 |
 |
Darwin, I, too, get very frustrated when I hear people referring to our system of government as a Democracy. We are, as you explain, a Representative Republic. There IS a very important difference. Thank you for taking the time to explain the difference so clearly. >> >>First of all, let me say that I have my own personal opinion about >whether >>President Clinton should be impeached, but my personal opinion >doesn't >>matter in the scheme of things. What matters is that we are a >Republic, not >>a Democracy. For those of you who don't know the difference, here is >a >short >>explanation: >> >>Only in a Democracy does the majority rule. In a Republic, >representatives >>are elected to conduct the affairs of government using whatever >knowledge >>and ethics they have and their conduct is governed by the >Constitution and >>the laws of the land. The concept that the majority can be wrong has >been >>demonstrated many times in history and the founding fathers >recognized this >>to the point that even the electoral college was created and given >the >power >>to override a popular (majority) vote. So it means nothing to me what >the >>polls show one way or the other. The process that is going on is >dictated >by >>our Constitution, and I believe it is the most precious (next to the >texts >>brought together in the Bible) document every created. It is not for >the >>people to decide by polls and surveys, it is for Congress to decide >as our >>duly elected representatives. >> >>To those that think our country is going to come to a complete >standstill >>and that the outcome is going to affect our health care, I say this. >During >>the serious and severe trials of WWII we lost a president, but the >country >>didn't collapse. Our resilience as a country is much more than most >people >>give credit for. That just shows you what a great country we have and >that >>our forefathers really did create the most fantastic system of >government >>ever on this earth. Will our health care suffer? I don't know, and >frankly >I >>don't care. If the Constitutional process is not followed, then I >can >>practically guarantee our health care will eventually suffer, if not >in our >>lifetime, then in our children's. >> >>My comments would be exactly the same regardless of who the president >was >or >>how great (or awful) he was perceived to be. No one man is >responsible for >>all the changes (for good or bad) that take place during his (or >her) >>administration. Should have absolutely nothing to do with following >>Constitutional law regardless of where it takes you. Our very freedom >to >>even do what we do on this list depends on the sanctity of that >document. >> >>- - - >>Here are my additional thoughts: >> >>I used to think as many of you still do that we were a Democracy. >This was >>and can be extremely frustrating. It was only when I truly understood >that >>we are a Republic and understood the significance of why the >founding >>fathers invented that form of government (we were the first and only >one >>that has ever been), that all the frustration and agonizing went >away. >> >>Our form of government was not created by a majority vote of the >people. A >>few men with an unbelievable dream brought it into existence via our >basic >>Constitution. It was so perfect that more learned men and women than >you or >>I have brought forth only a few additional amendments over the years >as >>times and experience has required. Even with the amendments, it was >not a >>majority vote of the people that adopted them, it was by 2/3 majority >of >3/4 >>of our State Legislatures (where, by the way, we also have the >Republic >form >>of government, not a Democracy!). I could even go so far as to say it >(the >>Constitution) may have been divinely inspired. >> >>The Constitution does not give the option of censure! It must be >amended >>before we will have that option. >>If in trying to uphold and comply with our Constitution, the nation >is >>paralyzed for months, then it isn't worth the paper it is written >on. >>Congress has no choice, partisan or non-partisan notwithstanding, but >to >>comply with the Constitutionally mandated process, because the >process does >>matter. >> >>Yes, I do most certainly agree that anyone's actions outside the >courtroom >>and grandjury are private matters. >>But, if a person stands up and takes an oath to "uphold and defend >the >>Constitution and the Laws of the United States of America" or takes >another >>oath to "tell the truth, tell the whole truth and nothing but the >truth", >>and it appears they did not do one or both, then let the chips fall >where >>they may. That includes you and me and them! >> >>Finally, we, the people, do not have a vote on impeachment. Majority >does >>not necessarily rule in a Republic. Again, the recorded history of >the >world >>shows the wisdom of our forefathers in realizing the majority can >sometimes >>be wrong. The only remedy for the majority is to elect competent >>representatives with a platform that represents your views, but even >then, >>they can change their minds (politicians do make unfulfilled >promises) or >be >>diluted by the checks and balances of having an opposition party to >contend >>with. Can you imagine the chaos that would occur (daily? weekly? >monthly?, >>yearly?) if, we, the people, tried to rule ourselves by majority >opinion? >> >>Oh, one more thing to challenge your thinking, be you Republican or >>Democrat, Liberal or Conservative, voter or non-voter, whatever and >with >>respect to bi-partisanship versus partisanship. Would you want all >three >>branches of our government 100% populated by the same party? Even >your >>party? >> >>THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOT A DEMOCRACY, IT IS A REPUBLIC, >THANK >>GOD!!!!!! >> >>Sorry this was so long. Helps me sleep better at night! Otherwise, >stuff >>just keeps rattling around in my head, and that gets real noisy! >> >>Love to all, >>Darwin >