>>>Please don't misunderstand me, I don't believe for a second that conservatives can heal the debt situation. Far from it as proven when they were given the reins. We're in a decline and the end is known to any who've studied the history of republics. The question is when. The present leaders in DC and Europe are at best going to slow the decline and at worst accelerate it. I would prefer those in power who would apply the brakes as opposed to gasoline until a game-changing leader who can rally the country to fiscal responsibility pokes their head up. No one comes to mind.
>>
>>And I was thinking I was the only one comparing the west to post-catharge Rome
>>seeing the plebs gain more and more power
>>to abolish the balance of power and establishing a non-republican empire.
>
>Not just Rome but Athens, France, Germany...One could also include Texas and California. The question is which way will we go? Collapse from inside (I just don't see an outside nation taking us by force), revolution, voluntary submission?
Well, Germany was not really a republic long enough when succumbing to Nazi lure.
Athens is more a lesson of how to fight for and try out forms of democracy.
When compared to the US only Rome has a republican history long enough to compare and make sense IMO.
>>And I still say having father son prez, wondering about prez couples
>>and having governour/senator posts often in the same family is a bad way to follow.
>
>Very monarchistic, isn't it? ;)
complete with state level aristocrats.
>Here's an interesting comparisson that raised my eyebrow.
>
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/335141/royal-presidency-mark-steyngranted that the prez is oodles more important, so the comparison is skewed,
the tendency to give more and more of such perks is in line with Rome loosening the strict rules of
consul power for Marius, Sulla and some others before Caesar showed them how that is done.
