Talk:Imperial Presidency

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article confused me, because a section called "Criticisms" should be criticisms of the theory of the Imperial Presidency, not the arguements of the theory itself. So I changed the main section title to "Arguements" and added a section for the criticisms of the theory, called "Criticisms." Erikmartin 20:35, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm surprised that this article a) hasn't been updated to include something about Bush and b) doesn't reference Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.'s "Imperial Presidency" (ISBN: 0735100470), which seems to be the classic treatise ont the subject. Unfortunately I'm not competent to do either. Mike Linksvayer 22:58, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Added Schlesinger book ref following example elsewhere. Mike Linksvayer 23:11, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I didn't really understand any of this article at all. It doesn't explain "Imperial Presidency" in a clear manner whatsoever. GravyFish 03:51, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Weaseling

This article seems to talk a lot about allegations about an Imperial Presidency. A rewording of the many of the examples will probably make this a more factual entry. --Janus657 20:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

i agree. the opening paragraph makes no sense and jumps about. it is not made clear at any point what the imperial presidency is 143.167.174.66 20:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC) Tom Sellick

[edit] Ambiguous Page

This article starts with the phrase "Imperial Presidency" and then acknowledges the book and then goes back to the phrase. This page should be split into one page for the phrase and another for the book. Id447 16:26, 31 August 2007 (UTC)