Term Limits for Congress?

....

I also disagree with the current term limits of the President. Personally if the people wanted Clinton to serve 3 or 4 or more terms, that is the right of the people via the vote.

.....
I disagree. Look what happened with FDR. That fucker was a populist who turned this country from a capitalist sanctuary to socialism. The same with Cuomo as Governor of NY. That fucker vetoed the death penalty 13 years in a row. Once these politicians get into power they'll bend and twist the Constitution to suit their need and there are more than enough sheeple to keep electing them. The populace ain't smart enough to take the long view, and will always vote for who will give them what they want in the short term.
 
I disagree. Look what happened with FDR. That fucker was a populist who turned this country from a capitalist sanctuary to socialism. The same with Cuomo as Governor of NY. That fucker vetoed the death penalty 13 years in a row. Once these politicians get into power they'll bend and twist the Constitution to suit their need and there are more than enough sheeple to keep electing them. The populace ain't smart enough to take the long view, and will always vote for who will give them what they want in the short term.

that's probably the funniest statement on the issue... so when people vote Dem they are sheeple but when they vote Repub they are just informed voters?

FDR took this country out of the great depression. His policies have sustained a great many citizens my dear.
 
that's probably the funniest statement on the issue... so when people vote Dem they are sheeple but when they vote Repub they are just informed voters?

FDR took this country out of the great depression. His policies have sustained a great many citizens my dear.
thats kinda funny

isnt that exactly what your side has been claiming for 2000 and 2004?
 
that's probably the funniest statement on the issue... so when people vote Dem they are sheeple but when they vote Repub they are just informed voters?

FDR took this country out of the great depression. His policies have sustained a great many citizens my dear.

And yet the Democrats that created Social Security continue to refuse to ear mark the taxes collected for it just for that. They Continue to use those funds robbing future retirees of the social program they created.

Republicans have tried to freeze the funds to no avail and they have tried to remove the money from Government control to be robbed and pillaged to no avail.

Before Bush every Democrat was agreed SS was gonna fail by 2020. As soon as the Republicans took over and ACTUALLY offered means to prevent a future failure? Why the dems all claimed Social Security was a rock solid program with no problems at all.
 
When you limit terms of Congressmen, you end up making the bureacrats more powerful.

Why?

Because some of the stuff Congress oversees is so damned complex that it takes years in place to really understand what is going on.

Now this is not my argument for why we should not limit terms, it's just a warning about the inevitable blowback that will happen if we did.
 
I disagree. Look what happened with FDR. That fucker was a populist who turned this country from a capitalist sanctuary to socialism. The same with Cuomo as Governor of NY. That fucker vetoed the death penalty 13 years in a row. Once these politicians get into power they'll bend and twist the Constitution to suit their need and there are more than enough sheeple to keep electing them. The populace ain't smart enough to take the long view, and will always vote for who will give them what they want in the short term.

Anyone out there think Karl Rove could get Georgie-boy a third term if it was legal?

-J
 
Lobbyist set up shop in DC and stay for every.. there would be a freshmen crop of legislators possibly every two years... That pixar movie with the sharks comes to mind...

Now dont get my wrong.. most in washington wouldnt know dick without lobbyists.. there is a place for them.. I'd just rather not see them more powerfull than my legislators..

Because a) congressmen know their constituents and that takes more than a couple of years. b) people generally like their OWN representatives even when they hate congress as a whole; and c) if new people were constantly running for office, they wouldn't be known commodities, so it would be difficult to raise grassroots campaign $$...which would open them up to influence by the same lobbyists and corrupting influences that you're concerned about.

At least someone who's been in congress for a while can tell thm to piss off and he'll win with or without the lobbyists b/c he's got the power of incumbancy and name-recognition.

That's just IMO... but it's how I see it. Plus, when their are term limits, local pols just switch jobs... and someone who should be in the legislature ends up a judge and someone who should be a judge ends up in congress...etc.

Valid points... How then can we fix our legislature with its 9% approval rating?

-J
 
In order for that to happen, they'd have to stop focusing on wedge issues.

By 'wedge issues', I assume that you mean abortion, racism, church / state, etc?

Do you propose that these issues be handed to the states? What are the issues that you see as the responsibility of the federal level?

-Joe
 
that's probably the funniest statement on the issue... so when people vote Dem they are sheeple but when they vote Repub they are just informed voters?

FDR took this country out of the great depression. His policies have sustained a great many citizens my dear.

Wow- read the true economic history. FDR's policies extended the Depression for years past what a market correction would have. In fact the only thing that ended it was WWII.
 
I'd love to see Bush have to go up against Bill Clinton. ;)

Clinton would have won. And if he didn't he would have easily won in 2004. In 2004 the democrats picked a loser. Bush should have lost. No one really wanted him for a second term until the choice was Kerry or Bush.

Now personally I think Clinton would have been a good president for 9/11 also, though not Gore. Clinton proved several times in his 2 terms he was willing to make hard decisions and use real military might when needed.
 
Personally I think that if Billy Bob let the Axis of Evil know that his darling wife had the nuclear football their sphincters would pucker up so tight that they wouldn't dare screw around. :badgrin:
 
Clinton would have won. And if he didn't he would have easily won in 2004. In 2004 the democrats picked a loser. Bush should have lost. No one really wanted him for a second term until the choice was Kerry or Bush.

Now personally I think Clinton would have been a good president for 9/11 also, though not Gore. Clinton proved several times in his 2 terms he was willing to make hard decisions and use real military might when needed.

Damn... I agree... although I'm not sure Gore wouldn't have done what was necessary. Kerry might have been one of the worst possible choices to run last time. Not a bad guy... but tarnish that let the issues get swallowed up.... didn't know how to fight back.

I knew Gore was done when I heard his convention speech.... "the people versus the powerful?!?!?!?!" WTF???? Donna Brazile needed a brain transplant for that one.
 

Forum List

Back
Top