Cain withdraws

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by mclem0822

Some would say that's politics. I think we can agree it's pretty dirty lol! Which is a shame!

the shame is the gridlock that occurs, and us waiting for things to happen while they make sure that anything that happens worth crowing about came from 'them'. of course, the opposite of 'them' does what they can to keep that from happening.
so, nothing happens and we all plod along.

we need term limits for congress. if they can't get re-elected, they might get off their asses and actually do something because they don't have to worry about pandering to voters.

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by Danzig

the shame is the gridlock that occurs, and us waiting for things to happen while they make sure that anything that happens worth crowing about came from 'them'. of course, the opposite of 'them' does what they can to keep that from happening.
so, nothing happens and we all plod along.

we need term limits for congress. if they can't get re-elected, they might get off their asses and actually do something because they don't have to worry about pandering to voters.

term limits only empowers lobbyists. when you wipe out institutional memory, who do you think fills the vacuum?

the entire term limits paradigm is misguided. it started on a premise that no one running for office could possibly do so out a sense of public responsibility and has been a self-fulfilling prophecy. it's guaranteed the result it was supposed to solve.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

term limits only empowers lobbyists. when you wipe out institutional memory, who do you think fills the vacuum?

the entire term limits paradigm is misguided. it started on a premise that no one running for office could possibly do so out a sense of public responsibility and has been a self-fulfilling prophecy. it's guaranteed the result it was supposed to solve.

What you are saying makes no sense. Term limits arent to blame for the political issues that we are experiencing. The issue that it could help solve in Congress is we wouldn't have career Congressmen who become entrenched in office and become far too influential, far more than their one vote is supposed to be.

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

What you are saying makes no sense. Term limits arent to blame for the political issues that we are experiencing. The issue that it could help solve in Congress is we wouldn't have career Congressmen who become entrenched in office and become far too influential, far more than their one vote is supposed to be.

if you can point to a state legislature or city council where term limits has resulted in better legislation, i'll concede.

but so far as i can see, all it does is replace the problem of entrenched elected officials with the far worse problem of entrenched unelected lobbyists. it's not as if influence disappears. it just moves elsewhere.

getting rid of incumbent based gerrymandering would go a lot further toward achieving the goal of good government than the idea of term limits.

it's a pointless debate though. it's not as if many states are going to universally disarm.

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by Danzig

the shame is the gridlock that occurs, and us waiting for things to happen while they make sure that anything that happens worth crowing about came from 'them'. of course, the opposite of 'them' does what they can to keep that from happening.
so, nothing happens and we all plod along.

we need term limits for congress. if they can't get re-elected, they might get off their asses and actually do something because they don't have to worry about pandering to voters.

the actual solution would be taking away redistricting from elected officials. if there were limited safe partisan districts there would also be limited safety in partisanship.

but that faces the same problem your solution does. both are state level issues and each state has an entrenched interest in the status quo.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

the actual solution would be taking away redistricting from elected officials.

Did you just see what happened in AZ regarding that? The independent commission redistricted and put forth the tentative plan, then Republican Gov. Jan Brewer fired the head of the Commission before it became final. The state Supreme Court told Brewer to get lost, that's illegal, and reinstated the Commission chair. Brewer is now desperately trying to figure out how to get her fired again, and the Supreme Court warned her, and said, "Don't do it".

Paid lobbyists need to be gone. Lobbyists own our government. Money needs to be gone out of politics. Congress becomes millionaires, and it's not due to their salaries.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

the actual solution would be taking away redistricting from elected officials. if there were limited safe partisan districts there would also be limited safety in partisanship.

but that faces the same problem your solution does. both are state level issues and each state has an entrenched interest in the status quo.

i am for anything that removes these 'leaders' from their positions of entrenched power. i advocate term limits for the same reason that the president is limited.

just read this yesterday, in the andrew jackson bio by h.w. brands (i highly recommend it!). it's jacksons view on rotation in office, rather than permanent tenure:

'there are, perhaps, few men who can for any great length of time enjoy office and power without being more or less under the influence of feelings unfavorable to the faithful discharge of their public duties. they are apt to acquire a habit of looking on with indifference upon the public interests and of tolerating conduct from which an unpracticed man would revolt. office is considered as a species of property. in a country where offices are created solely for the benefit of the people, no one man has any more intrinisic right to official station than another. offices were not established to give support to particular men at the public expense.'

'i can not but believe that more is lost by the continuance of men in office than is generally to be gained by their experience'.