Do we really *need* a president? Or have they become figureheads?

[Witchy_Dem]

Like the royalty in England?

What would our nation become without a president? Would congress be able to handle the executive branch without one?

[BlueEyedSon]

1. Who is "we"?

The people or the wealthy ruling elite/corporations?

[Witchy_Dem]

3. Hehe good point. I mean everyone, people and corps.

Would corporations take over unconditionally without a president?

[BlueEyedSon]

5. No, i think THEY pick the president, then use him to take control!

[Witchy_Dem]

9. So what would happen if there were no figureheads?

[daninthemoon]

4. I haven't had a president for 'bout 5 years now.

[Witchy_Dem]

7. Sigh. I can't accept that answer because he is there and he started

the war and is still there for the next three years.

I'm playing hypothetically. What would happen if we really didn't have one?

[MADem]

2. We sure do need one, we just have not had one for five years nt

[Witchy_Dem]

6. Problem is, we have had one who seems to think that he isn't

accountable. Nor does he have to listen to congress. He's making up his own rules as he goes.

What would the US be like without one?

[MADem]

10. A lot like it is now, with a bunch of thugs running all branches nt

[Witchy_Dem]

11. Would anyone ever vote for a middle class president?

[MADem]

14. Harry Truman!! nt

[kenny blankenship]

8. I think Bushler gives the lie to Stalin's saying that it doesn't matter

if there is a US President.

[mcscajun]

12. Absent a President, you still need a Head of State

No matter what you'd call him/her, somebody still needs to be at the top to wield executive power.

The Queen of England may be a figurehead, but if there were no Prime Minister in charge, she'd have to step in or someone would.

Yes, we need a President. I hope we get one in 2008. 'Cause we sure don't have a real one now.

[Witchy_Dem]

15. I'm just frustrated because he's not playing by the rules and it's

annoying.

Thanks for responding.

[mcscajun]

18. More than understandable.

Rules? They don't need no stinkin' rules!

As Leona Helmsley said: Only the little people pay taxes.
So Bush believes, and its corollary: Only the little people follow rules.

[Boomer]

13. President, evidently not.

But then we have a Vice President instead.

Dick Cheney is channeling for two centuries worth of superfluous VPs, who are not getting their vicarious revenge by watching him run the country.... straight to hell.

[Witchy_Dem]

16. I keep wondering how he's managed to stay squeaky clean and

OUT of jail.

Would be GREAT fireworks if he ever was indicted, during this presidency.

[AlGore-08.com]

17. The Constitution does not allow Congress to do certain things

Congress can vote on bills, but they don't become laws until a President signs them. If there was no President, there could be no new laws, so there would be no way to overturn all of the awful laws (and Executive orders) passed over the last five years.

Smirk has been a miserable President, but he wouldn't have been able to make most of the changes he has made without a Congress which supported his agenda. The Congress passed the Smirk tax cuts, gutting the surplus. The Congress passed the resolution to invade Iraq. The Congress passed the Patriot Act. The Congress voted to make FEMA a part of the Department of Homeland Security, rather than an independent Cabinet level office. The Senate voted 98-0 to make Michael Chertoff head of Homeland Security.

A different President would have vetoed that stuff, forcing the Congress to vote to override the veto - - something that's much harder to do than pass a bill.

There's nothing wrong with the structure of our Government. The problem is quality of the people serving in that Government. We have a bunch of incompetent, out of touch yahoos in far too many offices around the country. We need competent, visionary leaders who have proven in lower offices that they know how to govern in the public interest.