[Sacajaweau]

It appears no one knows there is a Parliament.

[Gene Eric]

There wasn’t gridlock when the Democrats forced Socialism down our throats a few years ago.

Monarch? The Country would be better served by a civil war I fear.

[Billthedrill]

Hmm...well, not all kings are necessarily bad. Charles I of England and Louis XVI of France turned out to be wonderful fellows. Afterward.

[dfwgator]

[Jacquerie]

A dozen times or so, the author refers to the consolidated government as "federal." It hasn't federal for a hundred years. He also thinks it should delegate non-national problems to the states. He has it backwards, as if the sovereign is the government in Washington.

He states, Federalism is the proper tool to break the gridlock that ails America’s politics. That is true, but according to him, we have a federal government already, so I suppose those in power are going to reverse their evil ways and return power to the states. Huh?

That was one p!ss-poor article.

[katnip]

it’s tempting to want to ditch the whole American constitutional system and install a king, who could at least get things done

Um, no it's not.

[veracious]

Shouldn’t be but so often is, thru-out history. When the legislature can’t or (correctly) won’t move forward on unlawful new emergency changes, the executive power is often encouraged or allowed to act unilaterally, _for_the_people_. USConstitution tries to specifically prevent this type of usurpation, but the DC gang, in both US Congress and SCOTUS won’t, cause their in on the gig. Soon, like in Rome, Caesar will disband USCongress, since it is not doing what the puppetmasters want.