Although it is convenient for you to ignore the long historic failures of European forms of parliamentary Governments, but when looked at over the over 200 years of America's history, the facts do not support your assertions over time.
I'm not in favor of a European style of government, just a true representation of our Constitution as set forth by the framers, and further deliniated in the Federalist papers, namely Feralist #10 by James Madison. He expected factions (political parties), and multiple parties was the model envisioned (not a polarized two party system that we have today.)
Rampant corruption? You must have a very loose definition of the term. But when the American people look the other way and keep electing corrupt politicians like Barney Frank, what do you expect?
I don't get why you think my definition must be loose. You've cited a good example (the best one) with Barney Frank, since that is a centerpiece in the financial crisis we face today.
Definitions of corruption on the Web:
* corruptness: lack of integrity or honesty (especially susceptibility to bribery); use of a position of trust for dishonest gain
* putrescence: in a state of progressive putrefaction
* decay of matter (as by rot or oxidation)
* moral perversion; impairment of virtue and moral principles; "the luxury and corruption among the upper classes"; "moral degeneracy followed intellectual degeneration"; "its brothels, its opium parlors, its depravity"; "Rome had fallen into moral putrefaction"
* destroying someone's (or some group's) honesty or loyalty; undermining moral integrity; "corruption of a minor"; "the big city's subversion of rural innocence"
* inducement (as of a public official) by improper means (as bribery) to violate duty (as by commiting a felony); "he was held on charges of corruption and racketeering"
As for Government working; I guess you forgot why our founders believed in separation of powers. Only people who think Government actually works and is better than the free market think that we would WANT Government to work. Federal Government programs make things worse for EVERYONE, particularly those they attempt to help.
Not all government programs are bad. But with the system set up the way it is today, it is too prone to vested interests getting their way instead of for the common good.
The BIGGEST threat to Americans in this election is the undertanding that there will be no checks and balances on the Democrats if Obama gets elected.
100 % agree. It's the main reason I would prefer McCain win.
There is not just a two party system in this country; but it has evolved into two major parties thanks to the media and Americans choices. This does evolve but takes decades or centuries to change.
It takes as long to change as it we as a populace demand it change. Getting the media to change its way will accelerate the process greatly.
How does doing away with the electoral process and guaranteeing that the highly populated areas of the NE and Pacific coast get to choose all our Presidents make things BETTER?
Please quote where I said the electoral process should be abandoned. I am in favor of it.
The people who keep re-electing intellectual midgets like Barney Franks, Maxine Waters and Nancy Pelosi would be the same ones selecting your Presidents. If you think that works better, I can’t help you with your denial.
I don't think it works better. I was commenting on your stance on multiple political parties, because it is an important subject to me that opens the door to a more effective and honest government than the one we have today.
