Al_U_Card Posted July 4, 2007 Report Share Posted July 4, 2007 Ultimate victory of the Saxe-Cobourg lineage.... George Walker Busche 6 6 6 The establishment of the NWO (Nobody Will Object) will allow the elite to enslave the rest. It's only a matter of time... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoob Posted July 4, 2007 Report Share Posted July 4, 2007 http://www.speedofwood.com/forumcrap/thunderbirds_laugh.gif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al_U_Card Posted July 4, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 4, 2007 Hi Scoob Yes there are several more "puppets" even "Big Dick" is just a bigger puppet... :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrTodd13 Posted July 4, 2007 Report Share Posted July 4, 2007 Suddenly I've started to hear a bit of chatter suggesting that Bush will refuse to leave office in 2009. In the past couple of years there has been a few laws and executive orders that basically say that the president can declare a military dictatorship in time of catastrophe or civil unrest. Is anybody else hearing increasing chatter about this possibility? What is the probability that an event, real or manufactured, will happen between now and Jan 2009 that will provide him an excuse to stay in office? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al_U_Card Posted July 4, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 4, 2007 How does 100% sound? Not that good, right? The only question is who will be the president elect. If it is one of "theirs" then np, but should it be a popular choice (despite their attempts to place "rigged" polling stations, the general vote is normally unassailable (for now)) then a sudden "terrorist" attack will undoubtedly materialize.. :D . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al_U_Card Posted July 4, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 4, 2007 Just a quick "constitutional" question. Here in Canada, on election night, the winner is declared and the incumbent (when the loser) is divested of his powers. Why in the U.S. do they get more than 2 months to plan something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtfanclub Posted July 5, 2007 Report Share Posted July 5, 2007 Just a quick "constitutional" question. Here in Canada, on election night, the winner is declared and the incumbent (when the loser) is divested of his powers. Why in the U.S. do they get more than 2 months to plan something? Because in the U.S. in the late 18th century, it took up to 6 weeks to count the ballots (December 20th was the cut-off date) and another month to have the new guy move his stuff in. Canada was populated only by polar bears and Innuits until 1920, when they had cars and stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al_U_Card Posted July 5, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 5, 2007 Oh yeah, I forgot......that the US is still stuck in its distant past..... :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtfanclub Posted July 5, 2007 Report Share Posted July 5, 2007 Oh yeah, I forgot......that the US is still stuck in its distant past..... :) Yeah, since it's been 7 whole years since it took us six weeks to count the ballots... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al_U_Card Posted July 5, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 5, 2007 Well, I wasn't specifically referring to the attempts at subterfuge, but if you insist... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtfanclub Posted July 5, 2007 Report Share Posted July 5, 2007 Well, I wasn't specifically referring to the attempts at subterfuge, but if you insist... That wasn't a comment directed at you, that was a comment directed at how far we've come in 200 years. Or not. Sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al_U_Card Posted July 5, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 5, 2007 Hi JT, not badly taken at all. We are exchanging ideas and concepts here and only those. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted July 5, 2007 Report Share Posted July 5, 2007 Just a quick "constitutional" question. Here in Canada, on election night, the winner is declared and the incumbent (when the loser) is divested of his powers. Why in the U.S. do they get more than 2 months to plan something? Well at least we tend to have voting. I missed when did the people of the UK vote Blair out and Brown in? I missed that. :D It seems the Old Boys in the smoke filled back rooms just got together and said who gets to rule? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al_U_Card Posted July 5, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 5, 2007 Well, since they all have "handlers" it comes to the same thing (like Canada, we elect a party and platform as well as individuals and the "Prime" minister is one among many). Not so sure that the office of the VICE-president will ever be the same again... :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.