list, drawn up nobody knows how and from which there is no appeal nor any mechanism to remove it. Road blocks are set up in NY State, 100 miles south of the border to search for illegal aliens. And the people charged with carrying out these orders do not complain. Why does anyone think the army would refuse to carry out an order to prevent the elections. Or if the elections are held and Bush were to lose, why could not Ashcroft simply announce that in view of the emergency, it would be too dangerous to allow a new president (and new Attorney General) to take office? It is not that I think this likely, it is just that I think it is possible. Americans have meekly submitted to all sorts of invasions of rights in the name of a dubious security, why wouldn’t they submit to this?
I think the thing I find most disturbing is how we have submitted quietly to the absurd inspections at airlines. We don’t protest because we know, without it being made explicit, that that’s how we get onto the “no-fly” list. I know; I do it myself.
You want a laugh? The US courts have ruled they have no jurisdiction over Guantanamo. So the base is under Cuban sovereignty, right? So the prisoners would be released if a Cuban court ordered them released, right?
I agree that there will be no attempt to suspend the elections. But I don’t think that the OP was an unreasonable question at all. The fact that American citizens on both sides ask such questions acts as a safeguard.
Some people may have been concerned about Clinton – and heaven knows that he tried to stay in the limelight. But he had not initialed measures that tamper with Constitutional rights – at least to the extent that the Bush Administration has. I’m sixty years old and I’ve never seen anything like it. And they want to do more with the Patriot Act II.
Why didn’t they do it all at once?
If some small group of people wanted to take over a large country politically, how would they go about it? Would it happen all at once? Or would they begin by taking away a few rights for a few people and then a few more rights for a few more people and so on?
At what point would you know to speak up? It would be hard to know, wouldn’t it?
The President would have to be able to convince the military that what they were doing was in the best interest of the country. They would be told that they were protecting our current system of democratic government in an emergency situation. Give some people a patriotic speech, wave a flag, give them an enemy and they will follow you anywhere. It wouldn’t take that much to seize control of communications. Everything is owned by a very few mega-corporations. And there can always be blackouts.
The Supreme Court ruled that in that particular situation President Lincoln could not declare martial law. They did not rule that no President can do it. To the contrary:
As an American, I wish to apologize for the arrogance displayed by The_Broken_Column in his remarks. His views are not that of most Americans either Republican or Democrat. Join me in fighting his ignorance.
Could you please point out what part of the Constitution this law is in?
Typical freaky fringe scaremongering. In 2000, the freaky fringe was howling that Clinton would suspend elections. Now the freaky fringe is howling that Bush will suspend elections.
Same stupidity, even if it might be different freaks howling it.