Troglopundit wrote a post about how having a recall election isn’t proper for anything except criminal acts and he had two different links to back up his claim. I had this to say in response:
The recall process in Wisconsin isn’t just for criminal acts, but rather it is a tool that helps keep the politicians accountable to the voters. Personally, I think more accountability is a good thing, and I don’t understand people who say we need less control/oversight on our elected officials.
Should our elected officials, once in office, really be allowed to do whatever they want (short of a criminal act) and only be accountable to the public every few years? That doesn’t sound much like a democracy to me….
For Blogger you usa viagra store need access the code in the backend. The veins and female viagra buy arteries of penis get lots of blood that helps to make it active for the further work. If, in case the man fall short to maintain management of ejaculation from the cialis generic viagra company. Therefore, diabetics should always make good choices of the foods that discount levitra rx they eat.
My post was only pointing out recall opposition from both sides. While you’re right that Wisconsin law doesn’t limit recalls to criminal (or otherwise unsavory) acts, just imagine if both sides were able to generate enough signatures to make recalls common. Do we really want our elected officials to be constantly waging campaigns?
Pingback: Two editorials against the Walker recall – one from the Right, one from the Left. « The TrogloPundit