Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Originally posted by: Specop 007
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
There is a great difference. Gridlock. That wonderful thing that keeps the parties fighting each other and largely ignoring us. 95% of the time that's good. I didn't care for either party, however the Republicans were in charge of Congress, and the Dems of the Presidency.
Now the Reps control everything.
I was station hopping on the radio yesterday and heard a few seconds of Rush's show. He had a replacement who said to the effect that while the President formulates the ideas, and Congress implements them, that Congress needs to find leaders in itself.
What's wrong with that? The President formulates the ideas and the Congress implements them.. Without flipping through my handy dandy Constitution I can say that nowhere is the President to be the master of Congress. Unfortunately, a great many supporters of Bush believe that is the purpose of Congress. That's wrong. Now, before anyone says "what if the Dems could do this" I would say it's wrong too. It's not about our party or agenda. It's effective seperation of powers, and that Congress represents the people of the US, not the Party in power. OK, it's always been like this, but now the control rests in one man, Bush. I don't think investing ANY person with that control is wise, and in that sense I agree with Hillary (although I really don't like the woman). Any effective opposition is dead.
Lets be honest here. What you say is true, and we (the people) agree.
But we both know Hillary, or any politician for that matter, does NOT want that. They want their Party in power. Hillary only cares about the fact the R's are in power becuase it limits her power. Do you think Hillary would say anything if it was the D's that were in power? You can bet your bottom dollar shewouldnt.
Which is why I think so many are Koolaid drinkers. Hillary says the current political structure causes the D's to effectively have no power. And I agree. But Hillary says it not for wanting balance, but for wanting power for herself. And the people she represents are too stupid to realize that. They suck down her words and rant and cheer "Yes! We need to stop the power grab!" and Hillary is thinking "Yes, we need to get ourselves in power!"
I'm not arguing for the Dems, but for The People. Ignore the Dems and Reps for the moment. Does it make sense for any party to wield such power? I am not supporting her or the dems, but the idea that (to be blunt) infighting is a good thing.
I can't remember who said it, but it goes something like this "The greatest threat to Democracy is an efficient bureaucracy". I think you understand what I mean.
If we have a Dem Congress and a Rep Prez, that would work too. What we need is to get rid of them all, but they are too entrenched. There are people who actually believe that the two party system is somehow a Constitutional fact, and that Reps and Dems are THE annointed ones. Nonsense.
Personally, I like my first AND second amendment rights. In fact I wish to enjoy them all. Show me a party that wants this, and I would support them until they turn away from that path.
THere is no one to be seen with that intent.
Facebook
Twitter