Posted on 03/23/2006 8:25:41 AM PST by IrishMike
Good news: The Bush people have put out a new ''strategy.'' The bad news is it's the same as the old one. The Pentagon's strategic review plan again commits us to promoting democracy through such effective means as pre-emptive war, bombing and other good stuff. This is the same plan we've been working from, with mixed results so far. In the Middle East, the Palestinians had an election and put Hamas in charge. That didn't seem to make anyone happy. Lebanon had an election and put Hezbollah in charge. The theory that democracy would solve all problems is especially dicey in Iraq. The Iraqis have now elected an entire government, but they don't seem to be able to get it to gel. Meanwhile, we are committed to forcing democracies into existence as though they were so many slow spring bulbs. I do like the idea of supporting democracy, however, and think we should try it - especially here in the U.S. of A. To this end, a couple of dandy ideas are now circulating, and I think they're worth your support and excitement. For ages, all good reformers have wanted to get rid of the Electoral College and have direct popular election of presidents, instead. The disastrous election in 2000 finally culminated in Bush v. Gore, a Supreme Court decision so bad even the court disowned it at the time. What a giant mess: a textbook case of why the Electoral College is toxic piffle. But the desire to Do Something about the mess in 2000 burned itself out. The Republicans who took over Congress are just not natural reformers.
(Excerpt) Read more at sltrib.com ...
Ah, that's it! And, The Constitution. Let's rid ourselves of this excess baggage.
Democracy - aka Mob Rule - is a really, really bad idea. It is two wolves and sheep deciding what is for dinner. It is your neighbors "redistibuting" what you earn. In the end it is kleptocracy and anarchy.
Try a republic instead. Or at least a representive democracy.
still stuck on 2000?..how pathetic..but this is molly (ihatebushnomatterwhat) ivins..
Could it be because they can't win elections – Democrats have gotten a majority vote in a national election only two times since FDR was president (Lyndon Johnson in '64 and Jimmy Carter in '76)
Democracies are great...just as long as you always agree with the majority.
You mean "representative republic", not "representative democracy" don't you?
That Molly is a genius! Smarter than all the Founding Fathers! So smart she would upset a proven political process that has worked for over two hundred years. Why, that's longer than any European constitution or Democracy, but no matter!
Why does any reputable outlet print this idiot's drivel?
If Kerry had won the electoral vote in 2004 these hypocrites would love the system.
In the Middle East, the Palestinians had an election and put Hamas in charge.
BUSH'S FAULT
That didn't seem to make anyone happy. Lebanon had an election and put Hezbollah in charge.
BUSH'S FAULT
...pihead reporter. She fails to mention that Japan and Germany have the 3rd and 5th largest economies in the world.....guess "forcing democracy" on them wasn't such a good idea, eh?
This is your brain on Gin.
Amen to that..I believe Bush won the popular vote over kerry by 4 million..and won a majority..not a plurality that gore won in 2000..but if kerry won 120,000 votes in Ohio..he would be President today (OMG)..you wouldn't hear pipsqueak from the left and msm about that would you?
No you wouldn't and as much as I would have detested seeing him in the White House I wouldn't have called him illegitimate.
I was going to post a pick of this wench, but after eating lunch I decided food staying where it should stay is a good thing.
In other words, lets spread democracy in the U.S, with democracy being defined as anything which helps democrats win elections. Yes, true democracy only is realized with liberals in power who promptly quash democracy. by: making it easier to manufacture votes via not requiring ID cards, allowing felons to vote, preventing the updating of voter rolls so the dead and cartoon characters can vote, re-re-re counting until they are ahead and then decrying any more counting as "disenfranchisement," seeking to redistrict, unless, of course it helps Republicans and then its "head for the hills and keep the legislature from meeting" then sue sue sue and claim racial discrimination.
Yes, democracy, yet another word (like torture, patriotism, freedom of speech, etc.) dumbed down by the left for its own purposes. Democracy = a process by which any and all means are justified to ensure that liberals win power (and consequently socialism advances and racist, sexist, homophobic people (Conservatives) are defeated, which is justified since Conservatives are automatically illegal anyway).
I have a friend who calls Bush a "Jacobin".
What we should be spreading across the world is constitutional government, with a just mixture of 'democratic', majoritarian element and 'anti-democratic' elements to restrain the popular will and protect the interests of minorities (in the political sense).
One of the most egregious examples of judicial activism was the "one man, one vote" decision which ruled that state constitutions could not follow the wisdom of the Federal constitution and have an upper legislative house elected from districts (say counties or towns) not based on population.
The electoral college is a defense of the interests of small states against those of large, just as the Senate is. We need to spread checks and balances around the world at least as much as democracy: the Hamas election, and the case of Mr. Rahman in Afghantistan show that democracy without checks and balances is just a short road to tyranny.
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.