In the term "checks and balances" -- what is the difference between a "check" and a "balance"

Question

... as used in the context of seperation of powers in the constitution.

Answer 1

A check is the ability of one branch of government to over-ride another branch (sort of like scissors paper, rock), Presidential veto, the ability of Congress to override a veto and the ability for the Supreme Court to declare a law unconstitutional. The balance is that the President can propose (but not make) and lobby for laws, Congress can change the Constitution (to make an unconstitutional law Constitutional), but it is VERY difficult to change the Constitution, so it is hard to change a Supreme Court decision (and requires a super majority of state legislatures to ratify such a change).

Answer 2

Checks and balances just means that everyones viewpoint is heard. The house checks the senate and the senate checks the house and they balance each other to make up our congress. Congress checks the President.

One can not operate without the other. All have to be in agreement. A law starts as a Bill in either the house or senate. The senate has to approve of it with a majority rule, then it is sent to the house. The house approves then it is sent to the President. If the President approves it is made into Law. One does not operate without the other.

Believe it or not, the original founding fathers wanted 2 presidents at a time. It never was brought forth because with the times being so tumultuous, they just wanted a unified country and knew the individual states would not accept the Constitution with 2 presidents so they let it go.

Congress was supposed to have the most power with the President only being it's spokesman. Boy how things have changed, wouldn't you agree?

Answer 3

Nah there is no fine line between scripted and fake, its just a nicer way of saying its fake. But the godzilla movies were guess what..... SCRIPTED YAY SCRIPTED, and that obviously ain't real. Well in 30 years who knows maybe with advancement in technology Godzilla could be real but probably not. Look when people refer to wrestling as fake, they aren't saying the injuries are fake but just the general way pro wrestling works is fake. There are still fake storylines and fake characters that every indulges in so I don't see the need to try and establish it as "real" anymore. Its not worth the time just let the trolls blast it. You asked if there is a fine line between scripted and fake, but there isn't. Scripted just goes with the OUTCOME of the match and the storyline put around it, which you know of course you know they are scripting a fake ending and a fake storyline. But they aren't scripting the whole match. Because for the most part most matches aren't fully planned or scripted its two wrestlers who go out there improvise a match till they can get it to the ending that was planned. So whats scripted is of course scripted to happen so its not a true real ending its fake. You even said it yourself the injuries aren't scripted and you want to know why the injuries aren't scripted because injuries are real not fake(the ones that aren't "faked and scripted anyway). You basically answered yourself at the end of what you put down on the question.