Wrong. For most of us Progressive minded millienials it is the crushing cost of education, our job prospects out of school, the wars, and our future standard of living that was completely shot by the recklessness and gluttony of baby-boomers. In terms of healthcare: Medicare-for-all. These are what is killing support for Democrats.
regulation those people wouldn't have even had the opportunity to make those bad decisions in the first place. It's easy to blame people who want what society has deemed "the American Dream", but it's also in the bank's interest business-wise to loan responsibly. Which is exactly why we should not have loaned the banks anything without guarantees that EVERYONE, not just the bad loans could refinance at a lower rate.
working class people their house is the most valuable asset and only means of economic stability and mobility they have. This even true more and more now for people who barely reached middle class but are now because of job loss back to working class.
I'm not saying I get to play armchair general. The fact you served in Vietnam while I admire and thank you for the service is irrevelant to what we are talking about. And yes we all must claim responsibility because like it or not George Bush was ALL of our president. What I am suggesting is what it ought to be and not what is. I am in complete agreement about Obama but we cannot trust that every president after will have the same good judgement. What I am saying is if the people of the United States are against the war and want out, the president should be listening to them more than anything. Obama being C-in-C is just for cohesion and so there is one voice directing policy. But to say that the public doesn't have a say I think is wrong. I concede that in some instances the passion of the people should sometimes be ignored, but to brush off public opinion of a war that is not traditional in the sense that the founders foresaw in giving the president C-in-C I think is irresponsible and with an indifferent public very dangerous.
I don't think it's SOLELY his decision to make. We have separation of powers for a reason. The congress has done a poor job checking the executive branch allowing it to gain ENORMOUS power. The executive branch was never meant to be able to just send troops without a declaration of war from congress. Now with time restrictions the president can. Just one example of how the imbalance of power in the federal gov't can get us in trouble with wars we SHOULDN'T have fought in the first place. This hasn't just all of sudden happened during Obama's admin. but a steady stream throughout the 20th century. The founders intended for the presidency to actually be a weak position. Congress is actually supposed to be where all the action is. But because of this shift in power to the executive branch in the last century the public, like you, has been conditioned to believe that the presidency is supposed to solve all our problems.
the point. But I don't expect you to be honest anyways. I don't mean he should literally read this diary and make his decision. What I am saying is you don't recognize that it's not solely HIS decision. It's the American people's army not Obama's. Reminds me of the Bush apologizers that somehow the president is the "decider". We just have a different philosophy on what the role of the president is. I see him as a manager and executive that is to implement what the American people want. You see it as an imperialist presidency. That somehow the president shouldn't listen to us uneducated common folk. It's not his job to do what he see's fit, it's his job to represent the will of the people. You may be quick to remain indifferent and concede so much power to one man, but I am not.
"And pondering what to do in Afghanistan makes Obama a dictator..."
That's not what I said. I am responding to your comment that you're glad the president doesn't listen to some online poll. I don't beleive that Obama is a dictator I am saying the idea that a president shouldn't listen to what the people want will make this country into a dictatorship. Remember there is three branches of gov't? The one most responsive to the people the congress shouldn't have a say in what we do? The congress is supposed to be an extension of the people's voice. I'm not about excuse or just beleive everything Obama does is good just because it's Obama. And I want an executive branch that listens to public opinion. There is part of the problem with our republic, the presidency has turned into some position of superhero. That if we just trust the president to do what he wants everything will be good cuz it's Obama.
"since he is pondering the situation and ultimately it's his job."
His job is to serve the American people. If the American people don't want the extra troops, it's also his job to listen to the people who elected him. I don't understand this idea that the president should be an imperialist presidency. The founders did give the president the C-in-C, but it is up to congress to give him the funds. I don't understand why people like you are so quick to give so much power and indifference to the executive branch. He may have information we don't, but that's irrevelant. I'd like to think we live in a democracy and not a dictatorship. That's how dictatorships are made, when the people are indifferent, and just concede power.
doctor, and have personally checked out Grassley's health, you have no right to assume he has frontotemporal dementia. Don't tell me that isn't what you were implying and trying to show. It's uncalled for and downright wrong. This post should be taken off the front page. Have the Republicans been showing a bigger dose of crazy lately? Absolutely, but did you ever stop to think that is exactly what Grassley is responding to? His shrinking and more radicalized base.