Charybdis - 06 March 2008 07:29 AM
Wow, how many ‘monarchies’ switch between rival powers ever few years without the catalyst of a civil war? Everything that has occurred/might occur is perfectly legal under our constitution - it’s hardly a revolution in the making. Damn, there are as many holes in your ‘theories’ as in BLT’s. Funny, that. I would have thought better of you.
[quote author=“Renquist”]I think he’s making a broad statement about how incestuous the US political landscape has become as opposed to making a theory it’s an actual monarchy. You’re not supposed to take it literally methinks.
Renquist gets the gist of what I was saying indeed.
The USA deliberately choose to be a republic, with a chosen President. To avoid anyone usurping power semi-eternally, you have a fixed number of terms for which a given person can be elected President. But now we are starting to see instances of (past) Presidents turning over power to sons, or spouses: effectively creating “Presidential Dynasties”. While possible under the US constitution, I’d say this is a loophole in it actually. Having your son or spouse run for President is a way to circumvent the restricted fixed number of Presidency terms. And a way to the establishment of families in semi-eternal power.
In fact, I am surprised that Charybdis doesn’t seem to get this point.
BTW, I have nothing against Monarchies. I live in one and am very happy with it (in fact, I am a strong Monarchist).