Re: RE: New Bill Could Make Bush President For Life
Excellent post. zen. Just as a party can become stagnant, so can an individual.....and his immediate group that governs. If a leader was in for life......the mentality would change immediately. They would feel "secure" in their position and probably not try as hard. Just a basic human failing most humanoids have. Some might welcome the "stability" that might represent. But all too quickly and insidiously stability can turn into passive complacency. Nature of the humanoid .
but it poses interesting considerations...
zenfisher said:I was being facetious. Well sort of...I definately want that thought out there ...If George II can run again...so can teflon Willy. It is more important to defeat the ideology and outright lies, that the current Republicans are ( quite succesfully ) deceiving the American population with. Slick Willy scares the Republicans. Even if they change the laws so Arnold can run against him. There is a great doubt that even Schwartzenager's (sp) appeal won't be enough to defeat him.
One leader, provided that leader is forward thinking is not always a bad thing. It when that leader gets mired in corruption and complacency that trouble arises. Ideally we as a society would prefer to have changes in the leadership to help prevent one party from being entrenched in power for to long. Unfortunately, that doesn't always happen, even in a democracy. If that were the case I'm sure Martin would have been sent packing long ago.
The problem is, for Canadians at this point in time there is no viable alternative. You have Harper, yeah right!!! You have the Bloc, which is for tearing the very ideals of the country apart,Then you have the NDP. Which for some unexplicable reason, Canadians seem to be terrified to elect. Then you have a bunch of smaller parties and individuals, which have some great ideas, but just don't have the clout to form a majority government.
This leaves you with the Liberals. ( How many years have they been in power?) As you have pointed out ...not a lot of creative thinking coming out the party headquarters lately. They have become a stagnant party, much as you suppose an individual would become. I am not saying your wrong about that. I too see it, as more of a probability, than a possibility.
But I digress.My goal is to merely point that this could indeed be a grave tactical error on the part of the Republicans.
Excellent post. zen. Just as a party can become stagnant, so can an individual.....and his immediate group that governs. If a leader was in for life......the mentality would change immediately. They would feel "secure" in their position and probably not try as hard. Just a basic human failing most humanoids have. Some might welcome the "stability" that might represent. But all too quickly and insidiously stability can turn into passive complacency. Nature of the humanoid .
but it poses interesting considerations...