09-12-2018, 10:48 AM
(09-12-2018, 10:38 AM)bfine32 Wrote: If we had a monarchy then perhaps; we don't.
Folks have about 2 more years to weather the "danger". What I consider more dangerous and have stated so for years is the legislative branch's inability to do its job. I find this to be much more dangerous than the current blowhard in the White House; yet, folks distract from that, by saying "did you see that tweet?"
I agree, here, and something that I have been saying (or trying to say) with my commentary on this op-ed. Congress should be checking the worst of the impulses of the POTUS, not those appointed by him. The fact that those appointed by him take on that role, whether out of necessity or what they perceive as necessity, means that Congress is not doing its job. This is just one more failure on the part of our legislative branch and is born from the fear the majority has with regards to the voters. Because of the popularity of Trump within the GOP, which is very high, they are hesitant to push back against him in public. Since everything policy-wise they could do would be public, it leaves the bureaucrats to keep him in check.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
