Term Limits Amendment

[Boss]

Only a fool would support term limits. Most politicians are criminals. The only thing that limits the level of their criminality is the knowledge that they have to run for reelection. If they didn't have to worry about that, they would just get into office and do their worst. Because they wouldn't have to worry about getting elected again.

Well I guess 75% of the country are fools because that's how many support it. Your rationale sounds retarded. No one is proposing we elect people to lifetime terms. They would have two terms as a Senator and/or three terms as a Representative but they would have to be re-elected for each term. What they could no longer do is build up these massive campaign war chests and entrench themselves in office for 40 years or more because they become too powerful to defeat.

 

[Boss]

The amendment would limit U.S. senators to two six-year terms and members of the U.S. House of Representatives to three two-year terms. don't think this dog will hunt. all this will do is discourage young newbies. who want's a short career like that?? what's the current retirement age?? that'll work IMO

I don't really give a shit who it encourages to be honest. If you care about the country and want to help the people of the district or state you're from by going to Washington and serving as their representative, and doing this with honor and integrity... that's what I care about. It's not supposed to be a "career" that's the problem now!

And again, if you don't think the dog will hunt, you're among the 13% who oppose this. 74% of us favor it. Maybe you need to revisit your priorities?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

PLEASE,

THIS is simply for SHOW

NOTHING will ever come of it...

EVER.

they would never ever get enough votes to pass this amendment in congress and the senate, let alone the 2/3's of the states...

it's another waste of time and tax payer's money, ALL FOR NOTHING.

AND as mentioned earlier, STOP campaign donations, then they can't be BOUGHT.... go to gvt funded elections.

easy peasy

this act of cruz's is just a gimmick, to get us off the track of eliminating the real corruption, lobbyists and their money

What makes you think state representatives would not vote for federal term limits? It would be in their best interests.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I believe President Trump would sign it.

But I also understand that it will never pass either house or senate.

Also I don't believe there's any existing mechanism for a public vote on term limits but hope I am wrong.

Presidents do not sign Constitutional Amendments. They cannot veto them either.

 

[Dr Grump]

Well, we agree to disagree. I still say your MMA and Judo analogy works in my favour - they are both martial arts. BTW, I do mean democracy in the general sense, not the term you are defininig. As I said, all western countries are democracies, and the only one I can think of that meets your description is Switzerland -even that's a maybe. Remember, western Europe at the time of your FF was mainly made up of absolute monarchies. That is no longer the case.

Well, no, my analogy doesn't work in your favor, it works in my favor which is why I presented it. I've already carefully and patiently explained why the US is not a true democracy. I've given you several specific examples to demonstrate how we are not a democracy but rather a republic. Our form of government is (little r) republican not democratic. Our founding fathers did not want a democratic government. They feared democratic government and specifically established us as a republic. It's in the Constitution that we are a Republic. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say we're a democracy, in fact, the word is not even in the Constitution.

We're not debating other countries or what other countries call themselves. Anyone can call themselves anything they please. China calls themselves a Republic... doesn't mean shit. They're not a Republic. North Korea calls themselves a "Democratic Republic" and they're neither a democracy or a republic. So we can't compare what WE are to what other people call themselves.

Now you say you mean "democracy in the general sense." Well, in the general sense, a democracy is governed by the will of the people exclusively. We're not. If we were, Hillary Clinton would be president.

Words morph over time. I note you use the term 'pure' democracy.

As for mentioning other countries, I think you are missing my point. Using your analogy, none of them are democracies, however, they all consider themselves such. You are getting too caught up in the minutiae of what the word means.

Bottom line: you are a western democracy. Whether you like it or not. Your chinese and NK analogies are red herrings. They are both communist forms of govt. We're not talking about how countries anoint themselves. I'm talking dictionary definitions.

And no, you MMA example is way off base...and helps my argument.

 

[Boss]

Words morph over time. I note you use the term 'pure' democracy.

As for mentioning other countries, I think you are missing my point. Using your analogy, none of them are democracies, however, they all consider themselves such. You are getting too caught up in the minutiae of what the word means.

Bottom line: you are a western democracy. Whether you like it or not. Your chinese and NK analogies are red herrings. They are both communist forms of govt. We're not talking about how countries anoint themselves. I'm talking dictionary definitions.

And no, you MMA example is way off base...and helps my argument.

Well now you're trying to wiggle around what you said and I won't have it. I did not use the term "pure democracy" ...I said "true democracy." Maybe you think that means the same thing? It's still not the term I used. If we can't go by a solid definition of what words mean then this conversation is pointless. When you can "morph" words into whatever you feel like on the fly, then you can say virtually anything and be correct.

I agree, many people call us a "western democracy" but that is incorrect. That's the point we're arguing. Going strictly by the dictionary definition, if we were a true democracy, Hillary Clinton would be our president. No? Go read the definition of democracy again!

The MMA analogy is perfect because it illustrates how something can contain certain elements of something else without being that thing. Our form of government uses certain elements of democracy but we're not a democracy. I've explained several ways in which we are not a true democracy, and I've now done that numerous times but you still insist on arguing. You haven't refuted any of the points I've made so now you want to carve yourself out an escape plan and proclaim victory. Sorry, I'm not going to allow you to do that. I have no sympathy for you because you chose to argue an unwinnable point. This has obviously now become a matter of pride for you which is why you're trying desperately to denigrate my analogies and demagogue.

The point is, we are not, nor have we ever been, a true democracy. You can CALL us that but you're incorrect. You can call us an oligarchy or plutocracy as well, some people do. It doesn't make them right.

 

[Dr Grump]

Well now you're trying to wiggle around what you said and I won't have it. I did not use the term "pure democracy" ...I said "true democracy." Maybe you think that means the same thing? It's still not the term I used. If we can't go by a solid definition of what words mean then this conversation is pointless. When you can "morph" words into whatever you feel like on the fly, then you can say virtually anything and be correct.

I agree, many people call us a "western democracy" but that is incorrect. That's the point we're arguing. Going strictly by the dictionary definition, if we were a true democracy, Hillary Clinton would be our president. No? Go read the definition of democracy again!

The MMA analogy is perfect because it illustrates how something can contain certain elements of something else without being that thing. Our form of government uses certain elements of democracy but we're not a democracy. I've explained several ways in which we are not a true democracy, and I've now done that numerous times but you still insist on arguing. You haven't refuted any of the points I've made so now you want to carve yourself out an escape plan and proclaim victory. Sorry, I'm not going to allow you to do that. I have no sympathy for you because you chose to argue an unwinnable point. This has obviously now become a matter of pride for you which is why you're trying desperately to denigrate my analogies and demagogue.

The point is, we are not, nor have we ever been, a true democracy. You can CALL us that but you're incorrect. You can call us an oligarchy or plutocracy as well, some people do. It doesn't make them right.

True, pure - same thing
I'm not wiggling out of anything. You don't get to decide on what the term means. Linguistic experts do. And they agree with me. End of story. At the beginning of this debate I posted the dictionary definition, which again, agrees with me.

You can stamp your feet and cry and demand that people see your point of view all you want. You are wrong. The US is a form of a democracy.

And no, MMA and judo are both martial arts albeit different types. For an example of my point - the US and USA are both forms of democracy albeit different types.

 

[Boss]

True, pure - same thing
I'm not wiggling out of anything. You don't get to decide on what the term means. Linguistic experts do. And they agree with me. End of story. At the beginning of this debate I posted the dictionary definition, which again, agrees with me.

You can stamp your feet and cry and demand that people see your point of view all you want. You are wrong. The US is a form of a democracy.

And no, MMA and judo are both martial arts albeit different types. For an example of my point - the US and USA are both forms of democracy albeit different types.

No, true and pure are not the same thing. We can pull out the dictionary and debate that if you like but you'll lose yet again. I think you better quit now and cut your losses but that's up to you.

You're right, we're not going by what I decide, we're using the dictionary definition of democracy the linguistic experts all agree on. If we were a TRUE democracy, Hillary Clinton would be the 45th President of the United States.

I don't need to stomp my feet, I'm right and you're wrong. The US is not a form of democracy and that word is not found in our Constitution. We do use elements of democracy, just as MMA uses elements of Judo. MMA is not a "form of" Judo... like I said, Rhonda Rousey may wish that were the case but it's not.

 

[rhodescholar]

Sneator Cruz has co-sponsored an Amendment resolution to the Constitution.

Sen. Cruz and Rep. DeSantis Introduce Constitutional Amendment To Impose Term Limits On Members of Congress | Ted Cruz | U.S. Senator for Texas

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and U.S. Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) today proposed an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to impose term limits on members of Congress. The amendment would limit U.S. senators to two six-year terms and members of the U.S. House of Representatives to three two-year terms.

The enduring concept of a citizen legislature, of limiting unruly influence and abuse of power, and of promoting integrity and unclouded judgment in Washington through congressional term limits is a priority strongly supported by the American people. According to an October Rasmussen survey, 74 percent of Americans support establishing term limits for all members of Congress, while only 13 percent oppose term limits.

Thoughts?

Lord almighty, what I wouldn't give to get fuckbags lifers like chuck schumer and his kind out of office...term limits are LONG, LONG overdue.

 

[Dr Grump]

[

No, true and pure are not the same thing. We can pull out the dictionary and debate that if you like but you'll lose yet again. I think you better quit now and cut your losses but that's up to you.

You're right, we're not going by what I decide, we're using the dictionary definition of democracy the linguistic experts all agree on. If we were a TRUE democracy, Hillary Clinton would be the 45th President of the United States.

I don't need to stomp my feet, I'm right and you're wrong. The US is not a form of democracy and that word is not found in our Constitution. We do use elements of democracy, just as MMA uses elements of Judo. MMA is not a "form of" Judo... like I said, Rhonda Rousey may wish that were the case but it's not.

I dunno if you realise, I'm not really debating with you. I'm telling you. Even the dictionary definition I posted stated that the US is a democracy. Period. As I said, you may not like it. I don't like broccoli either, doesn't mean everybody shouldn't. The US is a democracy. Fact.

 

[Boss]

I dunno if you realise, I'm not really debating with you. I'm telling you. Even the dictionary definition I posted stated that the US is a democracy. Period. As I said, you may not like it. I don't like broccoli either, doesn't mean everybody shouldn't. The US is a democracy. Fact.

Well all I can say is the person who wrote the dictionary got it wrong. If we were a TRUE democracy, Hillary Clinton would be the president... by THEIR OWN definition! So we can't be a democracy because Hillary is NOT the president. FACT!

How many more times do we have to go through with this? You've made your point and I've made mine. Repeating your point will not make it more accurate. I totally understand that a LOT of people get this wrong, including people who write dictionaries. All you need to do is read the Constitution. It says very clearly that we are A Republic. Article IV Sec. 4. It does NOT say we are a democracy or form of democracy, the word is not even IN the Constitution. There is a reason!

 

[Dr Grump]

I dunno if you realise, I'm not really debating with you. I'm telling you. Even the dictionary definition I posted stated that the US is a democracy. Period. As I said, you may not like it. I don't like broccoli either, doesn't mean everybody shouldn't. The US is a democracy. Fact.

Well all I can say is the person who wrote the dictionary got it wrong. If we were a TRUE democracy, Hillary Clinton would be the president... by THEIR OWN definition! So we can't be a democracy because Hillary is NOT the president. FACT!

How many more times do we have to go through with this? You've made your point and I've made mine. Repeating your point will not make it more accurate. I totally understand that a LOT of people get this wrong, including people who write dictionaries. All you need to do is read the Constitution. It says very clearly that we are A Republic. Article IV Sec. 4. It does NOT say we are a democracy or form of democracy, the word is not even IN the Constitution. There is a reason!

democracy

1.
government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.

There, I even bolded the parts that are pertinent to our debate. I'm not arguing that you are not a republic. You are. So is France. And you are both democracies.

The definition you are spouting sounds like the Greek one, which is old hat. I am not saying your form of govt IS called DEMOCRACY- I am saying it is a democratic form of govt. And it is. You can shout it from the roof tops it isn't. Doesn't make it so.

How many more times do we have to go through with this? You've made your point and I've made mine. Repeating your point will not make it more accurate. I totally understand that a LOT of people get this wrong, including US conservatives on messageboards because they think that their form of govt is the best there is (it;s not...it's probably not even in the top 5...) and the idea that their form is somehow being compared to the 'socialist' Europeans almost gives them an apoplectic fit...Too Bad. You're a democracy. Fact.

 

[Boss]

SUPREME power is NOT vested in the people or Hillary Clinton would be our president. There would be no Senate, no Supreme Court and the House would pass all bills by simple majority. We can go through this as many times as we need to, we are NOT a democracy. We are a Republic. Now, if you want to say the Republic is "democratic" in certain cases, that is correct. But that doesn't make us a true democracy.

This has nothing to do with me being a conservative on a message board. You can read it in the Constitution, Article IV Sec. 4:

The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.​

NOWHERE does our Constitution, or any other founding document, say that we are a democracy. We're simply NOT. You've yet to produce one solid bit of evidence to the contrary. All you have is some dictionary that incorrectly says we're a democracy. But I have used THEIR definition and the one you just posted to show you that we are NOT a democracy.

...because they think that their form of govt is the best there is (it;s not...it's probably not even in the top 5...)

And I'll take you to ******* task on THIS as well. We ARE the best form of government man has ever created... not because we're a republic instead of a democracy, but because of our founding principles; that all men are created equal and endowed with inalienable rights by their Creator. That makes us unique and exceptional. No other nation on this planet, currently or ever, has achieved the things we have. There is not even anything that comes remotely close. And it sure as **** isn't Socialism, which is responsible for over 150 million deaths.

 

[candycorn]

Terrible Idea for the USA.
Great idea for Democrats.

 

[Dr Grump]

SUPREME power is NOT vested in the people or Hillary Clinton would be our president. There would be no Senate, no Supreme Court and the House would pass all bills by simple majority. We can go through this as many times as we need to, we are NOT a democracy. We are a Republic. Now, if you want to say the Republic is "democratic" in certain cases, that is correct. But that doesn't make us a true democracy.

This has nothing to do with me being a conservative on a message board. You can read it in the Constitution, Article IV Sec. 4:

The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.​

NOWHERE does our Constitution, or any other founding document, say that we are a democracy. We're simply NOT. You've yet to produce one solid bit of evidence to the contrary. All you have is some dictionary that incorrectly says we're a democracy. But I have used THEIR definition and the one you just posted to show you that we are NOT a democracy.

...because they think that their form of govt is the best there is (it;s not...it's probably not even in the top 5...)

And I'll take you to ******* task on THIS as well. We ARE the best form of government man has ever created... not because we're a republic instead of a democracy, but because of our founding principles; that all men are created equal and endowed with inalienable rights by their Creator. That makes us unique and exceptional. No other nation on this planet, currently or ever, has achieved the things we have. There is not even anything that comes remotely close. And it sure as **** isn't Socialism, which is responsible for over 150 million deaths.

Stop cherry picking. It makes you look stupid. You think people can't read the other part within the definition? You only quoted "SUPREME power is NOT vested in the people". It stated "supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents". As you are having problems understanding this, I'll spell it out. Your congress critters and senators are elected agents.

Yeah, it is such a great system. Founded on all men created equal. I bet Washington and Jefferson's slaves felt that bit. The British Empire absolutely achieved as much as you. As did the Greeks and the Romans. Currently, your system sucks. Maybe back in the day, when it was first put together, it might have been the best (I'm not convinced - blacks couldn't vote, neither could women, neither could certain men if they didn't own land). That aside, other forms have govt have come along since then and superceded your utopia.

Oh and by the way, lest you forget, your Constitutional Republic is a form of democratic govt. Fact. The fact you even think a lot of European govts are socialist means you haven't a clue. Most are a mix of capitalism and socialism. There is no creator. No evidence of one, just faith. That is it.

 

[Boss]

SUPREME power is NOT vested in the people or Hillary Clinton would be our president. There would be no Senate, no Supreme Court and the House would pass all bills by simple majority. We can go through this as many times as we need to, we are NOT a democracy. We are a Republic. Now, if you want to say the Republic is "democratic" in certain cases, that is correct. But that doesn't make us a true democracy.

This has nothing to do with me being a conservative on a message board. You can read it in the Constitution, Article IV Sec. 4:

The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.​

NOWHERE does our Constitution, or any other founding document, say that we are a democracy. We're simply NOT. You've yet to produce one solid bit of evidence to the contrary. All you have is some dictionary that incorrectly says we're a democracy. But I have used THEIR definition and the one you just posted to show you that we are NOT a democracy.

...because they think that their form of govt is the best there is (it;s not...it's probably not even in the top 5...)

And I'll take you to ******* task on THIS as well. We ARE the best form of government man has ever created... not because we're a republic instead of a democracy, but because of our founding principles; that all men are created equal and endowed with inalienable rights by their Creator. That makes us unique and exceptional. No other nation on this planet, currently or ever, has achieved the things we have. There is not even anything that comes remotely close. And it sure as **** isn't Socialism, which is responsible for over 150 million deaths.

Stop cherry picking. It makes you look stupid. You think people can't read the other part within the definition? You only quoted "SUPREME power is NOT vested in the people". It stated "supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents". As you are having problems understanding this, I'll spell it out. Your congress critters and senators are elected agents.

Yeah, it is such a great system. Founded on all men created equal. I bet Washington and Jefferson's slaves felt that bit. The British Empire absolutely achieved as much as you. As did the Greeks and the Romans. Currently, your system sucks. Maybe back in the day, when it was first put together, it might have been the best (I'm not convinced - blacks couldn't vote, neither could women, neither could certain men if they didn't own land). That aside, other forms have govt have come along since then and superceded your utopia.

Oh and by the way, lest you forget, your Constitutional Republic is a form of democratic govt. Fact. The fact you even think a lot of European govts are socialist means you haven't a clue. Most are a mix of capitalism and socialism. There is no creator. No evidence of one, just faith. That is it.

I'm NOT cherry-picking, I am using the definition you posted. My two senators from Alabama have the same power as two senators from California representing a much greater population. Supreme power is not vested in the people OR their agents, else California's Senators would have much more power. There would also be no Supreme Court to overturn the will of the people. Nine people in black robes have Supreme power in some cases. If the people AND THEIR AGENTS had supreme power, Hillary Clinton would be the president because we wouldn't have an electoral college.

Again... You can correctly say that our Republic is a form of democratic government, but that doesn't mean we're a Democracy. There are important distinctions that make us NOT a true democracy and that is what we're debating here. And it's really not a debate... we're simply NOT a Democracy and you've made no case to support that we are.

 

[Boss]

Yeah, it is such a great system. Founded on all men created equal. I bet Washington and Jefferson's slaves felt that bit.

Well it was actually that very founding principle which eradicated slavery in the Western world.

The British Empire absolutely achieved as much as you. As did the Greeks and the Romans.

That's simply not true.

Maybe back in the day, when it was first put together, it might have been the best (I'm not convinced - blacks couldn't vote, neither could women, neither could certain men if they didn't own land).

Well, it's because we're NOT A DEMOCRACY! However, the very foundation of who we are is essentially what got rid of slavery in the Western world AND brought women the vote. I will note that slavery STILL exists in places where they don't have Constitutional Republics like ours. And IF we had been a TRUE democracy in 1865, we wouldn't have gotten rid of slavery either.

 

[Desperado]

Add mandatory retirement age for the Supreme Court and we have a winner

 

[Boss]

Add mandatory retirement age for the Supreme Court and we have a winner

Unfortunately, (or maybe fortunately) we don't get to tack on things to Amendments. I actually think that is much of our problem with Congress now... they try to cram all kinds of shit into one big omnibus bill.

No, this will have to stand alone and you either support it or you don't. One of these days, maybe we can get to term limits for the SCOTUS, I would LOVE to see that. I'd also like to see the Balanced Budget Amendment come up again... but I don't know, Democrats seem to be dug in, refusing to accept anything that bucks the status quo... Ironic, isn't it?

 

[Dr Grump]

Well, it's because we're NOT A DEMOCRACY! However, the very foundation of who we are is essentially what got rid of slavery in the Western world AND brought women the vote. I will note that slavery STILL exists in places where they don't have Constitutional Republics like ours. And IF we had been a TRUE democracy in 1865, we wouldn't have gotten rid of slavery either.

Ever heard of William Wilberforce? The UK got rid of slavery long before the US. The first country to give women the vote was mine - NZ. Try again.