The branches are broken.

The Legislative Branch aka Congress will not cooperate with each other. If you are in the other party, you are evil. I believe George Washington warned against making parties; now I see why. It gets to the point where the government shuts down because the two parties can't come to an agreement. Sad.

Then there's the Judicial Branch aka Supreme Court. Supreme Court is a broken system and its power has been abused for a long time. They are given the power to decide on things Supreme Court isn't supposed to handle. I remember when the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) was sent to Supreme Court so they could tell whether or not the penalty for not having healthcare is a fine or a tax. They ruled it as a tax to keep it constitutional. If having to pay money because you choose not to have or can't afford healthcare is a tax, then someone is going to have to tell me how.
And then there's the Gay Marriage ruling. Not once is marriage mentioned in the Constitution, yet it went to them, and they passed it using the 14th Amendment, which says something about not infringing upon the liberties of people. Do you know how many definitions of "Liberty" there are? Which definition is being implied when the Amendment was written in? Is it the 'liberty' that is granted a sailor in the Navy, which is the permission to go ashore? Is it the 'liberty' where you are free from foreign rule and are independent? Personally, I think that since the 14th Amendment was written a little after after the US Civil War, it is safe to assume that it is the 'liberty' which means you are free from captivity aka SLAVERY. But that's the thing; Supreme Court shouldn't have to assume. That's why there are 27 Amendments to date; the Constitution is vague and it is the job of the Legislative Branch to write in new Amendments for Supreme Court to uphold. With the gay marriage ruling, Supreme Court has used a power that is not given them. If the people knew or cared about the legal system, they would have put pressure on the Legislative Branch to federally legalize gay marriage or better yet have a 28th Amendment signed in regarding marriage.
These are just two recent examples of what I'm talking about. This has been happening for many administrations. SC isn't doing what the Constitution says is right; they are doing what they think is right, and that is not their job.

And then there is the Executive Branch. I mean, you can't really screw this up, but you can paint yourself in a bad light by issuing executive orders left and right (Obama is not the only one to have done this) and having your words drive a bigger wedge between the people of your country.
I'm focusing on the power of words right now. In Ferguson MO, Officer Darren Wilson fatally shot and killed Michael Brown. This is a case you probably wouldn't hear of out of state, if the victim wasn't black, of course. And before any evidence comes out that could determine whether or not Wilson's actions were racially motivated, President Barack Obama came out and called it a hate crime. Instead of calming the people down, telling them to wait for evidence, instead of telling the people that the police don't have a vendetta against black people, he comes out and fuels the flames for a greater divide between the black community and the police force/white community. He had the perfect opportunity to say, "Hey, sure there's still racism. Sure, there are bad cops. But don't feel like the whole country is against you, just look at me! I'm black, and I am your president! We will close the gap," but instead he antagonized Darren Wilson without any evidence and ruined his life, and in doing so antagonized the police force.

I still believe the world would be a better place with me as the leader of it. Sure, there wouldn't be quite as many people living in it, but for those still alive, it would be great.

Stay Edgy, and have a nice time.

Edited 3/2/2016 23:09:07

Next times on Martian rants: should Europeans really care that much on American politics?

Wow it seems alcohol is not that bad for you Belgian, I for once totally agree with your statement o.O keep drinking!

Next times on Martian rants: should Europeans really care that much on American politics?

Or: Should people who don't care about a thread stop wasting their time commenting on it?

I can't find one thing wrong with your post on your argument.


A+++ dude.

You could have also another 2 "invisible branches" of the government - the states and the executive agencies (EPA, FDA, Department of Education, etc). These branches have also been turned upside down since now most laws and policy issues that were originally given exclusively for the states to handle are being superseded by federal laws and regulations created by the executive agencies.

We need State's Rights again. Where's John C. Calhoun when you need him?

Edited 3/2/2016 22:04:24

Maybe the two parties fighting each other and not getting anything done is good. Let's see what cooperation gets us.

The PATRIOT act
The NDAA (which legitimized Guantanamo Bay and weakened our rights)
The Global War On Terror
The TSA
Torture
Bailouts
$1.3 Trillion deficit

Yeah maybe them fighting is better than the alternative.

^That's a good point. Didn't consider that at all. But I think across the board public opinion is against these laws/actions, which increases the concern that Congress and in general the government is too displaced from the actual desires, opinions, and needs of the people. Great state's rights and powers would be a countermeasure against that.

(Did someone say something about Franche-Comte or am I going insane?)

Belgian Gentleman and Angry Koala, thank you for your input.

....................../´¯/)
....................,/¯../
.................../..../
............./´¯/'...'/´¯¯`·¸
........../'/.../..../......./¨¯\
........('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...')
.........\.................'...../
..........''...\.......... _.·´
............\..............(
..............\.............\...

Doesn't interest you? Stop taking the time to complain, then.

^^
Martian I actually liked you, because you always seem very kind... But now you are rude. Let those trolls troll and dont pay attention to them.

You are complaining that I am being rude to trolls...

Why do libertarians support heavily militarized police that often kill people for small things? This is the thing that confuses me to no end. The police could be going house to house searching for people without a warrant and as long as they call the person they're looking for a gang member or thug then the police are off free. Is it because the people who don't like them are Neo-liberals? Is it because race is brought into this?

Why do libertarians support heavily militarized police that often kill people for small things? This is the thing that confuses me to no end.

Anyone who calls themselves a libertarian and supports this is lying. A libertarian will hate the Republican party the same or more than the Democratic party. I've seen the word libertarian been used too freely. It means right-anarchist, that's it. It's a vague enough meaning, but still somehow folk misuse it.

Edited 3/3/2016 05:06:57

Libertarians attached themselves more to the Republicans because they like GOP business practices. At-least in the U.S, libertarians generally put more focus on the economic issues than social issues which greatly puts them at odds with the Democrats who the Libertarians see as having devastating fiscal policies.

In an ideal world, the Libertarians would be able to break off and present themselves to the people as a third faction. U.S politics doesn't work like that though.

Yes, but Republicans also want more government spending and militarism, which are not Libertarian things.

Edited 3/3/2016 05:32:31

@cata
Shhhh grumpy cat

Simply transform the one party into the Optimates, the other ones into the Poplares. Then have a big hundred year civil war, a huge global empire and everything is fine. ;)

I still believe the world would be a better place with me as the leader of it. Sure, there wouldn't be quite as many people living in it, but for those still alive, it would be great.

Man of the year 2016.

Great rant DDB. One of your best yet.

Why do libertarians support heavily militarized police that often kill people for small things? This is the thing that confuses me to no end.

Which "libertarians" are you referring to? I put it in quotes because I concur with Juq that anyone who calls themselves a libertarian and supports a militarized police state is lying to themselves about what they actually are. As far as I'm concerned, libertarian-Republicans such as Rand Paul, Ron Paul, and Justin Amash have spoken out about the increasing militarization of local and state police forces.

It should also be noted that Libertarians, like any group of people, are not a hive mind who are going to have the same exact thoughts on every political issue. A few small diverges doesn't mean they'd be "Not a REAL Libertarian", it would simply mean they're human and don't agree with their group 100% of the time.

It's the same reason pro-labor Republicans or pro-life Democrats exist and haven't been kicked out of their respective parties, they're still close enough to count.