[exmarine]

Right, because in failing (and sometimes before failing), it leads to unbridled tyranny. Which is, I point out, not democracy. Having a constitutionally limited government is a good plan. But constitutionality is orthogonal to whether or not you have a democracy.

What you speak of is UTOPIA. it is not possible to have a perfect democracy because power corrupts and absolute power corrupts aboslutely. That is precisely why we have checks and balances - "the heart of man is desperately wicked - who can know it" (Jer. 17:9) The liberals also dream of utopia - a John Lennon imagine-land where all is peace and love and dope (dream on liberals!).

[donh]

Right, because in failing (and sometimes before failing), it leads to unbridled tyranny. Which is, I point out, not democracy. Having a constitutionally limited government is a good plan. But constitutionality is orthogonal to whether or not you have a democracy.

What you speak of is UTOPIA....

Boy...is this response ever irrelevant. What we were speaking of is whether or not our constitution establishes a democratic union and lays down the rules for it's operation, or not. Obviously it does, only a very brief scan of the document will verify that. And even if we were speaking of the effects of democracy, how could you call my criticism of it utopian? I guess being Mr. Logic doesn't require of you the maintenance of a long attention span.