See other (s)Elections Articles
Title: Well Jethro guess your wish isn't coming true
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Jun 1, 2008
Author: Me and boby mcgee
Post Date: 2008-06-01 15:59:30 by Itisa1mosttoolate
Keywords: None
Views: 1427
Comments: 102
Looks like Hillary can't win her required 195 delegates out of the remaining 200. Obama bin laden only needs 20 of the remaining 200.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 61.
#1. To: Itisa1mosttoolate (#0)
JT wished for hillary?
I think people are confusing our disgust with Obama with a preference for one of the other puppets.
which other candidates? it's only been hillary and barack for the past 6 months.
Well I think everyone knows that we despise McCain both for his Zionist connections and his co-sponsorship of the 2006/2007 Immigration Reform bills and McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform. Our task here on 4 is to show that "change" will not come from the other two candidates are masters are offering us.
When we supported Ron Paul, the white guilters said.."One man cannot make a change, it wont happen". Now the same side liners have found a "savior" to worship who says he will make small change and they grovel and slobber at his feet because he is a person of color. Disgraceful.
Some of us never stopped supporting Dr. Paul.
I never stopped supporting Barry Goldwater but a lot of good it did. Biggest landslide of popular vote in American history, for Johnson, I took little solace in that. When my horse refuses to leave the gate, I have to wait for the next race.
True that. Check my tagline. There may be an alternative.
Mirage...off track, just something I am reading... "For those not concerned with imposing term limits on Senate, House, and Supreme Court members, consider the following: * Lifelong politicians are now allowed to represent lobbyists based in DC more than voters back home because of no limits to their power to stay in DC. * Term limits for legislators would allow a greater variety in the House and Senate, rather than a lifelong office just for the elite. What history proves is that Our Founding Fathers had this in mind: an average American citizen serving for a few short years, then returning home to enjoy their Guaranteed American Freedoms. * Since 1970, average Supreme Court Justice tenure has risen from approximately 15 years to over 25 years. * Until 2006, no new Justice had joined the Supreme Court in over ten years."
You're dead on with the citizen legislator. The Founders envisioned a citizen going off to Washington, serving a term or two, then returning to the farm. Urbanization and the rise of the Professional Politician (see Jerry Brown in California for details) did a lot of damage to their vision. The Constitution was to be both guide and harness for the citizen legislator. We have strayed far.
John Adams... "" Although John Adams was a devout Federalist, he maintained that rotation, as well as frequent elections, would be necessary in order to keep government as near to the people as possible. Adams expressed these two beliefs in a speech given just before the American Revolution in which he proposed holding annual elections of representatives (Peek 101). He also compared men in a society with rotation-in-office to bubbles on the sea which "rise,...break, and to that sea return"; Adams later develops his thought by adding, "This will teach them the great political virtues of humility, patience, and moderation, without which every man in power becomes a ravenous beast of prey (Peek 102)." In response to the ideas of Melancton Smith, the strongest opposition from the Federalists came from Alexander Hamilton at the New York ratification convention. Hamilton, along with Roger Sherman and Robert Livingston, developed three strong arguments against implementing term limits in government: the people have a right to judge who they will and will not elect to public office, rotation reduces the incentives for political accountability, and rotation deprives society of experienced public servants (Foley 28). In general, the goals of all founders, despite their political affiliation, aimed at preserving a close connection between representatives and their constituencies. While the Antifederalists believed that imposing term limits would create enhanced participation in government, a check on tyrannical leaders, and greater representation of the people, the Federalists theorized that the same goals could be accomplished by the president serving a short term and having congressman follow his actions "(Foley 34) The Founding Fathers erred very badly, they did not conceive of professional politicians looking and lusting for lifetime power.
Career legislators are much less of a problem than career bureaucrats of the executive branch. It's not like the legislators read let alone write the laws they vote upon. The legislative branch (along with academia) is actually the dumping ground for the less competent. More competent folks job-hop the media-regulator-industry triad.
I agree with you.
#62. To: angle (#61)
Here in OR we have this: This one is on tape referring to the differences between Klingons and Vulcans and trying to claim he has pointed ears. The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of term limits. The Founders were correct in placing limits on the mob as well as limits on the Government.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: christine, Itisa1mosttoolate (#1)
#4. To: buckeye (#2)
#6. To: Itisa1mosttoolate (#4)
#7. To: buckeye (#6)
#26. To: Cynicom (#7)
When we supported Ron Paul
#28. To: mirage (#26)
Some of us never stopped supporting Dr. Paul.
#30. To: Cynicom (#28)
When my horse refuses to leave the gate, I have to wait for the next race.
#31. To: mirage (#30)
(Edited)
#33. To: Cynicom (#31)
#34. To: mirage (#33)
#59. To: Cynicom, mirage (#34)
#60. To: Tauzero (#59)
The legislative branch (along with academia) is actually the dumping ground for the less competent.
#61. To: mirage (#60)
Replies to Comment # 61. 
End Trace Mode for Comment # 61.