THE TALK OF POSTPONING ELECTIONS is ridiculous

[rainstorm]

SHUT UP!!! its only advertising to the terrorists that we think they can do it. we arent spain. we might as well be sending them an engraved invite to attack us

[dryline22]

Nothing wrong with planning ahead. I'm not so sure making those plans public to the media was an especially prudent move, though.

[chadtm80]

Nothing wrong with planning ahead. I'm not so sure making those plans public to the media was an especially prudent move, though.

I agree.. Like I said many times.. To not plan for it is stupid.. As far as the media, well there stupid too

[rainstorm]

Nothing wrong with planning ahead. I'm not so sure making those plans public to the media was an especially prudent move, though.

I agree.. Like I said many times.. To not plan for it is stupid.. As far as the media, well there stupid too

we are telling them to attack us. president bush should say nothing will stop our elections. and, if we are saying they can stop OUR elections, then maybe liberals are right. there can be no way elections will occur in iraq. this is total and complete hysteria

[Lindaloo]

I agree dryline and Chad.

rain, how are we telling them to attack us because we are planning ahead? I do not understand!

[chadtm80]

this is total and complete hysteria

Who? You?

Newsflash Rainstorm.. It CAN happen.. and they know that, they dont need anyone to tell them so

[Derek Ortt]

Plans should be made, but never announced! Just a part of our emergency powers is all that should be done, not this big announcement

[rainstorm]

then why are we in iraq? lets get out now. if we cant have elections here, we are nothing. how many polling places are there? 100's of thousands?
total hysteria. terrorists must be loving this. we are having a panic attack. they dont even need to attack us to throw us in abject panic.

[Lindaloo]

this is total and complete hysteria

Who? You?

Newsflash Rainstorm.. It CAN happen.. and they know that, they dont need anyone to tell them so

Exactly.

I believe we have a plan in place and IMO there is nothing wrong with telling them "HEY! We know what you are doing"

[Derek Ortt]

We shouldnt announce that we know what they're doing. Instead, we should crush them before they can do it! zAll they will do now is look for another time and place to get us. Time for us to shut up and take action

[rainstorm]

no, we are telling them: "you suceeded in spain, and we are weaker than they are. you can destroy the elections in the greatest country on earth"

again, if we are this weak, why are we in iraq?

[rainstorm]

you wont like this. rush agrees with me:

RUSH: Jeff, let me pose a couple of things to you here, and for those of you that were not here in the first hour, let me bring you up to speed on this and reiterate what I've said so you can get an idea what Jeff's context here is. The basic story is that U.S. counterterrorism officials are looking at an emergency proposal on the legal steps needed to postpone the November presidential election in case of an attack by Al-Qaeda, and it is in Newsweek yesterday, Tom Ridge warned last week that a potential attack either prior to the conventions or the election and -- pardon the sniffles, that happens when I laugh, though I'm not laughing at this I'm still laughing about the Bullying Institute -- the magazine cited unnamed sources who told it that the Department of Homeland Security asked the justice department last week to review what legal steps would be needed to delay the election.

My problem is doing this in public is just an engraved invitation to terrorists to step in here and do something to screw up our elections. This is letting them win. In 2001, they stopped an election in New York City. It was a New York mayoral primary election. To me, and this is the first of two points I want to make to you, Jeff. In my mind the only planning that should occur is to ensure the election goes forward regardless of any attack. We cannot allow these people to stop the functioning of this Republic in such an elementary or fundamental aspect of it. The major parties -- this will never happen, by the way, but I'm just suggesting this is in my little idealistic view here, the common sensical view -- the major parties should agree right now in public and in open that they will abide by the results of an election in November should an attack occur without a flurry of lawsuits and without a flurry of court orders because these people, the Al-Qaeda, the enemy, must know now up front that nothing it does or can do will change this. We do not want to become Spain. The terrorists effected the outcome of an election in Spain, and it's unfortunate, we do not want to become that.

The second thing, and I've got this story here in the stack, and I don't have time to find it now, but I'm just going to paraphrase it for you, there's some wacko Democrat protest group, one of their 527s associated with MoveOn.org, you ought to see the elaborate protests they have planned for the Republican convention. Now, one of them, Jeff, is a plan that will force the evacuation of Madison Square Garden in toto because of a threatened terrorist attack. Now, the one I want you to think about is this. If any political organization, either side of the aisle, takes this news and says, "A-ha, we can stop this election with a terrorist attack," could they fake an Al-Qaeda attack? Could a domestic bunch of political zealots on either side see this, conclude they could stop the election if it looks like their guy is going to lose, and start mounting all these attacks all over the country at polling places or the day before, and cause a postponement of the election? Once the government says it's considering this plan, it's an open invitation to any wacko to do it. And I think we need to be firm in our resolve and say it ain't going to happen. We're going to have this election, the Constitution says the election happens here, we're not going to postpone it, whatever happens on Election Day the votes that are counted that day count, both parties get together, agree with it, no lawsuits. Jeff, hang on, I want to get your reaction to this after the break.

[chadtm80]

then why are we in iraq? lets get out now. if we cant have elections here, we are nothing. how many polling places are there? 100's of thousands?
total hysteria. terrorists must be loving this. we are having a panic attack. they dont even need to attack us to throw us in abject panic.

Now who said we couldnt have elections here Rainstorm? Relax

[JQ Public]

Its a bad idea. It only shows that these terrorists have made us change. Besides in not a feasable plan. I heard on the news that they would have to have all of congress...all states...counties...and towns/districts to vote for this for it to occur b/c one place can't vote at one time while another votes 3 days later or what not.

[rainstorm]

Its a bad idea. It only shows that these terrorists have made us change. Besides in not a feasable plan. I heard on the news that they would have to have all of congress...all states...counties...and towns/districts to vote for this for it to occur b/c one place can't vote at one time while another votes 3 days later or what not.

EXACTLY, JQ!! it is simply a hysterical response to nothing

[Guest]

I see both sides of the issue, and what do you know agree with some of each opinions.

I am all for Rainstorm's idea of letting terrorist know that we are not hysterical about POTENTIAL events come November.

At the same time, I see some of the majorities' thinking. I think the government only needed to go as far as just letting the terrorist wackos that we are prepared in the media. Keep all this delaying of the elections TOP SECRET; no need to scare everyone to pieces or let the terrorists win.

In fact, I have a feeling that the terrorists already know the U.S. is pretty much prepared for anything, especially centered around the elections, and the terrorists know it.

In other words, STOP THE HYSTERIA!

[rainstorm]

right, and if bush wants the stock market to plunge, ensuring a landslide defeat, just keep up the hysterical ravings

[Guest]

right, and if bush wants the stock market to plunge, ensuring a landslide defeat, just keep up the hysterical ravings

Yes, that is another thing: the stock market (basically the only thing that could help Bush) is a VERY delicate animal. That sinks and basically it will be landslide victory for the DEMS! Right on, RS!

[rainstorm]

i almost croaked when tom ridge made his announcement about the conventions last week. is the administration that dumb? another memo to bush: BE STRONG!! TELL US WHY WE ARE SAFER TODAY!!!

[wx247]

I agree dryline, Chad, and Linda. Oh wow... isn't that a diverse group! j/k

The need for plans is imperative and I think that the administration needs to let us know that there are plans in place in the event of something happening -- on election day or any other day.

Bush isn't planning on cancelling the election -- far from that. He is letting the terrorists know that no matter they try our people will vote and our democracy will still stand.

Ignoring the obvious is dangerous... these plans need to be in place. Spain didn't have those plans and we know what happened there. That is why the US is stronger Helen... we can survive these kinds of terror threats through planning and education.