Cool Russian :) i love that ♥♥♥ um...i dont speak it :( so could you say that in english?
That each person has a soul that will be reborn
Answer:
Let us assume that Jimmy Carter is an intelligent, decent, hardworking man. Assume, moreover, that he has appointed to his cabinet and sub-cabinet many men and women who are experienced and dedicated. How, then, can a president—certainly no less mentally alert than most past presidents—with many advisers of high caliber, produce such an undistinguished presidency?
It’s a puzzlement. And it cannot be accounted for by most of the explanations currently in vogue, such as: Carter’s an outsider who really doesn’t understand the levers of national governance; or Carter surrounds himself with a “Georgia Mafia” whose weaknesses are the same as his own; or Carter is a bad manager who hasn’t been able to sort out decisions that a president must make from those that should be settled at lower levels; or Congress is so uncontrollable that it will not allow any president to exercise the reins of leadership; or the bureaucracy has grown beyond the span of presidential control; or many of the nation’s problem’s are highly intractable; or even all these reasons taken together—although there is truth in all.
I would like to put forward another theory: The root of the problem is that Jimmy Carter is the first Process President in American history.
“Process President”—using a definition by Aaron Wildavsky and Jack Knott—means that Carter places “greater emphasis on methods, procedures and instruments for making policy than on the content of policy itself.”
Carter is an activist. He wants to do things. Yet his campaign statements should have warned us that save for the human rights thrust in foreign policy, his passion in government is for how things are done, rather than what should be done.
He believes that if the process is good the product will be good. In other words, if he sets up a procedure for making policy that is open, comprehensive (his favorite word), and involves good people, whatever comes out of this pipeline will be acceptable (within certain budgetary limits).
Explanation:
Answer:
Eisenhower's main goals in office were to contain the spread of communism and reduce federal deficits
Explanation:
Answer:
The English Bill of Rights
Explanation:
The Glorious Revolution was when William of Orange took the English throne from James II in 1688. The event brought a permanent realignment of power within the English constitution. A more contentious argument is that the constitutional changes made property rights more secure and thus promoted economic development.
The English Bill of Rights (1689) was drawn up by Parliament and signed by William and Mary in 1689. The bill was conceived to ensure that the power of the monarchy would be, in the future, limited and that Parliament could function free from royal interference.
William and Mary proclaimed joint sovereigns of Britain. The Bill of Rights, which greatly limited royal power and broadened constitutional law, granted Parliament control of finances and the army and prescribed the future line of royal succession, declaring that no Roman Catholic would ever be sovereign of England.
