- Joined
- Jan 2, 2006
- Messages
- 29,140
- Reaction score
- 15,325
- Location
- Boca
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
From a political standpoint, i would consider myself more of a conservative. I believe in the right to bear arms, dicipline your child, moral up-bringing towards America's youth, reduction or elimination of well-fare, lower taxes, and last but not least US military dominance.
On the other hand i also believe in a womans right to have an abortion, seperation of church and state, a more Dutch like standpoint on excise, corprate taxation, child services (except in Florida), and a broader medical program that doesnt just cater to someone who refuses to work.
After a friendly conversation with my fellow co-worker (who is ultra conservative), he calls me a young liberal who is on the right track to becoming a conservative. He and his favorite am talk radio host also believe liberals have no place in politics and are ruining this country.
Thats were i really started thinking about the term balance in power. As it was coined by the forefathers to ensure no one individual obtain monarch like power, there was great reason to ensure this at that time.
When you really think about the first 30 years of this countries existance 1776-1806, there was great fear that one of these great men of that time would, and could exploit a weak political state. Therefore political party doesnt seem as much of a rally point behind political ambition.
The president elect at the time had no control over who was to be his vice president. Instead, the canidate who recieved the second most electorial votes was to be vice president. To put it bluntly, the canidate who recieved the next highest amount of votes would be the one who would replace the president if he was to leave office for some reason. And when you think about it, if a president were to die, it makes more sense to replace him with the cannidate who recieved the 2nd highest ammount of votes.
Now when you think of balance of power, what exists now is political party. The medium's for balance of power that were established (senate, House) are merely open seats for a political party to either protect the presidency, or to weaken it.
What is to happen when there is a president who's political party controls both the senate and the house? Presidents such as FDR, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter and Bush Jr have had this luxury. So where is the balance in power?
It is my belief that this whole political party thing has really gotten to big to walk. So big that the only way to get it out of the house is with a crane (no pun intended). People are more concerned with political party than individual idealism. Something that defined our forefathers. Even worse is the liberal vs conservative battle. I know of people who wont speak to one another because they found out the other is of a different political stance.
Yet they cannot exist without one another. You might sympothize with the conservatives due to constant political attacks not only by the media, but other nations, activist groups and the ultra left liberals as well. You might applaud liberals for questioning lapses in intelligence, and decisions based off this intelligence. The fact still remains. Without eachother to keep themselves in check, power might be misused, laws might be ignored, and all the while we lose what little say we have in our government.
On the other hand i also believe in a womans right to have an abortion, seperation of church and state, a more Dutch like standpoint on excise, corprate taxation, child services (except in Florida), and a broader medical program that doesnt just cater to someone who refuses to work.
After a friendly conversation with my fellow co-worker (who is ultra conservative), he calls me a young liberal who is on the right track to becoming a conservative. He and his favorite am talk radio host also believe liberals have no place in politics and are ruining this country.
Thats were i really started thinking about the term balance in power. As it was coined by the forefathers to ensure no one individual obtain monarch like power, there was great reason to ensure this at that time.
When you really think about the first 30 years of this countries existance 1776-1806, there was great fear that one of these great men of that time would, and could exploit a weak political state. Therefore political party doesnt seem as much of a rally point behind political ambition.
The president elect at the time had no control over who was to be his vice president. Instead, the canidate who recieved the second most electorial votes was to be vice president. To put it bluntly, the canidate who recieved the next highest amount of votes would be the one who would replace the president if he was to leave office for some reason. And when you think about it, if a president were to die, it makes more sense to replace him with the cannidate who recieved the 2nd highest ammount of votes.
Now when you think of balance of power, what exists now is political party. The medium's for balance of power that were established (senate, House) are merely open seats for a political party to either protect the presidency, or to weaken it.
What is to happen when there is a president who's political party controls both the senate and the house? Presidents such as FDR, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter and Bush Jr have had this luxury. So where is the balance in power?
It is my belief that this whole political party thing has really gotten to big to walk. So big that the only way to get it out of the house is with a crane (no pun intended). People are more concerned with political party than individual idealism. Something that defined our forefathers. Even worse is the liberal vs conservative battle. I know of people who wont speak to one another because they found out the other is of a different political stance.
Yet they cannot exist without one another. You might sympothize with the conservatives due to constant political attacks not only by the media, but other nations, activist groups and the ultra left liberals as well. You might applaud liberals for questioning lapses in intelligence, and decisions based off this intelligence. The fact still remains. Without eachother to keep themselves in check, power might be misused, laws might be ignored, and all the while we lose what little say we have in our government.