How would you respond...

[ColbertWatcher]

...to a GOP family member, friend or co-worker who says there is nothing wrong with a "Unitary Executive"?

They might not use the term "Unitary Executive"; they may only refer to the idea, but they believe they are supposed to support it.

For many of us, we have a GOP family member, friend or co-worker who might not be as informed as we on DU are. Having a conversation about something as complicated as the "Unitary Executive" may include first defining it.

We had the hearing today, and even the partisan GOP members of the committee seemed to believe there's nothing wrong with the "Unitary Executive". Of course, we all know they're playing at ignorance to maintain their status as victims of a "power-mad" Democratic congress headed by an impeachment-hungry Pelosi.

So, I guess this question is in multiple parts.

Supposing you were to have the "Unitary Executive is unConstitutional" conversation with the one GOP family member, friend or co-worker who seems on the brink of enlightenment, what would it sound like?

How would you go about defining it? Explaining the Constitutionality of it all? How would you explain all the Dumbya abuses in trying to achieve it?

I know this may be a bit much for a Friday night, but I'm trying to make up for not including the hearing in my weekly "Most Important News Story" poll.

Thank you ahead of time for your participation.

[billyoc]

1. "Interesting. Say, did anybody catch the impeachment hearings today?"

:rofl:

[ColbertWatcher]

7. But, what if they said they didn't see it?

Nor did they see it covered in the nightly news program they habitually follow.

What would you say then?

[proud patriot]

2. I would reccomend they read the Constitution

and brush up on US Government 101 you take it in high school.

We have 3 CO EQUAL branches of government .

[ColbertWatcher]

8. What would you say then...

...when they bring up that Dumbya "only wanted to protect Americans from terrorists"?

I'm playing Devil's Advocate, of course.

[Jackpine Radical]

26. Oh, crap. Godwin's Law again. Here goes-

All Hitler wanted to do was save Germany from the Communists and all the other foreigners who were destroying Germany with reparations.

[proud patriot]

43. Call them cowardly , tell them they dishonor the troops who

are fighting and putting their lives on the line to
protect and defend the Constitution .

I might do it more politely in mixed company but my message would
they same .

[Warpy]

3. I'd remind them that our form of government

has three equal branches so that one man or even one party could never become too powerful.

Then ask them how they will feel if the next president is a closet socialist who starts to nationalize every company they have in their 401K portfolio. Remind them that the unitary executive is powerful enough to do just that.

[ColbertWatcher]

10. Make it personal. I like that tactic.

But, what if they say they would be okay losing some rights for more security from terra!

I'm playing Devil's Advocate, of course.

[Warpy]

25. That's why you make it personal

because those are the only terms they can understand these things in.

"Losing rights" is too abstract. After all, they don't think they're using those rights since they agree with the lunatics in power, won't miss 'em. Terra isn't abstract because they saw all those pictures on the telly for days after 9/11. That's real to them even though they didn't directly experience it.

However, telling them the unitary executive after a change of power can cost them money, that they can relate to. Reminding them that the unitary executive ordered the NG and Blackwater to confiscate every gun they found in NOLA after Katrina is something they can relate to, something a runaway right wing did.

[ColbertWatcher]

27. True. Their world is very small and rarely goes beyond themselves. n/t

[proud patriot]

44. they might feel more comfortable in a Different country

whose laws are all based on fear .. like let's say hmmm China ?

[Mojambo]

4. See Federalist Papers. n/t

[ColbertWatcher]

11. That's a lot of reading. Do you have any particular Federalist Paper in mind? n/t

[Mojambo]

14. I believe Federalist #47 deals with separation of powers.

Madison,

"The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."

[ColbertWatcher]

19. I like that.

That's so good, I had to look it up:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._47

Thank you.

[Mojambo]

20. No prob. n/t

[Tangerine LaBamba]

5. I'd tell them that

"unitary executive" is a term made up by the current administration to cover their raping of the Constitution and the cooperation of the Congress in that assault, much as the term "surge," which really means "escalation," was employed to distract the country from the reality of said escalation.

Then, when they were properly confused, I'd hit them with a quaint concept found in our Constitution known as "checks and balances."

After that, I'd smoke a good cigar, enjoy a sip or two of brandy, and wait for someone to come in and clean up what's left after their heads explode.

[ColbertWatcher]

12. All in a day's work, LOL. But, what will you do tomorrow? n/t

[Union Thug]

6. Wasn't there something about the tyranny of monarchy that

pushed people to traverse dangerous seas and create a little start-up country that has a constitution and a bill of rights? I seem to remember something about it. Maybe y'all can help out.

[ColbertWatcher]

13. So, you'd play stupid? And make them explain to you why Unitary Executive is bad.

I would love to see that on YouTube!

[Union Thug]

18. I can't take credit ..

for that idea! It's a good one. I was just being knee-jerk sarcastic. :-)

[noamnety]

9. I would just say

when we have those in other countries, we call them dictators.

[stillcool]

15. Now that's a good answer.

[ColbertWatcher]

17. That's a good one.

I'm not sure what the rejoinder from a GOPher would sound like.

What if they ask you about Congress rolling over? What if they say Congress made the Unitary Executive?

[noamnety]

22. Congress didn't write all those signing statements. (nt)

[ColbertWatcher]

24. Now you've made your mother cry. What do you have to say for yourself?

Assuming this conversation is with your militant GOP mother.

Substitute "mother" with whoever you're having the conversation with, of course. And note the sarcasm.

[noamnety]

38. I didn't make her cry.

Congress did it. :P

[ColbertWatcher]

40. Freakin' Pelosi! n/t

[opihimoimoi]

16. Victims of the Stockholm Syndrome, they don't know any better.

[ColbertWatcher]

21. But, would they recognize their own ignorance?

And once recognizing it, overcome it?

They are GOPhers after all.

[opihimoimoi]

23. Pain is a good indicator sumpthins not right.l..the GOP Pain now in the Land of ours

is such many many peeps are beginning to respond to the stimulus by waking up from the semi coma.....

Some will recognize they were abused and make effort to escape the mental Prison of the GOP...by themselves...

others will need assistance/therapy The degree of brain damage being that deep....

Come, we go find some really good GROUP THERAPISTS....

[ColbertWatcher]

28. A little bit of DU can cure what ails ya! n/t

[opihimoimoi]

41. I only wish...the level of SHEEPISM is DEEP....like they wanna believe so much...they do...

Check out Laura Ingram...the woman on FOX...she is anti Bama big time...always looking for the BAD,,,nit picking all the way...never POSITIVE always Neg....they perpetuate Dumbness....

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

29. Simple. I'd say, "if you don't want a democracy, why are you living in the U.S.A."?

They don't "understand" what a unitary executive means because THEY DON'T WANT TO UNDERSTAND. They want someone to tell them what to support and what to reject and tend to gravitate towards those places where there are people directing them what to perceive rather than present knowledge or encourage REASON.

So,...keep it simple and don't bother arguing because it's absolutely useless to argue with someone too lazy to even TRY to think.

[ColbertWatcher]

30. I've always liked making the GOPhers the ones to answer for stuff.

I've always hated when I watch some random Dem spokesperson on TV being led around by a fast-talking GOPher. Always trying to answer the GOP's questions. Never able to make them answer for their shit.

[annabanana]

31. Unitary Executive = King. . . .n/t

[ColbertWatcher]

33. Do you think that would sway one of the people in the OP? n/t

[muntrv]

32. If the founding fathers wanted a unitary executive, they would have stayed

with King George III.

[ColbertWatcher]

36. The GOP do love their euphemisms! n/t

[shadowknows69]

34. I don't think you'd like my answer

It involves their head and a toilet. My own version of waterboarding if you will.

[ColbertWatcher]

35. LOL! n/t

[Ichingcarpenter]

37. The lines are drawn on the battle before us

As it was before in time between families through the ages.

You can make a stance with love or hate. Unfortunately,
they use anger, emotional and irrational thought
to prove their points and try to draw you in like the
media they watch.

I have seen this in Vietnam war and see it again now.
My dad back then told me he didn't want another nigger in the
family, when talking about my brother....... Now, is now

FREEDOM......... was a railroad in many peoples minds that became a reality.

[Ichingcarpenter]

39. Who knows where the times go, I do not count the time ...... its only Castles burning

Don't let it bring you down, find someone who
turning, and you will come around.


How can the birds know?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbpURBJA4uA


Castles burning
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMQyWOTOCvk

[ColbertWatcher]

42. Saturday night kick. n/t

[JNelson6563]

45. What's the difference between that

and a monarch?

Of course I'm sure these same folks will feel the same when it's President Obama, right?

Julie