We are supposed to be a REPRESENTATIVE Democracy. Term limits put that to bed. If we are not free to chose whom we want simply because they already served x number of terms then we are denied our right to Representation of our choice.
In the words of Samuel Byran, "The authors of the new plan, conscious that it would not stand the test of enlightened patriotism, tyrannically endeavoured to preclude all investigation. If their views were laudable; if they were honest, -- the contrary would have been their conduct, they would have invited the freest discussion. Whatever specious reasons may be assigned for secrecy during the framing of the plan, no good one can exist, for leading the people blindfolded into the implicit adoption of it. Such an attempt does not augar the public good -- It carries on the face of it an intention to judggle the people out of their liberties."
You seem to insist on referring to our government as a REPRESENTATIVE Democracy in the hope of convincing people that this is true. You speak of the right to representation of our choice and yet there are millions of people who do not have representation of their choice because they did not vote in the majority. The hypocrisy of you opposing term limits because it denies you representation of your choice while you support an electoral process that denies other people representation of their choice is truly appalling. Many of those who lived at the time recognized that the Constitution and the system of government proposed by it was not a representative democracy and there are those today who also recognize this but are embarrassed to admit it. The problem with your assertion that we live in a representative democracy because we can choose our representatives when in fact we do not choose our representatives instead those who vote for a specific person choose their representative while everyone else is denied representation based on the outcome. That said, let's look at what really took place at the hands of those who supported the Constitution and ask ourselves why they insisted upon secrecy.
The words of one opponent, "Upon a subject so momentous, the public has a right to the sentiments of every individual that will reason: I therefore do not think any apology necessary for appearing in print; and I hope to avoid, at least, the indiscriminate censure which you have, with so much candor and liberality, thrown on those who will not worship your idol -- "that they are industriously endeavouring to prevent and destroy it, by insidious and clandestine attempts." Give me leave just to suggest, that perhaps these clandestine attempts might have been owning to the terror of your mob, which so nobly endeavoured to prevent all freedom of action and of speech. The reptile Doctor who was employed to blow the trmpet of persecution, would have answered the public reasoning of an opponent, by hounding on him the rage of a deluded populace."
It is important to note what was said here because it shows just the amount of terror and intimidation people who opposed the Constitution endured. They opposed it because they believed in freedom and liberty and men like Madison and Hamilton who believed they had the right to meet in secret and conspire to deprive us of our rights and liberties took it upon themselves to terrorize those who opposed the Constitution and who they "stigmatized as enemies to their country; as monsters, whose existence ought not to be suffered, and the destruction of them and their houses recommended, as meritorious." Note these words, because they are the words of men who were frightened for their lives by those who conspired to draft and to ratify the Constitution. Few of them had the fortitude to stand up and publically declare opposition except under pseudonynyms.
But let us now come to the present and to your words, "f we are not free to chose whom we want simply because they already served x number of terms then we are denied our right to Representation of our choice" which should be soundly condemned. Free minds support term limits in our present system of government because they are absolutely necessary to protect us against those who would do us and our country harm. The faction that opposes term limits does so because they fear the people and the will of the people. They aren't those who believe in REPRESENTATIVE Democracy and only use these words to delude people into believing that their desire is for representation of their choice when in reality it is not representation they desire but the power to rule indefinately that they seek. I condemn your words as tryanny and I'm ashamed that you would think that you could delude others into thinking term limits are bad for representative democracy when they are a necessary step on the road to actually becoming a representative republic.
