This morning, after listening to a talk radio show host--conservative, of course--discuss what to do about elections in case of another terror attack occurring on or directly before Election Day, November 2, 2004, I made a prediction. First, however, to the subject.
"There does not appear to be a clear process in place to suspend or reschedule voting during an election if there is a major terrorist attack," DeForest B. Soaries, chairman of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, wrote in a letter to Republican and Democratic leaders in the House and Senate. [Bold mine]Under catastrophic conditions, should the election go forward as planned or should it be postponed? Many pertinent factors were mentioned by the host and the callers, but this one is the most important, perhaps the only important one:
• No provision exists in the Constitution for such a contingency
Far lesser factors mentioned:
• Whether an attack occurred on the exact day
• The scale and scope of the attack
Additionally, some callers didn't want this subject even be discussed on air or in print. Citing the March 11 attacks in Spain and their effect on the Spanish election results, some thought that a public discussion of this subject would give terrorists the encouragement to commit similarly-timed attacks (as if they weren’t already thinking about doing it ).
One caller had an even better point, however: there needs to be public dialogue about these types of conditions, because if there isn’t and some attacks occur under such circumstances, and election contingency decisions have to made, there will be a segment of our society that says, “see, he’s trying to do in again.” Between a terrorist attack and another attempt by Bushitler™ to yet again subvert the democratic process—for the handicapped, that’s sarcasm--one can only imagine the feces storm that could rain down upon the country under such a scenario.
(I joke, but only halfway. The division and viciousness in this country concern me; not frighten, but concern.)
What? Oh yeah, my prediction: moonbat publications would turn the words ‘suspend' and 'reschedule' into the word ‘cancel.’ Granted, after the paragraph about public dialogue and Bushitler™, it didn’t take a prophet to forecast moonbat behavior.
At least two Leftist publications didn’t let me down.
From Democracy Now!: Could Bush Cancel the Election?
From AntiWar.com: Scheme to Cancel the Elections?
(And to be fair, the FoxNews article cited also uses the word ‘cancel.’ Just exercising my prerogative to have a little fun with the Leftists and to crow about being right.)
But the Bush administration isn’t going down that road, says Condoleezza Rice:
"We've had elections in this country when we were at war, even when we were in civil war. And we should have the elections on time. That's the view of the president, that's the view of the administration," Rice said in a televised interview Monday.That is how a democratic republic operates.
(Thanks to Laura Ingraham)
