Overstaying Their Welcome

Who wrote this drivel?

BS Nº 1: "In mature democracies, the answer has been to limit executive terms." Crap. The Most 'mature' of all democracies, the UK, has no term limits, neither does the US Senate. Neither does France, Germany, Spain, etc., etc., etc.

BS nº 2: "Uribe wrangled a constitutional amendment from Congress in 2006 allowing him to serve a second term". Now talk about hiding facts behind the use of language. 'wrangled' actually means in this case 'bribed'. Uribe bribed Yedis Medina whose vote gave him the 2nd term. This was a criminal conspiracy and makes his re-election illegitimate, yet the author is trying to convince us that that's OK in democracy as long as the person who does it is 'our' friend'.

BS Nº 3: "But there is a big difference, experts say, between negotiating an extension with the legislature (which means recognizing checks on presidential power) and harnessing popular passion". Firstly, who are these 'experts' or is this just a nasty underhand way of disguising personal opinion? Secondly, what is being implied here is elitist rubbish that will almost certainly secure the writer his well-paid position as propagandist to power. He implies that institutions run by elites for the elites are a more democratic process than the people's voice. Thirdly, is he trying to tell me that an institution as corrupt as the Colombian Congress where 41 of the 102 Senators have either been investigated or are in detention and 27 of the 166 representatives likewise linked to the paramilitaries, is a 'check on presidential power'? Perhaps someone ought to explain to the author that 'harnessing popular passion' is actually the very essence of democracy and why for example the abstention in the recent European elections is a danger sign showing that the people do not believe in western style democracy where our only function is to decide which group of elites to put into power in the knowledge that they will not represent us in any way at all but the corporations that nurture them. (Phew, nearly ran out of breath there!)

BS Nº 4: "Plebiscites weaken courts and legislatures "at the moment they are most needed," writes Dartmouth democracy scholar John Carey". What chutzpah! Quoting the man behind attempts to undermine democracy in Bolivia and foment separatism, the man behind the designing of the quisling government in Iraq, and using a quote which says that democracy weakens legislatures is truly Orwellian.

BS Nº 5 "THE CONCLUSION: most of the world's stable governments have term limits on the books, but suspending them doesn't end democracy" Most of the worlds stable governments? Name them. In fact as I mentioned previously, they don't have term limits, so the conclusion is shot to pieces.

And the final comment "It matters who dodges them, how and why" just takes the biscuit. It proves the double standards inherent in elitist discourse.