Tuesday, March 8, 2016

A popular dictatorship?

Is this really what the American people want?  Eight years of President Obama, making no effort to work with Congress to pass his policy desires, but working tirelessly to find loopholes that allow him to issue Executive Orders to implement his agenda. 

A pretty good bet that Hillary Clinton would operate the same way.  She has never shown a particular inclination towards obeying the law.  

Donald Trump, no doubt in my mind.  He has already announced numerous policy initiatives that would require him to use the power of the executive to implement. 

Bernie Sanders, harder to tell.  My suspicion is that a President Sanders would be more inclined to attempt to use Congress but would his supporters stand by while a recalcitrant Congress refused to implement the full blown Socialist agenda that Sanders wants?
Is this really what the people want?  It seems so.  Republicans (not conservatives but Republicans with a capital R) are tired of twenty years of broken promises by their party.  Twenty years of promises that, if elected, the Republican party would roll back the socialist advances made by the Progressives under Bush 1, Clinton, and Obama.  Never mind the advances that were prevented by a somewhat conservative majority in the House and Senate, gun control, higher taxes, more regulation;  clearly the Progressive wing of American political life has little regard for Constitutional checks and balances.  Read Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals if you don't believe me.

I, for one, am disgusted.  I most likely, unless Ted Cruz can pull off a Republican primary upset, am going to be faced with the choice of not voting or voting for Donald Trump.  If I don't vote, we get Hillary, four more years of Obama policies but probably worse since she will care less than he does about propriety and Constitutional order, plus she will have a five to four majority of hard core liberals on the Supreme Court, with possibly more to come.  If I do vote, I have to vote for Trump as the alternative to Hillary which, as I may have mentioned above, doesn't fill me with hope for the future of a Constitutional Republic.

I am completely disgusted that putative conservatives have put us into this position. I understand the frustration at the status quo, but hey, Ted Cruz.  Who thinks that Cruz would be a squishy, middle of the road, not particularly conservative president?  So why not elect a guy with principle who has already proven himself to hold and fight for conservative views over some lifelong Democrat who recently switched parties to run for President?

Well, as was said by James Madison about 250 years ago, when asked what kind of government the new country would have, "a Republic, if you can keep it".  I fear that we have not kept it, whether D or R wins this election.

Popular dictatorship it is.


Blue said...

I suspect Ginsburg will either retire or die before the next administration comes to an end. Heck, perhaps before the current administration ends...

heresolong said...

Kennedy is only two years younger than Ginsburg and Breyer is only two years behind him. We could have four vacancies in four or eight years. Fortunately Kagan is only 55 so she should be around for a while.

Blue said...

True. That means we need someone other than a radical Liberal President doing the nominating... ;) I really thought Ginsburg might retire after this session. Don't know why, just a feeling.

ebizcan.com said...

a Republic, if you can keep it , Madame.....Was Ben Franklin , not Thomas Jefferson. Btw , I'm Canadian and even I know that , LOL.

ebizcan.com said...

Sry , I meant not James Madison..

heresolong said...

Thanks for the input. Not sure where I got Madison. Also not sure what being a Canadian versus being an American has to do with having a good memory. Thanks for proving my point by mentioning Jefferson.