Seldon do I disagree with you, con-pilot, but I think we already have term limits for everyone. They're called voters. If we elect someone really great, why limit the benefit of their service? If they're bad, or have sold out to the perks of office, it's in our hands to dispatch them.
Good points Ben, but then why term limits just for the President? Not that it matters, it will never change. However, I still believe that all of us would be served better if all terms were changed to four year terms rather than four years for President, six for Senators and two for Congress. Because of the two year term limit for Congressmen, they spend most of their time running for reelection.
I realize that we have the recall option available to us, however, except for Brown of California, which was at state level, governor, when was the last time a recall worked at a Congressional level. Shoot, there have been sitting Congressmen and Senators finish up their terms in prison, along with a few Federal Judges.
Hum, just thought of something that I need to look up, can Congressmen or Senators be impeached or only heads of states, Governors and Presidents?
Back later.
Okay, that didn't take long. Only the President, Vice-President, Federal Judges and Cabinet Members can be impeached at the National level and at the state level Governors, Lieutenant Governors, some judges and state level cabinet members can be impeached.
If democracy works then term limits are surely unnecessary.
Term limits are by no means perfect; but the absence of term limits means that an elected official's #1 priority is re-election. Longterm good is way down the list!
It'd be hell trying to get that amendment ratified, though.
Well, you know we could try. We could set up a non-profit organization with you and I running it, of course we would have to compensated for our time and efforts. As this is a potentially very serious issue we be faced with, I feel a nominal fee of, oh let's say, $500,000.00 USD per annum each should suffice, if that proves to be inadequate we can vote ourselves a raise. Open expense account of course. As we will have to make numerous visits to all 50 states and US Territories we'll need an aircraft. Perhaps one of those new Cessna single pilot jets, we can take turns flying it. No wait, what am I thinking of, we will have to have an aircraft that can go to Hawaii, Guam, Puerto Rico and the other territories. I think a nice used Falcon 50EX would serve nicely.
I believe that within 10 to 20 years we could be approaching getting a solution to this burning issue of election terms.
Can't believe what I saw only an hour ago here in Oz, whilst watching BBC World Service, (The BBC are rabidly anti Republican).
A BBC News Team went to a hardened blue collar Democrat area and showed Democrat supporters carrying placards saying, "Democrats for McCain" Seems BHO doesn't have the full support of areas that were heavily in favour of Clinton but now don't believe BHO can cut it as POTUSA.
...was under the impression that term limits on the President were created so that in future we wouldn't kill the fellow like we did GTF's favorite president, who didn't complete term #4.
That probably was the party line that was taught in social studies classes in the early 70's in the U.S. Not saying it's the real reason, just saying that was my impression. Might be true. Might not. Don't know.
The president we need right now, for my money, is Andrew Jackson, or maybe Polk... who is way underrated.
I've always been in favor of picking at random, someone from the general populace who meets certain basic criteria (under development). Pay them per year 10x what they make in their chosen line, put them in for 4 years, then regardless of how good or bad they did, throw 'em back. You think for one minute if Ed the Plumber were the president that we'd have drainage problems in 4 years?
con-pilot-
I'm appalled... if Nan Pelosi isn't willing to settle for anything less than a 767 to scooch from coast-to-coast... why should you?
Remember, this is important work you're doing, your flights are going to be longer... and besides, you're just plain worth it.
Grants my man, grants from the government and foundations. I'll start working it.
Quote:
I'm appalled... if Nan Pelosi isn't willing to settle for anything less than a 767 to scooch from coast-to-coast... why should you?
Remember, this is important work you're doing, your flights are going to be longer... and besides, you're just plain worth it.
Can't let you all discuss Byzantine structures and term limits without mentioning that both parties have systematically and continuously Gerrymandered the voter boundaries in a blatant and open attempt to ensure that only Republican voters live in a Republican district, and Democratic voters live in a Democratic district.
The faint buzzing noise you hear near every election is just the Founding Fathers spinning in their graves every time a House Representative uses the word "Democracy". Hypocritical Bastards, every last one.
The four pillars of Reagan's economic policy were to:[1]
1. reduce the growth of government spending,
2. reduce marginal tax rates on income from labor and capital,
3. reduce government regulation of the economy,
4. control the money supply to reduce inflation.
You forgot to "add emphasis" to points one and two. The lawmakers in Congress, of both parties, have consistently failed to control spending with the MAJOR exception of Bill Clinton and the Gringrich Congress. Deadlocked, spending, as a percentage of GDP almost fell. Benanke and Greenspan in the years before failed to control monetary supply, hence, the current inflation and commodity price rises. Oil is up in part from increased demand from China and India, and largely due to loose monetary policy. Loose monetary policy combined with Congressional influence pushing lax borrowing standards in the housing industry. I have cited numerous articles wherein Congress and the GSEs pumped up the housing bubble. Bill Clinton, in a Business Week.com interview stated that deregulation courtesy of Phil Gramm were NOT to blame for the finances. Click for WSJ editorial specifically quoting interview, I'm about to go to WORK so not going to research it.
I have been and remain unalterably opposed to any bailout. Government needs to be out, completely out of the economic sphere, PERIOD. You cite FDR claiming the free market was sturdy horse. Well, how come he kept shooting that horse throughout the Thirties. The economy was no better in '38 than it was in '33. The stats show it. The present problem is the Democrats are insisting on following the same tired class politics and it will get us the same unfortunate results.
NO BAILOUT, got it?
GF
Last edited by galaxy flyer : 2nd October 2008 at 04:16.
Well, how come he kept shooting throughout the Thirties. The economy was no better in '38 than it was in '33. The stats show it.
Actually the country was heading into an even more disastrous depression in 1938, the only thing that saved the country was the war in Europe and then the attack on Peal Harbor against the United States by Japan causing World War II.
Im sorry I is not up with it all but if they get the $700 is that it ?
I won't solve the problem, it's just a sticking plaster. Oh sure, they'll take the money, who wouldn't; but the market will keep sliding and they'll be back for more before Xmas.
Linear Mode
