You are quite right, but ATS members are more interesting in pointing fingers than an actual discussion - as is most of the population. The reason why people put so much into executive branch politics is because its much easier to point the finger at 1 person than it is to every single person in the congress and the senate. Even though the President has little direct power over 99% of the things people whine about, they will still do it because hes (or she!) is an easy target.

The real power of the U.S. government is first in the Congress and Senate, then the Supreme Court, and lastly the President. But as you can see on ATS, people rabidly and frantically pile on one another to gleefully bash Bush (as they will the next President), but no one bothers examining that most of the things they bring out their Bush bashing sticks for are the fault of the Congress.

Silly me, I keep forgetting we must not let facts get in the way of bashing on ATS...

[edit on 22-7-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

Good thread. I was reading something today about Jimmy Carter, the most hated president in recent history. He wanted to beef up the military, being a Navy man himself and caught slack from his own party, specifically Ted Kennedy. Ted basically submarined Carter.

I see your logic. But if I may take it a step further.

No matter who you elect, to whatever position of power. It is inevitable that sooner or later the bureaucracy that develops around these systems of power become corrupt. People have a way of learning the system and knowing how to avoid being caught. Add to that that people in positions of power have a way of being immune to prosecution.

Individuals who are motivated to seek these positions are exactly the type of personalities that you do not want to hold these positions. They are almost always self serving.


In today's world I see no reason why it is, that. The people can not vote on exactly the same things that congress votes on. The only difference is that. The people would not be serving their self interest's and would therefore be immune to corruption.

Just take a look at some of the things that government passes. And you are left thinking to yourself, why would they do that?
If you take that power away from the few and give it to the many. The people get exactly what they want.
You couldn't do this in the past. There was never a viable means to accomplish this. However with the advent of the internet there is no reason that I can think of not to

We now have the capability to allow the majority of the population to vote instantly via the internet. Some will argue that this is not a secure way to vote. I completely disagree. If you can do your banking online why shouldn't you be able to vote online?

[edit on 22-7-2008 by foremanator]

I said Bush has not vetoed less than any other President since Harding. This is true, and this is what the chart shows. In recent history, he has vetoed very little compared to any other President.

Bush's claiming of executive privilege has no impact on the importance of the Congress, which was the point of the OP.

I appreciate everybody contributing quality comments to this post. I really feel this is an important issue we need to fix in order to move the United States in a positive direction. Just seems that Congress can no longer relate to the struggles the average American is going through. While we are debating on who will be our next President, let's also keep in mind that ultimately his success will depend on Congress. A Congress who for the most part only cares for its own party platform and a Congress that seeks to humiliate each others party at every given opportunity.