BTW, I do not drink alcoholic beverages.
FYI Bushbot, I have posted these images dozens of times on Free Republic.
I deal in fact. Not fantasy. I also have a right, as an American citizen, to disagree with my President's policies.
Posted on 12/27/2006 6:26:37 PM PST by RetiredArmy
That would make a great documentary. I hope that the MSM will make it soon and show it often ;)
GREAT POST !!
Show me in my original post where I made ANY reference to polls.
I have no problem with someone responding to an implication, when I'm implying.
I didn't mean to imply that President Bush was a dictator, only that if ANY President was to go off on their own and ignore the will of those who elected them without good cause (as in information the public wasn't privy to), they could be compared with a dictator.
What is the 'evidence' if it isn't a poll? Just curious.
You seem to be dancing around what you were implying in your posts, both about what the people want, and who you're calling a 'dictator.'
It helps to say what you mean if you don't want to be misunderstood.
I covered that, If you want to call people contacting the White House directly a poll, so be it.
As for dancing around the what I was implying, I said that any President that made decisions rejected by the American people without good cause could be compared with a dictator. This includes President Bush just as much as any former or future President.
Now the question is whether or not President Bush meets that standard. My answer to that is, "No". President Bush is not a dictator.
JaJ, until I know otherwise, I credit you with meaning well, but your "dictator vs. a representative of the people comments" require a response.
Any U.S. President is elected by all the people, but he is elected to be the Chief Executive of America and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. Once he is there, his duties do not include: to follow (You prefer "rethink"...how do you know he hasn't?) what polls, call ins, chatter, demonstrations, emails, letters or whatever say he should do.
Or else deserve to be called a dictator.
Words such as dictator have very specific meanings.
Any duly elected government official does not become "a dictator" by disregarding or going against public opinion when making good faith judgements in their capacities as elected officials. Such is totally within the scope of their legal duties.
It's when they go outside the scope of their legal duties that they could become a dictator. Suppose they were committing crimes, whether felonies or against the Constitution, in doing what they decide. Suppose they refuse to concede an election if they lose one, and try to stay in office. Suppose they give illegal or unconstituional orders to subordinates, whether civilian or military. etc.
They could turn into dictators, by the specific meaning of that word, by those acts, but never by disregarding public opinion.
I think you might have in mind a loose meaning of dictator, in that a person might have an arrogant and authoritarian mindset, to such a point that you might say, that man is a "dictatorial type", not meaning it literally, but a figure of speech.
Conceding that limited point, I reiterate that the literal meaning of calling a nation's leader "a dictator" for proceeding against public opinion does not square with the specific meaning of that word.
The Walk on Water Conservatives think that marching lockstep with the last man in the brigade.
Pray for W and Our Troops
The Walk on Water Conservatives think that Leadership is marching lockstep with the last man in the brigade.
Pray for W and Our Troops
What a relief.
ME TOO!!!
AMEN!!!
I agree with rangerette here. I also believe that a president has a cabinet of trusted people to help him make crucial decisions. Most people who contact their government could be led by malicious media and not have all the info when they let their voice be heard. The time for the people to be heard is at the polls (obviously).
It is my opinion that an elected official could, with the right circumstances, become a dictator, literally. Whether benevolent or not matters not.
What a relief.
I know, I've been relieved so far with every President since I've been old enough to think for myself.
That doesn't mean I quit keeping an eye out.
BTW, I do not drink alcoholic beverages.
FYI Bushbot, I have posted these images dozens of times on Free Republic.
I deal in fact. Not fantasy. I also have a right, as an American citizen, to disagree with my President's policies.
You statements make about as much sense as those coming from this person:
fyi, i'm from CAMP COUNTY.
free dixie,sw
Of course any official could become a dictator but it isn't because he doesn't follow what he considers to be current public opinion. It's because he goes outside the law and the Constitution and brings power to bear that he actually does not have. And benevolent (as you mentioned0 or malignant has nothing to do with it.
Originally, Ft Worth.
Now, Abilene.
Camp County eh?? Deep East Texas. We're a bit "fur" apart...
Abilene is a "fur piece for shore" from Pittsburg.
but having gone to KJC, i'd bet you're one of the FEW FReepers, who can tell anyone where Pittsburg is w/o consulting a map!!!
free dixie,sw
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.