Aren’t we more-or-less a 4 year dictatorship

[IsItJustMe]

For all intent and purposes, I see our country as a 4-year dictatorship. We elect a president and we are pretty much stuck with him for 4 years. He seems to have the power to start wars, torture, suspend habeas corpus and just about anything else he wants to do.

The people of his own party rubber stamps most of what he wants, he rigs the Supreme Court with the people who will see it his way, and even when the Supreme Court does have a different point of view, the cases won’t get to them until the tyrant is out of office.

Our system of government seems to be broken, at best. Everything from the Electoral College to the winner-take-all backward way of gathering votes.

I am sure some would say, “Yeah, it’s messy, but it’s the best system.” I would have to respectfully disagree. The Prime Minister of Italy had to resign today because of political divisions within his government. I just think it would be great if we could find a better way of throwing the bum out, rather than our antiquated way of doing things that now exists. It’s worse than seeing sausage being made. LOL

[no_hypocrisy]

1. It's a de facto dictatorship because the two other branches of

government have deferred their constitutional obligations to check the executive branch where appropriate.

[ObaMania]

2. Four? Try six!

It was a coup in '00 staged by the GOP and they installed a dictator. And Congress have been the enablers.

[Double T]

3. Eventually, in a MUCH more-then-less 8 year dictatorship..........

'OUR' dictator will NEVER step down; SOME 'BODY' will have to drag HIM away kicking, screaming and throwing a hissy fit temper tantrum.

[Esra Star]

4. I think Jefferson said that the constitution would need to be

re-worked about every hundred years. It is well overdue.
When the president is a Clinton or a Kennedy you don't notice it so much.
But since Cheney took over, it seems to be much more necessary.
I think the representation in the various assemblies is good and adequate.
I think that the president should have no political power.
Political power should reside in the assemblies.
The commander in chief should be the person who could win a confidence vote
in a joint sitting.
The mechanism for calling for this vote would have to be worked out.
end ramble now

[KoKo]

5. Don't miss this ...whether you agree or not...or just are on the fence...

it explains alot:

http://www.easycartsecure.com/CounterPunch/CounterPunch_Books.html

[DivinBreuvage]

6. Surely you're not looking to Italy as a shining example of democracy?

Granted, I agree our system is not the best system possible, but ITALY???

[Vidar]

7. I'd say six year dictatorship, but otherwise agree.

[peacetheonlyway]

8. It's Official, Checks and Balances is COMPLETELY BROKE

your point is the same as mine. We are in total agreement.
3 branch government, praised by our history books as the genius of our founding fathers,
has officially been proven inadequate in today's democracies and global economies.

I propose a government with
a. more citizen oversight and control of voting (like paper ballots and right to video tape
the chain of custody of every single friggin piece of paper to/from ballot box)
b. a 4th branch dedicated to citizen oversight ( a sort of congressional overseeing body that makes
congress do their fucking jobs since they can't seem to do it)
c. a 5th branch that is made up of global citizens that is oversight/advisory/writes reports
for all other branches.

think of this. a group of german/french/russian/chinese writing reports claiming about the
problems that US being in iraq causes their countries in economic, environmental, access to oil
etc. it could be interesting if this same group was given full audit ability over our elections.

would take the whole rich man out of the equation with average citizens ultimately having total
and complete oversight.

but how do you choose the citizens? make them all nobel peace prize winners? perhaps.
who knows.

either way, what we have today, does not work. some will argue rule of law was broken and that the
3 branch system is just fine , we just need to enforce rule of law, but I'll argue the 3 branch
system allowed almost 320 years of rule of law including voting rights, bill of rights, constitutional
rights, geneva convention (international rights) to be totally thrown out window by exec. branch
usurping all the power. it is broke. it's what we call in the telecomm industry BAD BROKE.

time for a toilet flush on the bad broke system.

first way to start is another citizen nonviolent revolution.

either way if libby trial only resolves in one person getting his hand slapped we don't
have any more of a chance of surviving any new system because the fundamental legal underpinnings
are broken too and need redesign.

anyone want to meet me at the harbor with some tea?