Seeking checks and balances

I (and a few million others) have been pondering recently what to do about the hijacking of the Presidency.

By “hijacking” I don’t mean that the Republicans have stolen anything. I refer to the evolution in our nation of that office to a moral leader, which at times just might lead to the election of an unsuitable head of state.

It occurred to me that we should, perhaps, have a Prime Minister to fulfill the statesman role I was reluctantly willing to accept John Kerry for but am scared to find Bush in. Of course, the Prime Minister election process would doubtless become beholden to the whim of moral fashion, as well.

So perhaps we are “in a phase” at the moment and will inevitably return to our senses and elect officials to leadership positions based on their ability to run the office, rather than their adherence to our fickle notions of virtue. In fact, it seems that the founding fathers designed our government to withstand these periods, with so many checks and balances, and less political positions in the Judiciary and the Senate.

Which brings me slight comfort, and hope that we will move past this period with only reversible damage to our international standing, environment, civil liberties, and economy. That is, if the other branches would do their bloody jobs!

Imagine how less upsetting the image of a gun-wielding monkey in the Oval Office would be if we could count on our Senators and Judges to keep him away from us.

I posted this in November 2004 during week 1600.

For more, you should follow me on the fediverse: