Replies to post #2853 on Zeev's Turnips Talk Politics (ZTTP)

[webster groves]

<<Claiming that Bush is a danger to our democracy will prove to be vacuous, since in two years we will have another election to prove those claims absolutely wrong.>>

This assumes we are not in a full-blown war in 2004. Who knows what will happen in Iraq. I fear if things get messy, that Saudi Arabia monarchy will fall to fundamentalists. It'll be rally round the flag, boys, and Bush will sweep back into office in a patriotic landslide. Bush himself doesn't bother me. It's his hyper-conservative baggage (Ashcroft, Rumsfield, Perle, Poindexter, and Carde) that worry me.

-wg

P.S. Rice probably should be in the group, too, but she at least has a brain.

[JMKel]

Claiming that Bush is a danger to our democracy will prove to be vacuous....


I hope you are right. These Total Information program and the secret courts are already breeching the constitutional rights of Americans. They are fundamental breeches. So I am not as sanquine as you in this matter. I prefer to use strong language opposing it now before it gathers strength and acceptance.

[porter]

<there is a danger that if a leadership vacuum is formed there, it will actually end up being a fundamentalist regime that replaces Hussein>

That's the riddle that few understand. It was for THIS reason that Bush Sr. did NOT pursue Hussein in the first Gulf war.

A weakened enemy sometimes is better than a dead one.