On 06/10/2006, at 11:15 AM, Dan Minette wrote:
Anyway - in an ideal world, my disagreements with Republicans would
be on policy. But at the moment it's not, it's with the ideology of
the current administration and the damaging shortsightedness of that.
And the Democrats have been complicit, as a party, by not providing a
resistance to this, especially to the erosion of checks and balances,
and the power-grab by the Executive. Even if they were going to get
rolled as a minority, they should have still stood up for their own
policies. And didn't. Shame on them. The system only works if there
are two parties instead of one.
But, that's not really what happened. For example, Bush's
executive powers
are less than those from FDR through Nixon....even after his big
push to
expand them. Checks and balances are still working.
Erosion of, not suspension of.
The clearest example
of this is Bush's need to negotiate the limits of his power with
Senators
from his own party. He got reigned in far earlier than FDR got
reigned in
by his party (for trying to pack the Supreme Court).
Still, what is with the attempt to suspend _habeus corpus_?
Now, this doesn't mean that I agree with Bush. It's just that his
re-election does not represent the decay of long cherished American
values.
Do you not think that protection of liberty has been eroded under
Bush 43? Or, at least, badly disrespected?
Charlie
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
