Ed Leafe wrote: > On Sep 6, 2008, at 3:06 PM, Ricardo Araoz wrote: > >> In that case I could say that govt from the top also assumes that >> those >> who command have society's best interests in mind. And THAT is also a >> 'simplistic' philosophy. As is the one that says that majority must be >> right... or rule, plain stupid. > > That is the basis for why I consider the government as envisioned by > the US Constitution, with its checks and balances, to be the optimal > design. We've seen how removing these checks and shifting the balance > to an imperial presidency has ruined the process these last 8 years; I > can only hope that it recovers quickly. > > -- Ed Leafe >
I guess we disagree on this topic. I think your govt would be 'optimal' if you had a mechanism by which people could kick off any public officer if enough signatures are obtained, even a president before his mandate is complete. That way if the people are fooled by someone who acts differently than what he promised, or if the people change their minds, they would not be forced to bear with him for many years till his mandate expires. _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
