Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

avebury

(10,952 posts)
1. The Founding Fathers never anticipated one political party
Mon Feb 6, 2017, 11:09 PM
Feb 2017

gaining control of the WH and Congress and then running roughshod over the Judiciary and the people.

Bucky

(54,041 posts)
7. What? Have you read the debates from the Philadelphia convention?
Tue Feb 7, 2017, 05:14 AM
Feb 2017

Read Farrands Debates. I think they very much anticipated a tyrant might emerge.

avebury

(10,952 posts)
9. And look how well
Tue Feb 7, 2017, 05:50 AM
Feb 2017

their idea of checks and balances are working. Two legs of the Federal Govt. running amok.

Bucky

(54,041 posts)
10. And the 3rd branch stopping the actually unconstitutional things
Tue Feb 7, 2017, 09:13 AM
Feb 2017

I mean, sure, if voters vote in a bunch of bad managers, you're going to have a lot of bad government.

We're definitely using the airbags on this model.

AlexSFCA

(6,139 posts)
5. wrong
Tue Feb 7, 2017, 12:37 AM
Feb 2017

What he said may have sounded right on Nov. 9 but it no longer applies after Jan.20. Checks and balances: when president can stack supreme court with loyalist justices - gone one branch of government.

Our only hope isto regain senate. We do better in statewide elections because they are not subject to redistricting.

pat_k

(9,313 posts)
6. Congressional failures to "check" in past few decades...
Tue Feb 7, 2017, 05:10 AM
Feb 2017

... paved the road to hell.

The Congressional "checks" on the Executive and the Judiciary don't work when members of that body refuse to do their duty.

Failed to impeach Reagan for Iran-Contra
Before the investigation even began, our so-called "leaders" in the Democratic Party decided that no amount of Presidential negligence or nonfeasance, would justify a impeachment, which they viewed as "dangerous" for the nation.

The Real Danger was created by their failure to serve as a check on an Executive that was either a participant in the criminal conspiracy, or willfully blind to the evidence of the conspiracy that was laid before him.

Failed to reject the unlawful Florida electors on January 6, 2001, and thereby "check" the treasonous Bush v. Gore decision. The only thing the five black robed criminals did with Bush v. Gore was render the Florida election incomplete, and therefore unlawful. Congress had a duty to object to, and ultimately reject, those unlawful electors.

Failed to reject the unlawful Ohio electors on January 6, 2005.

Failed to impeach Bush-Cheney for committing war crimes in plain sight
I can't imagine a higher high crime than government sanctioned torture.
____________________________________________________________

When the votes of the American electorate are not counted, that electorate is cut out of the process. Self-governing is rendered meaningless. Congress allowed this.

When our government officials torture in our name, we become a war criminal nation. Our very identity is destroyed. Congress allowed this.

And by their failure to even attempt to do their duty (can't win, so don't fight) the Congressional Democrats are as culpable as the treasonous court, war criminal executive, and Republican accessories after the fact in Congress.

If, and only if, our so-called leaders in the Democratic Party start doing their duty, we'll be alright. If not...

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"Are we going to be okay?...