Timmy
Gold Member
- Oct 2, 2015
- 22,432
- 2,836
- 290
People who genuinely want to serve the interests of the United States and protect the Constitution. The real question is, what dirt-bag con-artist will endure the headaches for a temporary job paying $65k per year (answer: nobody).Dude...if you really believe that...I have a ton of land in Florida I would like to sell you. I'll give you one hell of a price on it.We haven't functioned under Constitutional government in over 100 years and you know it. Your disengenous claims otherwise is as absurd as your ideology. If you're going to lie about something CCJ, it needs to be something that we don't know you know.We are currently functioning under Constitutional government – nothing to ‘return to.’
“Cap the job at $65,000” is a ‘solution’ in search of a problem that doesn’t exist.
We have term limits – they’re called elections, reflecting the will of the people, who may elect anyone they wish for as long as they wish.
Once again we see the ignorance and stupidity common to most libertarians and TPM nitwits.
Capping the job at $65,000 will rid Congress of the con-artists who are not looking to serve but rather are looking out for themselves. Of course, you fear this measure because you desperately need those con-artists to push the anti-constitutional agenda that you desire. I understand your fear on this one and can appreciate your healthy fear of it.
If "elections" are "term limits" making term limits unnecessary, why is there a term limit for President of the United States, junior?
Dude , people don't run for congress because of the salary .
Dropping it down wouldnt fix any issue we have now , it makes things worse .
Plus , think of the extra expense to fly around from home to dc all the time .
The majority of the people running for Congress these days are nothing more than con-artists in it for the wealth and the power. Current salary is almost $175,000 and that doesn't include the benefits (like the cadillac pension).
The position should be a burden that people consider a civic duty. It should be akin to jury duty. Can you imagine what would happen if we appointed people to jury duty and paid them nearly $200,000 per year (plus outrageous benefits)? Do you have any idea how corrupt our juries would be as people interested in power and money came out of the wood work to become career jurors?
It's funny because nobody whines about "lobbyists" and how politicians are in their pockets more than the left. Yet when ever anything is proposed that would prevent that, the left mocks it. Why? Because nobody benefits more from lobbyists and corruption than the left. If we limited every Congressman to two years (or at most, two terms of two years), they would have no reason to get in bed with the lobbyists. The only people who need to do that are career politicians who are looking at decades of favors and campaign financing.
If u paid jurors $200k, you'd have much better jurors!
What good candidate is gonna leave his good paying stable job for a shitty paying temporary job?
Umm, no . You'll get shady people who will use the position to get paid in other ways , or rich folk who just want the power .