Time for 'arms control'

For those who haven't seen it, this is the cover of this week's Newsweek (you know, that magazine that recently was sold for $1... less than the cover price of a single issue...). I have to say, it makes its point well: the question being, "is the modern presidency too much for one man?" While the editorial slant makes it clear this is an apologetic for the disaster of the current administration, it's a fair question.

My answer: yes. Moreover, the presidency was never intended to be as powerful as it's become (neither were the other two branches of the Federal Gubmint, but we'll stay focused here...). Rather than do a few specific things well, as intended under the Constitution, today's Executive Branch has its hands in just about every aspect of daily life -- at the neglect of what it's supposed to be doing. That's why you have Texans taking on narco-infiltrators on our southern border, while our troops are halfway around the world and TSA is trying to figure out how to put a smiley face on airport gate rapes.

I'm just waiting for folks to reach the logical conclusion: if the Feds have their hands all over us (literally), and everything they touch seems to end up a mess, what's the point? The States created the Fed as their agent. We are at a point where all 50 need to tell Washington "we brought you into this world..."

Final thought: whether they intended this connotation or not, depicting Obama as the Hindu god Shiva the Destroyer is a master stroke. Passive-aggressive example of buyer's remorse, perhaps?