If we had the level of political involvement by the population needed to make such a change, we wouldn't need term limits.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Term Limits Protest
- Thread starter Lowlight
- Start date
-
- Tags
- term limits
We already have term limits. We just have really stupid voters.
I've thought abut the land owner thing too, as used to be the case; however, more importantly is one must be PAYING taxes - THEN and only then does one has a real stake in the game.
You cant even imagine all the shit that would have to be burned down to get term limits.
If my memory is correct the Senate has to vote for term limits at the national level. McConnell already said they would never vote on that.
At all levels of public office there should be term limits. In the early days of this country it was a duty to go represent your people. They didn't want to, but it had to be done. Now we have people making careers out of it.
Also they should not be allowed to exempt themselves from the laws they pass and enforce on us. I think if that went away we would have a very different outcome in several ways. And no lifetime pay once they serve a term. Get paid while you;re there and once you are out you are on your own like most of us.
However, none of this will happen because they will never vote on this to restrict themselves.
At all levels of public office there should be term limits. In the early days of this country it was a duty to go represent your people. They didn't want to, but it had to be done. Now we have people making careers out of it.
Also they should not be allowed to exempt themselves from the laws they pass and enforce on us. I think if that went away we would have a very different outcome in several ways. And no lifetime pay once they serve a term. Get paid while you;re there and once you are out you are on your own like most of us.
However, none of this will happen because they will never vote on this to restrict themselves.
Sadly, this is most likely the case. Why do you think there's been such a move to put pussify the country.
my brother....You could argue that subject 10 million different ways!
You didn't give me a question mark.....But, IMO, the "pussification" of our nation stems from the public schools and "the family unit." Firstly being, the family. If men & women don't put the work and value into the discipline and education of their children, it's left to the public schools. And we all know *most* school districts within the last 30 years(I say 30 because I can only speak on 32 years of life experience) are run by highly democrat/liberal leaning organizations. So...that' right there could be an indicator as to why you see all these so-called "millennial"/antifa litte b*tches causing problems. They weren't disciplined as kids and everyone got a trophy in school for showing up.
Pot stirring OP reported to the boss of this place.
ridiculousness he posts!!
ridiculousness he posts!!
You're correct in that those fucks will not vote against their own self interests. But in some states the ballot initiative process bypasses them easily.
I'm normally not a fan of ballot initiatives as they come too close to pure democracy for my comfort. But in this case, I think it's the only viable means of doing so peacefully.
Ballot Initiative and Referendum - Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost
I agree in principal, but when dealing with countries like China or the thieving state with nukes (Russia), there is the problem that their plans are laid out for many years, even with a two termer like obumer, politicians attentions spans are short anyways. Removing the folks who deal with our competitors would just allow them to wait out a policy not in their best interest.
Being from Cali, term limits sound good, but I cannot imagine what kind of loons would take the place of Pelosi and Schitt. Pelosi is a huge money maker for dems across the country, but the San Fran dems would likely send an antifa tranny in her place.
I'd prefer to have a ban on lobbying for any elected official or staffer, but I'm pretty sure this would be unconstitutional.
The rules in place now encourage elected folks in Washington to get rich at the expense of their honor.
Being from Cali, term limits sound good, but I cannot imagine what kind of loons would take the place of Pelosi and Schitt. Pelosi is a huge money maker for dems across the country, but the San Fran dems would likely send an antifa tranny in her place.
I'd prefer to have a ban on lobbying for any elected official or staffer, but I'm pretty sure this would be unconstitutional.
The rules in place now encourage elected folks in Washington to get rich at the expense of their honor.
I use to deny that we need term limits but I have since changed my mind we definitely need them. My two senators are worthless in my opinion and don’t know what working a real job is like. It’s tough watching your state turn into a shit hole.
Just my opinion, but I have always felt that term limits should apply to the House of Representatives, not the Senate. The whole purpose of the Senate is continuity, to instill a longer view of policy. Th e House is where things should turn over much more, as they represent the voice of the people, within the moment. The House is the voice of the mob, the Senate (should be) the voice of reason and deliberation on the long term effects of a given policy proposal.
This is why (typically) the Senate tends to historically be a conservative majority (GOP), and the House tends to be a progressive majority (Democrats). For the house to function correctly, it's members should be cycled often, as that would reflect the ever changing mood of the mob. For the Senate to function correctly, it should have members who have somewhat in depth/lengthy experience in governmental proceedings, rules and laws.
None of them should have a retirement, short of serving 20+ years. And they should all have the same healthcare as the everyday citizens (or pay for it out of their own pockets). No insider trading, and no garnering of wealth though their influence (to include their direct family members and spouses).
JMTCW...
This is why (typically) the Senate tends to historically be a conservative majority (GOP), and the House tends to be a progressive majority (Democrats). For the house to function correctly, it's members should be cycled often, as that would reflect the ever changing mood of the mob. For the Senate to function correctly, it should have members who have somewhat in depth/lengthy experience in governmental proceedings, rules and laws.
None of them should have a retirement, short of serving 20+ years. And they should all have the same healthcare as the everyday citizens (or pay for it out of their own pockets). No insider trading, and no garnering of wealth though their influence (to include their direct family members and spouses).
JMTCW...
I liked your pos.t, but with the likes of Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer, Lindsey Graham, Mitt Romney and many others, I'm not on board with no term limits for Senators
You're Wrong.
When you have enough .gov dependents, they will vote to increase their .gov handouts instead of voting to leave the people alone.
So to make it simple, if you pay into the system via taxes, you vote. If you receive more "Rebate" than you paid in, or pay 0, you get no vote.
You should get a voter Registration in the mail with your tax return from the .gov that is good for 1 year.
The saucer for the hot tea....
Repeal 17th Amendment.
The saucer for the hot tea....
.
Repeal 17th Amendment.
Bingo...
I will offer this thought... be careful what you wish for WRT term limits. Part of the beauty of the system is inertia. It is supposed to work against itself... and evolve slowly. This prevents the 'whims of the moment' (such as Antifa and our current flirtation with Marxism) from taking over. And remember, there are no term limits for 'staff and bureaucrats' who then become the real power, while the elected figureheads do nothing but vote what told for.
Remember, we get what we vote for. And most stay home... and get what a small minority of activists vote for.
The swamp is not about elected officials. It's the un-elected ones we need to fear. The activist types who don't want to go into engineering or banking or trades... they want to worm their way into the system and pull the levers of power on their own... with fuzzy regulations... by writing the legislation for the Congresscritters to vote on... by simply obfuscating or over-reaching, knowing noone will ever slap them down or reprimand them. And that through the miracle of the Civil Service GS-System... their power will increase via seniority, not competence. This is the swamp.
Leahy, Feinstein, Grassley... they are mostly dottering old idiots who don't even understand the complexities of the modern world. They have no idea what they are doing. They are wound up like Japanese tintoys and stamp and rant and shoot sparks. But all that is being done by their staffers. "Here, Senator. You read this and then push the AYE button this morning, ok? The AYE button. That is the one on the left. Later, you have to meet some Girl Scouts. Ok? Got that? It's all taken care of...."
These are the people to fear. Not the elected idiots. Term limits? How about term limits for staffers and bureaucrats? Not going to happen... and if you look at history and where this came from, look no further than Woodrow Wilson and his Civil Service Reform and creation of the Civil Service Commission. This was engineered in 1917... all part of the progressive revolution made possible by the 'crisis' of WW1. Never let a crisis go to waste.
Just my $0.02 for the morning.
Sirhr
And SEIU is the continuation of that progressive tick, digging deeper into the fabric of the government body. Unionized government employees needs to be challenged in the courts.
So I've been all-in on term limits for Congress since Government class in '72. And after Army service I'm rock-set for it. But not a chance on the planet since the very ones it affects are the ones that would have to propose, set it in motion, pass, then wait to have it ratified by the states who are too ignorant of their own history to see the value. But I'd be first on that government list, along with no benefits after office and no laws passed that they are not subject to...
Similar threads
