Since you think bush is such a bad guy and such a bad president. Since you truly believe in your hearts that he orchestrated the 9-11 terrorist attacks. What stopped him from declaring "martial law", suspending the constitution, and declaring himself the unquestioned emporer of the United States of America?
2006-08-07 13:25:23 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
The reason is he is not so bad. It is just a way for demogogery to be put out. These people just want to have it their way and not the country's way. It is democracy and we have a republic. We VOTE for our leaders and then let the LEAD. We must trust our vote and then live our lives. How can people be so angry inside all the time?
2006-08-07 13:32:29 · answer #1 · answered by chrisrtait 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Bush couldn't have gotten away with declaring martial law so soon after being elected. However, I predict the following possible scenario in 2008:
If it looks like the Republicans will lose the next election, Bush and his cronies will fabricate another "terrorist attack" on U.S. soil. Then Bush will be ordered (by Cheney) to declare martial law, claiming that a change in administration would not be in the best interests of national security.
George Bush, Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld and the entire sitting U.S. Congress constitute the most evil, incompetent, corrupt, cowardly, useless body of American leaders in this country's history. They all deserve to be tried for high crimes against humanity by an international tribunal, and - if convicted - should face a public firing squad.
Surely Satan has reserved a special oil-soaked corner of Hell for these truly evil sub-humans where they can all spend their eternal damnation blaming each other for destroying our world.
Where's Lee Harvey Oswald when we really need him? -RKO-
2006-08-07 13:49:11 · answer #2 · answered by -RKO- 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i imagine it really is sparkling from the solutions above me that the traditional thread for human beings that sense they are better positive of contain those that artwork and keep on with themselves. for sure, this can be actual lower than any administration. I surely have continuously preached economic accountability to the start-up agencies I mentor and to my workers. easy such issues as no longer over-extending oneself. Be it housing, vehicles, or mastercard debt. quite a few my workers are reaping the benefits of that self administration now. With surprising credit ratings, they are contained in the area to capitalize on good purchase expenditures for residences and vehicles. it truly is particularly hardship-free to blame Bush, or Clinton, or all and sundry for ones lack of initiative and accountability. yet decrease back for your question. i'm better positive off now that i changed into 8 years in the past. Is that because of, or maybe with Bush? do not comprehend. I only followed my personal suggestion.
2016-11-23 15:04:34 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's right, he can't possible be bad since he doesn't eat babies. Because there is no area between "baby eater" and "Saint".
He can still be a bad guy even though he didn't suspend the Constitution (though he did do that in effect in some limited cases).
2006-08-07 13:30:14 · answer #4 · answered by Charles D 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do think he's a bad president.
I don't think he orchestrated 9/11.
It wouldn't surprise me if there were a terror attack a few month before the '08 elections and the very thing you suggest will actually happen.
I don't think it will happen, I've just prepared myself for the possibility.
2006-08-07 13:31:07 · answer #5 · answered by WBrian_28 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because there will definitely be a rebelion uprising, leading to a civil war between pro- and anti-Bush people, and that will lead to another Rome when Caesar was in power many centuries ago. Anybody can see that.
2006-08-07 13:31:03 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Creating the very situations we are fighting against. I don't think that even Bush would have been that stupid. You know how many would have fought him on any of that??
Besides, he doesn't have the power to do any of that - he would have to have the (just about) full support of Congress. Not happening.
2006-08-07 13:35:01 · answer #7 · answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well if the liberals could do something other than criticize and name call maybe they could come up with some kind of a solution to the problems upon us. Where are your answers?
2006-08-07 14:02:20 · answer #8 · answered by question212 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hes egotistical but not entirely stupid,even he couldn't pull that off and he knows it.
wbrian I agree I told my husband that last night.Put it down on your calendar.
2006-08-07 13:33:29 · answer #9 · answered by Yakuza 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This should be good I'd like to see what some of these IDJITS have to say! good question.
2006-08-07 13:30:20 · answer #10 · answered by battle-ax 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋