More information on the topics discussed below can be found on the Internet!

Custom Search

Friday, November 05, 2004

Or maybe not

Arlen Specter is already backpedaling on statements he made (or was quoted as having made) yesterday regarding future nominees to the Supreme Court. This is in response to a coordinated "Conservative" attack on Specter after these statements were reported yesterday.

If anyone is wondering about what I mean by a "near-absolute loss of the system of checks and balances", this is a prime example. Simply retaining the nominal structure of the government doesn't mean quite so much when Bush partisans control both houses of Congress and are likely to make up a significant proportion of the Supreme Court within two years. Any dissent by Congressional Democrats can be ignored; any dissent by moderates can be quashed.

Meanwhile, Bush continues to indulge in a delusion of a mandate. Can a President be removed on the grounds of being profoundly mentally ill? I suppose not, when the condition is clearly shared by many millions of supporters who will vigorously fight any attempts to shine the light of reality on their delusions.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Harry, it's not the nominal structure of the government; it's the structure of the government. That's what checks and balances are.

It's not about who controls the branches of government, it's about the separation of powers into judicial, executive and legislative functions.

Bill