pull down to refresh
42 sats \ 4 replies \ @jbschirtzinger 2 Oct \ parent \ on: The Complicated Legacy of Andrew Jackson’s Bank War econ
I don't see that he had much of an option. He was battling the BellSouth of the era, and that ordeal was resolved by busting into smaller bells that are now trying to re-join together. If a body wanted to stop that, they'd have to use some manner of uni-lateral executive power.
Isn't that sort of ends-means reasoning what leads to executive overreach?
reply
The truth of the office of the president is that it has no executive overreach if something looks to be the cause of jeopardizing the Union. The Civil War made that clear if nothing else was made evident.
reply
I think that's the principle that's being called into question, though.
Just because it is that way, doesn't mean it ought to be.
reply
It is the way it must be. A head without a body is useless.
reply