Tell me agin that the Repub's are just as bad as the Dem's

[SHMIV]

I love the idea of term limits. I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of banning lawyers from ANY public office, either.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[RWBlue01]

I truly believe what we need to do to fix many of the problems in congress is term limits. Then maybe they will do their job(they are elected to represent use) instead of working to keep their job. It reminds me of what my grandfather told me back in early 70’s when I was able to vote for first time. “ I vote for no incumbent give another crook a chance.”

This is exactly what the country needs. We have them for the Pres, Governors, ect, why are Senators and Congress exempted? The problem is they would never pass anything that would end their personal rein of pocket lining, stealing, and trampling on our rights.

Casey

Lets be clear, I am not a democrat.

But watch this guy. He makes sense.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mw2z9lV3W1g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mw2z9lV3W1g

Less laws make for a better gov.
Enforce all the laws equally makes for a better gov.
When the average person breaks the law at least once a week we have a problem with the system.

[gunderwood]

I truly believe what we need to do to fix many of the problems in congress is term limits. Then maybe they will do their job(they are elected to represent use) instead of working to keep their job. It reminds me of what my grandfather told me back in early 70’s when I was able to vote for first time. “ I vote for no incumbent give another crook a chance.”

This is exactly what the country needs. We have them for the Pres, Governors, ect, why are Senators and Congress exempted? The problem is they would never pass anything that would end their personal rein of pocket lining, stealing, and trampling on our rights.

Casey

Yet, term limits haven't solved the problem in those positions either. It just makes them more wild when they no longer can be re-elected.

The problem isn't term limits. The problem is that we the People have let a bunch of self-promoting thieves to ignore the Constitution. They don't get it that the Constitution checks their power and we don't hold them too it. Until the Constitution is upheld, the problem is intractable.

[SHMIV]

Hmm. We may have done some irrepairable damage. At some point, we were all deceived into believing that voting is a right, as opposed to a priviledge. We then allowed unproductive people to vote. Since then, these unproductive people have gotten folks elected who ought not be in office, then those unproductive people help keep them in office since those unproductive people have basically traded their vote for food and funds.

How can we possibly undo that?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Kreutz]

Hmm. We may have done some irrepairable damage. At some point, we were all deceived into believing that voting is a right, as opposed to a priviledge. We then allowed unproductive people to vote. Since then, these unproductive people have gotten folks elected who ought not be in office, then those unproductive people help keep them in office since those unproductive people have basically traded their vote for food and funds.

How can we possibly undo that?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

A do-over. No other way. Luckily I think this will self-correct when the system collapses under its own weight.

[RWBlue01]

Hmm. We may have done some irrepairable damage. At some point, we were all deceived into believing that voting is a right, as opposed to a priviledge. We then allowed unproductive people to vote. Since then, these unproductive people have gotten folks elected who ought not be in office, then those unproductive people help keep them in office since those unproductive people have basically traded their vote for food and funds.

How can we possibly undo that?

So what limits would you impose.

[SHMIV]

@ Kreutz: I suppose that you're right. The problem with a do over, though, I is that our enemies will not sit idly by as we reset. They will take the opportunity to do whatever it is that they've been itching to do.

@RW: I assume that you are asking what limits I would impose in regards to voting. I've said it several times on this forum, but I suppose that it bears repeating. Besides, the forum is a big place, and it could have easily been missed.

Basically, and broadly put, if one is collecting welfare, they don't vote. If one is not gainfully employed, they don't vote. If one is not contributing to society, one doesn't have a say in how society functions.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Kreutz]

@ Kreutz: I suppose that you're right. The problem with a do over, though, I is that our enemies will not sit idly by as we reset. They will take the opportunity to do whatever it is that they've been itching to do.

Most of them will be eaten by the "downtrodden" they've been giving our money to.

The survivors of that horde will starve to death without EBT.

Auto-correction is beautiful in its simplicity.

[SHMIV]

But, what of our outside enemies? The inside enemies, well their fates would be clear.

I suspect that other nations would see an opportunity to overtake us, and probably take it.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[RWBlue01]

@RW: I assume that you are asking what limits I would impose in regards to voting. I've said it several times on this forum, but I suppose that it bears repeating. Besides, the forum is a big place, and it could have easily been missed.

Basically, and broadly put, if one is collecting welfare, they don't vote. If one is not gainfully employed, they don't vote. If one is not contributing to society, one doesn't have a say in how society functions.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Very reasonable. Most of the time when people talk about restriction rights they do it on education, race, sex, or ....some other stupid requirement that they meet. Not being supported by social welfare programs will work. Not being a criminal.

[RWBlue01]

But, what of our outside enemies? The inside enemies, well their fates would be clear.

I suspect that other nations would see an opportunity to overtake us, and probably take it.

In today's world, I don't expect a foreign nation to try to take over our land. They are much better off trying to control us without having troops on our soil. (Or just a few peace keeping forces, but active fighting would unit us against them as we do have nukes.)

[GeneFrenkle]

@rwblue - like China owning our debt and, years ago, Japan buying up California?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[SHMIV]

No, not in todays world. In that quote, I was responding to Kreutz. Kreutz was speaking of a reset, which would come in the event of a complete collapse of American society. In such an event, I believe that outside forces would be something to be concerned about.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Reverenddel]

I wish I knew what the answer to the problem really concluded. Is it a reset? Do we work within the system? Do we exclude anyone on the public teet the right to vote because it's self serving?

I do know that we're at the event horizon economically. We're looking at America in an Argentinian, Greek, or Cypriot type break down soon. Our dollar is over-valued. The cost of food has escalated in just the past two years...

Ammo is none existent, we have terrorist both home-grown, and foreign. We have abusive government officials who take whatever they want with a puppet joke court system banking on the proceeds.

This is what our Founding Fathers wanted for us? Really?