1 posted on
04/04/2012 3:22:17 AM PDT by
servo1969
To: servo1969
2 posted on
04/04/2012 3:24:56 AM PDT by
aces
To: servo1969
The entire point of the founding fathers' design was that they had learned through personal experience that it is impossible to give that much power to one person without them becoming corrupted by it. Not to mention the fact that such a position would tend to attract people who were already power-hungry to begin with. They essentially created a system of government which operated like a bucket of crabs: None of the crabs were to be able to escape and do as they pleased without one of the other crabs grabbing them and pulling them back down (to Earth.) Of course, this makes it hard for the government to accomplish things very quickly. Which was kind of the point.
Many people, Obama for example, would like the Executive branch to be the King crab.
6 posted on
04/04/2012 3:45:39 AM PDT by
servo1969
To: servo1969
Duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh................
The Constitution sets out how to oppose this tyranny.
Nothing at all wrong with it.
The problem ISSS............a complete, total LACK OF BALLS on the part of our (sic) “opposition” party.
Bone-er is a complete gutless idiot hiding behind a coterie of other bumbling cowardly idiots.
THAT’S the problem.
Nobody willing to kick ass and take names.
7 posted on
04/04/2012 3:55:40 AM PDT by
Flintlock
(Picture ID for ALL voting. Let our dead rest in peace.)
To: servo1969
BTW—why is Holder still in office??
HUH???
8 posted on
04/04/2012 3:56:31 AM PDT by
Flintlock
(Picture ID for ALL voting. Let our dead rest in peace.)
To: servo1969
A little more power for the glorious leader is just what all revolutions need. Finally an American leader with the the stature and vision of a Mugabe or Hugo Chavez. (sarc)
To: servo1969
I’m not sure I agree with the author on his use of the word ‘gridlock’ here. He gets the principle of Checks and Balances correct - it’s between branches of the government. But gridlock to me refers to the political parties being able to stymie each other’s agenda in the legislature. Gridlock is not an executive veto of af a bill, or judicial overturning of a law. These things are Checks and Balances in action, as it were.
11 posted on
04/04/2012 5:07:38 AM PDT by
2nd Bn, 11th Mar
(The "p" in Democrat stands for patriotism.)
To: servo1969
I think he stepped into a bee hive by lambasting the judicial branch. Popcorn popped. Waiting for the DOJ to give the judges a middle finger.
13 posted on
04/04/2012 6:33:53 AM PDT by
halfright
(Just a serf in the Kingdom of Zero)
To: servo1969
14 posted on
04/04/2012 6:41:49 AM PDT by
paulcissa
(The first requirement of Liberalism is to stand on your head and tell the world they're upside down)
To: servo1969
So long as the checks cash nobody cares about balances.
16 posted on
04/05/2012 3:17:07 AM PDT by
ctdonath2
($1 meals: http://abuckaplate.blogspot.com/)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson