But I Went to Harvard Law School!

[pegwinn]

And the Supreme Court made the CORRECT decision. I personally would vote for a repel of the amendment that limits the president BUT in the end that limit was made BY an Amendment. The people agreed to it.

Did the people really agree? I wasn't around then, but I wonder what a review of the records would show. "The people" are not included in the equation. The State Legislatures are. But, unless there is a record of referendums via special elections, I seriously doubt that <a title="Mr. or Mrs. Middle Class USA"><u>McUSA </u></a>had anything to say in the matter.

Believe it or not, I respect your opinion on the matter. But, I have my doubts on your premise that the people are the ones in charge of it.

 

[jillian]

Did the people really agree? I wasn't around then, but I wonder what a review of the records would show. "The people" are not included in the equation. The State Legislatures are. But, unless there is a record of referendums via special elections, I seriously doubt that <a title="Mr. or Mrs. Middle Class USA"><u>McUSA </u></a>had anything to say in the matter.

Believe it or not, I respect your opinion on the matter. But, I have my doubts on your premise that the people are the ones in charge of it.

Personally, I hate term limits... sounds too much like we can't be trusted to vote for whom we want.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Personally, I hate term limits... sounds too much like we can't be trusted to vote for whom we want.

Absolutely. Federal posts that are elected are already term limited... by US the voters. That is how it should work. I did not really like having Clinton for President BUT I would have voted for elimination of Presidential term limits even if I KNEW he would be president for ever.

The people decide by voting. If the people want Ted Kennedy as their Senator till he dies, guess what? That is the right and power of the people of Massachussetts to do and it is none of my business in NC. I do though get to make fun of them for making that choice )....

 

[jillian]

See.... something even we can agree on.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

See.... something even we can agree on.

I suspect we agree on a number of things, but we are not here to pat each other on the back...

I bet we agree on this too.... No one has any real rights if EVERYONE , regardless of any condition of color, race, religion,sex, sexual orientation or financial status does not in fact have the same rights.

 

[jillian]

I suspect we agree on a number of things, but we are not here to pat each other on the back...

I bet we agree on this too.... No one has any real rights if EVERYONE , regardless of any condition of color, race, religion,sex, sexual orientation or financial status does not in fact have the same rights.

I think its important sometimes to acknowledge the agreements. Part of the problem with this country now, as I see it, is that we've been so conditioned in our responses to "the other side" that we forget that ultimately, people want the same things, they just have different ways of going about it.

And, as you put it, I can't see anything to find fault with in what you said. Now why do I think it's a trick question?

 

[AllieBaba]

I don't think people want the same things. I've met and talked with many people who actually want bad things to happen to people who don't agree with them. And I'm not talking about wishing harm on others who might cause harm. I mean wishing actual, physical harm to people because they don't agree on things like homosexual marriage, or abortion, or the military. I actually had somebody who claimed to be a gay advocate tell me they hoped I had a homosexual child, since I hated homosexuals so much. (I don't hate them, btw). They were so rabid about the fact that I didn't agree with them, they were okay with the thought of putting a child in a home which (according to them) they wouldn't be loved, in order to punish me. I've had all sorts of horrible things (including torture, death, death of my children, general unhappiness) wished upon me because I'm Christian, as well.

The point I'm making is...we don't all want the same things. I don't wish harm on people who don't agree with me, unless those people pose an actual physical threat to myself or others. And even with those people, I don't have personal hatred towards them. And I don't believe there are many, if any, on this board who harbor actual hatred towards those who don't agree with them. But there are people who do feel that way in the big wide world. Many of them, oddly, are writers and journalists.

And honestly, you should never forget it. If you do, you forget how important it is to be diligent in your own beliefs, and to always consider what is truly right and good...otherwise you slip into thinking everybody else is considering it, which lets you off the hook, and lowers the barre....

 

[jillian]

You're on an issue that I wasn't really touching upon. By "we all want the same things", I mean, we all want to be healthy, happy, put food on our table, see our children educated and doing better than their parents. I believe those things are true and if we remember that and leave the wedge issues behind, then our society would be much healthier.

The other stuff you're talking about, well, you might see it, I really can't relate to it. I don't know anyone who wishes harm to people simply because of different political ideology. A homosexual child isn't wishing harm, btw. But, I can see where that might have offended you. Me? I'd prefer my son be heterosexual because life is easier when you are. Plus, I'd really like grandchildren someday.

But perhaps one shouldn't tell a gay activist that being gay is a choice and a sin and their behavior is abberant. I could see where that might piss THEM off.

 

[AllieBaba]

That's what I'm saying. Everybody DOESN'T want those things, Jillian. There are many, many people who don't want what's best for their kids or anybody elses, who don't care if there's food on the table or not. But if your existence has been so sheltered that you've never seen it, then there's nothing more I can really say that will make any difference.

And as I explained already, the point of wishing the homosexual child on me isn't evidence of my antipathy, it's evidence of the antipathy of the person who did it. Because despite the fact they said they loved everyone, they were wishing that because they thought mistakenly that I would be hurt..and they didn't care one bit about the hypothetical child being placed in a home where they thought they wouldn't be loved.

But of course you missed the whole point because you've got your own agenda, and that's all you care about. Typical. I wasn't making a point about homosexuality or anything else. But hey, thanks for pointing out that I must deserve whatever I get.

Jerk.

 

[jillian]

I know what you were saying. And I think it's an absurd way to look at the world. Yes, we want our kids to do better. The fact that you think some don't is more a reflection on your attitudes than anyone else's.

I have no agenda, sweetie. Was merely pointing out that when pointing out others' sins, one might expect a little resentment in return. Doesn't make it right, but it is truth. Perhaps he was wishing you some empathy, something sorely lacking from your posts.

Thanks for the opinion.... now kindly relay yours to someone who might actually care about what you think.

 

[AllieBaba]

Not only are you a jerk, you're a blind jerk if you honestly believe everybody wants nothing but happiness and joy for the children of the world, sweetie.

 

[jillian]

Not only are you a jerk, you're a blind jerk if you honestly believe everybody wants nothing but happiness and joy for the children of the world, sweetie.

Where did I say children of the world.

Try again... I said "THEIR CHILDREN"... meaning we each want our own children to do better.

I know comprehension is tough. Do try.

 

[AllieBaba]

... By "we all want the same things", I mean, we all want to be healthy, happy, put food on our table, see our children educated and doing better than their parents. I believe those things are true
......I don't know anyone who wishes harm to people simply because of different political ideology...

Sorry, I read "we all" to mean..."everybody". Or, "we all". Which is everybody. Snookie.

I know comprehension is tough. Do try.

 

[jillian]

Cute... got caught misreading and getting snarky for no reason and now want to claim that *I* didn't comprehend my own sentence?

LOL... damn you're funny.

But I know how much it means to you to have the last work, so have fun, honey child, some of us have to go back to work now.

 

[AllieBaba]

I don't know what you comprehend of your own sentence, but I know what you said.

And what you said, more than once, is that we all want what's best for all our children and our families, dollface.

Then you said you didn't mean the world's children.

You're left with no meaning at all. Must be nappie-time for wee little baby.

 

[pegwinn]

Personally, I hate term limits... sounds too much like we can't be trusted to vote for whom we want.

Tell it to Congress. They did it to FDR. I like term limits because the longer one stays in a position of power the farther removed they are from the people that they allegedly work for. Eventually you end up with elitists who really do believe that they are better than the great unwashed.

Speaking of Congress, I would expect that to be the one place where you would not be afraid to send your kids to work.....

Absolutely. Federal posts that are elected are already term limited... by US the voters. That is how it should work. I did not really like having Clinton for President BUT I would have voted for elimination of Presidential term limits even if I KNEW he would be president for ever.

The people decide by voting. If the people want Ted Kennedy as their Senator till he dies, guess what? That is the right and power of the people of Massachussetts to do and it is none of my business in NC. I do though get to make fun of them for making that choice )....

Glad to see you clarified it by states. Any idea why so many people don't bother to vote? And, are you sure you even have the right to vote?

See.... something even we can agree on.

Hallelujah.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Tell it to Congress. They did it to FDR. I like term limits because the longer one stays in a position of power the farther removed they are from the people that they allegedly work for. Eventually you end up with elitists who really do believe that they are better than the great unwashed.

Speaking of Congress, I would expect that to be the one place where you would not be afraid to send your kids to work.....



Glad to see you clarified it by states. Any idea why so many people don't bother to vote? And, are you sure you even have the right to vote?



Hallelujah.

What is in the water now adays, seeing black helicopters too I see.

 

[pegwinn]

What is in the water now adays, seeing black helicopters too I see.

Now Now be civil. We don't want the Gunny having to close the bar and throw us out. Did you click the link or just get some PT by jumping to a conclusion?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Now Now be civil. We don't want the Gunny having to close the bar and throw us out. Did you click the link or just get some PT by jumping to a conclusion?

Ohh I went there all right, another site devoted to how we are all helpless and being used. That somehow the system we have had for the ENTIRE history of our country is a bad one. The reason we have bad politicians is because the PEOPLE vote for them. No one forces them to do so. No one forces them to reelect crappy people to office. They CHOSE to do so. And in fact your site would in fact encourage the original fear of our fore fathers, that we the people are to STUPID to run our Government and be trusted to elect Presidents or Senators. That only the "special" should vote.

Term limits is a crutch to paint over the fact the people sometimes are to dumb to be trusted to elect the right people. It is an unneed crutch designed to protect us from ourselves. We are and have always been a representative republic. There has never been any law or requirement that the people we elect be frozen into indecision while waiting to hear what the people want. We elect them and they make decisions based on what they think is best , for good or bad. What is supposed to happen is if they make BAD decision we vote their asses OUT of office.

What is supposed to happen is we learn what they think and how they will probably act after we vote them in. BEFORE we vote for them. And we take into consideration at reelection if they did as we felt was reasonable and acceptable, whether they listened to us enough to rate being reelected.

Term limits is just a crutch to protect us from being stupid and lazy. And when we do find the right people it is a club to beat us with for being stupid and lazy and creating term limits.

 

[pegwinn]

Ohh I went there all right, another site devoted to how we are all helpless and being used. Wow, talk about hidden messages. I wrote it and don't remember that passage. Perhaps you could quote and link?

That somehow the system we have had for the ENTIRE history of our country is a bad one. Same as above. Feel free to quote it outright. Hell, I will be generous and tell you to pick any post and quote it. Let's face a fact of life, our system may be the best we have, but it is corrupt.

The reason we have bad politicians is because the PEOPLE vote for them. No one forces them to do so. No one forces them to reelect crappy people to office. They CHOSE to do so. See, we can agree on something.

And in fact your site would in fact encourage the original fear of our fore fathers, that we the people are to STUPID to run our Government and be trusted to elect Presidents or Senators. That only the "special" should vote. It wasn't a fear of the forefathers guns, it was a fact. You might want to stop here and double check your history as well as the constitution. Those same forefathers explicitly did not write in a "right to vote" in the constitution.

Term limits is a crutch to paint over the fact the people sometimes are to dumb to be trusted to elect the right people. Who said anyone was too dumb yadablahetc? I suspect this is your opinion and you cannot source it.

It is an unneed crutch designed to protect us from ourselves. See the above please.

We are and have always been a representative republic. There has never been any law or requirement that the people we elect be frozen into indecision while waiting to hear what the people want. Whereever did you get the idea that I said or wrote anything counter to that?

We elect them and they make decisions based on what they think is best , for good or bad. What is supposed to happen is if they make BAD decision we vote their asses OUT of office. I'd say they make decisions on what they think are in thier own best interests. I agree on what is supposed to happen. What are the odds on an incumbent being voted out? Here, let me help you out:

In November of 1998, 401 of the 435 sitting members of the U.S. House of Representatives sought reelection. Of those 401, all but six were reelected. In other words, incumbents seeking reelection to the House had a better than 98% success rate. U.S. Senators seeking reelection were only slightly less fortunate--slightly less than 90% of the Senate incumbents who sought reelection in 1996 held on to their seats. SOURCE

What is supposed to happen is we learn what they think and how they will probably act after we vote them in. BEFORE we vote for them. And we take into consideration at reelection if they did as we felt was reasonable and acceptable, whether they listened to us enough to rate being reelected. No argument there. How often do you really think that happens?

Term limits is just a crutch to protect us from being stupid and lazy. And when we do find the right people it is a club to beat us with for being stupid and lazy and creating term limits. I would say it is a tool as opposed to a crutch. A crutch allows you to do something you cannot do on your own. A tool allows you to do someting that you can do, better. Term Limits ensure that no one gets so entrenched that they are virtually impossible to vote out as they become a corrupt piece of the system

All pols are compromised by the system. If Mr. Smith went to Washinton today he would not get reelected and would be ineffective during his tenure.