term limits

[hannitykillspuppies]

assuming it would ever happen for senators and congressmen, how long would you make them? what other elected offices do you think should have term limits?

[BoredWithNoSB]

18 years each level. Looking at what happened at the state level in Michigan when term limits got put in, you need to give people time to learn the process. It is a mess there and a select group of power brokers at the party level run the place since nobody knows what they're doign for 3/4 of the time they're there. The rules in Washington are 10 times as complex as those in Michigan, too. So, you have to do more than two or three terms.

I'd also lengthen congressional term to 3 years so you could have the hope of maybe having a short time period in there somwhere where they weren't campaigning and actually trying to do what they thought was best.

Sure, you could still have career politicians, but I don't think that's necessarily bad. If they're good enough to win their congressional district 6 times and then go on to state-wide office, you'd hope they weren't a schmuck.

[kydoty]

6 years, both Senate and Congress.

No 2nd term. All 6 of your years are dedicated to the Senate or House and none of it campaigning.

1/3 of the House and Senate will be restocked every 2 years.

The only person that gets a chance for a 2nd term is the President.

[Peter for President]

6 years, both Senate and Congress.

No 2nd term. All 6 of your years are dedicated to the Senate or House and none of it campaigning.

1/3 of the House and Senate will be restocked every 2 years.

The only person that gets a chance for a 2nd term is the President.
So you take the House out of the two-year term and make it a six as well?

[Vegas]

Three terms for the house and two terms for the senate are both plenty. Nobody other than Barry Goldwater should serve longer than that.

[kydoty]

So you take the House out of the two-year term and make it a six as well?

Yes. 2 years is way too short a term. As it stands now they literally spend half their term campaigning. That has to stop.

[Peter for President]

Yes. 2 years is way too short a term. As it stands now they literally spend half their term campaigning. That has to stop.
I hear ya.

[pnkpanther]

Three terms for the house and two terms for the senate are both plenty. Nobody other than Barry Goldwater should serve longer than that.

Not a goldwater fan, but do like these quotes

When you say "radical right" today, I think of these moneymaking ventures by fellows like Pat Robertson and others who are trying to take the Republican party and make a religious organization out of it. If that ever happens, kiss politics goodbye


Every good Christian should be concerned", Goldwater retorted: "Every good Christian ought to kick Falwell right in the ass."
(in regards to Falwell's opposistion of Sandra Day O'connor)


"Everyone knows that gays have served honorably in the military since at least the time of Julius Caesar."

"You don't have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight."

"Do not associate my name with anything you do. You are extremists, and you've hurt the Republican party much more than the Democrats have."[

“It’s time America realized that there is no gay exemption in the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in the Declaration of Independence.”

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

assuming it would ever happen for senators and congressmen, how long would you make them? what other elected offices do you think should have term limits? Why in the hell would you want to enact term limits??

That's how CA got into trouble. The lobbyists run Sacto, not the junior-grade legislators who barely get to know what's what by the time their term is up.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

This thread is sick.

You already have 'term limits' in place.

Show up to the voting booth and *vote*.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

Not a goldwater fan, but do like these quotes Do you like this one???

I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

Oh that's right. You abhor 'extremism'....but don't seem to abhor it when it's gays protesting and committing acts of full-on disobedience.

[mosaic]

This thread is sick.

You already have 'term limits' in place.

Show up to the voting booth and *vote*.

What happens if all prospecting incumbents are retards? Im not voting for a retard.

All politicians suck, they should have to plead their case to hold position every year. Unless the ppl vote they stay bcus theyre doing a good job.

Wish we could do that with Obama right now, what a swing and a miss on Americas part there.....

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

What happens if all prospecting incumbents are retards? Im not voting for a retard.

All politicians suck, they should have to plead their case to hold position every year. Unless the ppl vote they stay bcus theyre doing a good job.

Wish we could do that with Obama right now, what a swing and a miss on Americas part there..... All the politicians always 'suck'.

Benn that way for decades. But this country has still gotten through all of 'em.

BTW, lobbyist suck even more. They're not elected and you can't throw 'em out of office.

[thrasymachus]

Politics just suck. Honestly, I don't think there's one simple answer and I don't think anyone has the answer. The political process is disgusting, though. Sadly, it seems like the last people we'd want to trust with the public welfare are the ones in control of it.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

For me, the answers are there...enforcement of rigid rules to keep pols from accepting illegal donations. (And laws like Feingold/McCain need to be repealed because all they do is make it so that campaign politics dives into the mud via a third party).

Each side knows that they've got folks who are willing to accept a bribe. For every Randall 'Duke' Cunningham, there's a Maxine Waters and Charles Rangel.

Of course Maxine 'Muddy' Waters lobbied the Feds on behalf of her husband's bank. Her husband's ventures affect her livelihood.

Of course Rangel tried to utilize his power and influence illegally. He and Charles Schumer tried to exert their influence on NY politics by having Hillary run for office.

But the vast majority of folks up on the Hill *aren't* on the take.

And ya, they might not vote the way you want, but that's the American political system- checks and balances.

It's the corruption that needs to be reigned in.

[thrasymachus]

For me, the answers are there...enforcement of rigid rules to keep pols from accepting illegal donations. (And laws like Feingold/McCain need to be repealed because all they do is make it so that campaign politics dives into the mud via a third party).

Each side knows that they've got folks who are willing to accept a bribe. For every Randall 'Duke' Cunningham, there's a Maxine Waters and Charles Rangel.

Of course Maxine 'Muddy' Waters lobbied the Feds on behalf of her husband's bank. Her husband's ventures affect her livelihood.

Of course Rangel tried to utilize his power and influence illegally. He and Charles Schumer tried to exert their influence on NY politics by having Hillary run for office.

But the vast majority of folks up on the Hill *aren't* on the take.

And ya, they might not vote the way you want, but that's the American political system- checks and balances.

It's the corruption that needs to be reigned in.

That may or may not be true. I don't believe it, though.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

That may or may not be true. I don't believe it, though. It'd be very easy for the cops on the Hill- and the FBI- to catch these guys if that were true.

If you were to go through each Congressional class (every 2 years), you'd honestly find very few arrests per number of members of that Congress.

[thrasymachus]

It'd be very easy for the cops on the Hill- and the FBI- to catch these guys if that were true.

If you were to go through each Congressional class (every 2 years), you'd honestly find very few arrests per number of members of that Congress.
I don't know about that. I doubt these guys are explicit about their dealings. I think most politicians are dirty in some way.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

I don't know about that. I doubt these guys are explicit about their dealings. I think most politicians are dirty in some way. Define 'dirty'.

I'm defining it as being flat out 'corrupt'. Others here might define it as saying one thing and doing another (which is total irony).

Even if you included those who've been censured, found in contempt, impeached, and reprimanded the total number versus each Congressional class is actually small.

What people hate is those gosh darned pollytishuns votin' the way they shouldn't.

But those same people keep voting their own representatives in.

Yes, you all have 'term limits'....even if your State didn't vote on it as a proposition.

This- Term Limits- is just another one of Ashy's more ignorant suppositions in life.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

Lemme just be clear....

'Term Limits'- the completely political limitation of a term for an elected official- is stupid beyond belief.

I wasn't in favor of it when i first learned of what the GOP did to FDR, and i'm not in favor of it for any elected official- partisan or otherwise.

It serves no purpose but to buttress the feelings of those voters who like to bitterly complain but don't get involved in the political process to any extent...IMO.

[pnkpanther]

Do you like this one???

I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

Oh that's right. You abhor 'extremism'....but don't seem to abhor it when it's gays protesting and committing acts of full-on disobedience.

They have the right to assembly and protest. I dont always approve of their actions, but they dont consult me either.

[hannitykillspuppies]

This thread is sick.

You already have 'term limits' in place.

Show up to the voting booth and *vote*.that clearly doesn't work.

[hannitykillspuppies]

Why in the hell would you want to enact term limits??
That's how CA got into trouble. The lobbyists run Sacto, not the junior-grade legislators who barely get to know what's what by the time their term is up.because career politicians suck and are more concerned about continuing their career rather than productively and efficiently running the country.

[pnkpanther]

This thread is sick.

You already have 'term limits' in place.

Show up to the voting booth and *vote*.

Took you two posts into thread to ignore what think tank is supposed to be. You can be anti term limits and present why w/o saying people who are for them and posting that idea as "sucking"

[KinjaKahn]

Three terms for the house and two terms for the senate are both plenty. Nobody other than Barry Goldwater should serve longer than that.
this... but I would not be opposed to putting a 12 year limit on all elected officials, and do away with pensions... hopefully that would eliminate the career politicians.

[Jiddy78]

A 2 year term seems to short to me...I agree with those that say those folks would spend more time campaigning than making said difference.

[Peter for President]

A 2 year term seems to short to me...I agree with those that say those folks would spend more time campaigning than making said difference.

That's good in some cases.

[mosaic]

That's good in some cases.

Like when?

[BoredWithNoSB]

Like when?

Even when someone I don't agree with is in, I like to see them have the chance to try their ideas. Nobody knows for sure what will work. Everything on both sides of the aisle economics-wise is theory. Its just which theory you buy into.
Take Michigan, for example, I didn't buy into almost anything that Engler thought, but was happy he at least tried doing something. Thanks to his efforts people now have a better idea on what works and what doesn't under certain conditions. Unfortunately, few have taken the lessons and tried to build on them.

[domenick2x]

this... but I would not be opposed to putting a 12 year limit on all elected officials, and do away with pensions... hopefully that would eliminate the career politicians.
Just eliminating the pensions can be a step in the right direction.

[Vegas]

Just eliminating the pensions can be a step in the right direction.

I'm not sure eliminating pensions would change anything. I'd much prefer they pass a law that bars former congress folk from lobbying for a few years after they leave office. The current situation is sickening.

[domenick2x]

I'm not sure eliminating pensions would change anything. I'd much prefer they pass a law that bars former congress folk from lobbying for a few years after they leave office. The current situation is sickening.
I'd think 10 years would work, and I'd be absolutely on board with that.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

that clearly doesn't work. Which is why we had massive turnover here in the 70's when Prop 13 passed. The incoming pols were called 'Prop 13 Babies'.

Yup, showing up to 'vote the bums out' never works...those bums always work until they die or retire. :rolleyes:

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

because career politicians suck and are more concerned about continuing their career rather than productively and efficiently running the country. It's more likely that you and others like you refuse to show up to a poll to vote or maybe even work for a different campaign- or even encourage somebody you know to run for office- and want 'term limits' an easy way to enact an agenda that you really don't want to have to 'work' for.

'Term limits' is the easy road that many folks fool themselves into wanting to take. And we all know what the road to hell is paved with, right???

(Want an example of lobbyists completely running politics?? See 'California')

Prior to term limits, the State didn't have budget crises as deep as what we're now seeing. Why?? Because lobbyists didn't always know more than the politicians they're lobbying and there was a steadier/consistent leadership regardless of which party was in power.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

Took you two posts into thread to ignore what think tank is supposed to be. You can be anti term limits and present why w/o saying people who are for them and posting that idea as "sucking" 'Sick' and 'suck' are two completely different words, Mr. Comprehension.

Where'd i attack anybody or say they 'sucked'????????

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

That's good in some cases.
Like when? Like when they're out campaigning thus Congress isn't in session voting to raise taxes.

Same with what i alluded to here previously- gridlock.

[domenick2x]

It's more likely that you and others like you refuse to show up to a poll to vote or maybe even work for a different campaign- or even encourage somebody you know to run for office- and want 'term limits' an easy way to enact an agenda that you really don't want to have to 'work' for.

'Term limits' is the easy road that many folks fool themselves into wanting to take. And we all know what the road to hell is paved with, right???

(Want an example of lobbyists completely running politics?? See 'California')

Prior to term limits, the State didn't have budget crises as deep as what we're now seeing. Why?? Because lobbyists didn't always know more than the politicians they're lobbying and there was a steadier/consistent leadership regardless of which party was in power.

Yes. Door to Door salesmen. The younger demons occasionally go skating down that road for fun.

[hannitykillspuppies]

Which is why we had massive turnover here in the 70's when Prop 13 passed. The incoming pols were called 'Prop 13 Babies'.

Yup, showing up to 'vote the bums out' never works...those bums always work until they die or retire. :rolleyes:

oh, the 70's. so relevant.

[hannitykillspuppies]

It's more likely that you and others like you refuse to show up to a poll to vote or maybe even work for a different campaign- or even encourage somebody you know to run for office- and want 'term limits' an easy way to enact an agenda that you really don't want to have to 'work' for.

'Term limits' is the easy road that many folks fool themselves into wanting to take. And we all know what the road to hell is paved with, right???

(Want an example of lobbyists completely running politics?? See 'California')

Prior to term limits, the State didn't have budget crises as deep as what we're now seeing. Why?? Because lobbyists didn't always know more than the politicians they're lobbying and there was a steadier/consistent leadership regardless of which party was in power.
wait, i thought showing up to the polls was 'term limits.' now 'term limits' consists of voting, working for a campaign, and getting people to run for office. make up your mind.

why don't you start a thread about lobbyists, hell they're probably already is one.

[swordfish]

Talk trash if you want.

Ron Paul doesn't suck and he is not corrupt. For some reason tho, you still won't listen to the man.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

Yes. Door to Door salesmen. The younger demons occasionally go skating down that road for fun. If they did it for fun, they'd probably be more aware of their actions then they are when they blindly come up with these great ideas- like term limits- and tell everybody that *this* will be the magic bullet to get rid of them thar scoundrels.

Yes, it gets rid of the scoundrels that you elect, and the system replaces them with scoundrels you can't/don't elect called lobbyists.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

oh, the 70's. so relevant.
Ohh the 90's, even more relevant.

That's when CA passed term limits and the dumbass Republicans who went for it thought there'd be way in hell the dems would ever return to power like they had with Willie Brown at the helm.

When's the last time we had a GOP Speaker of the Assembly??? GOP State Senate leader????

Buehler....Buehler.....anybody???

Second question: How's that economy/budget been doing ever since CA passed term limits???

Buehler.....??????

[domenick2x]

If they did it for fun, they'd probably be more aware of their actions then they are when they blindly come up with these great ideas- like term limits- and tell everybody that *this* will be the magic bullet to get rid of them thar scoundrels.

Yes, it gets rid of the scoundrels that you elect, and the system replaces them with scoundrels you can't/don't elect called lobbyists.
You completely missed the reference, which is fine... but I'm not sure what direction you were trying to take it.

[hannitykillspuppies]

Ohh the 90's, even more relevant.

That's when CA passed term limits and the dumbass Republicans who went for it thought there'd be way in hell the dems would ever return to power like they had with Willie Brown at the helm.

When's the last time we had a GOP Speaker of the Assembly??? GOP State Senate leader????

Buehler....Buehler.....anybody???

Second question: How's that economy/budget been doing ever since CA passed term limits???

Buehler.....??????well why don't you work on a campaign or ask one of your friends to run? that should be all you need to do.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

well why don't you work on a campaign or ask one of your friends to run? that should be all you need to do. I have...many a time.

You???

[hannitykillspuppies]

I have...many a time.

You???
oh, so your solution changed nothing in your state. good to know.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

oh, so your solution changed nothing in your state. good to know. Yup, none of the folks i worked with or sent money to got elected. None of 'em. :rolleyes:

Every single New Directions (liberal) rino candidates all won easily versus the candidates i sided with for Sheriff, DA, Congress, Assembly, and Central Committee.

And chances are Barbara Boxer won't be sitting in the same seat she's sat in the past number of terms come November. And that will have happened *without* 'term limits'. :rolleyes:

[hannitykillspuppies]

Ohh the 90's, even more relevant.

That's when CA passed term limits and the dumbass Republicans who went for it thought there'd be way in hell the dems would ever return to power like they had with Willie Brown at the helm.

When's the last time we had a GOP Speaker of the Assembly??? GOP State Senate leader????

Buehler....Buehler.....anybody???

Second question: How's that economy/budget been doing ever since CA passed term limits???

Buehler.....??????

Yup, none of the folks i worked with or sent money to got elected. None of 'em. :rolleyes:

Every single New Directions (liberal) rino candidates all won easily versus the candidates i sided with for Sheriff, DA, Congress, Assembly, and Central Committee.

And chances are Barbara Boxer won't be sitting in the same seat she's sat in the past number of terms come November. And that will have happened *without* 'term limits'. :rolleyes:yet you still complain about what's going on in your state. i guess you just need to work on more campaigns and get more of your friends to run. then you should be able to get rid of all the shitty politicians in your state.

[mosaic]

yet you still complain about what's going on in your state. i guess you just need to work on more campaigns and get more of your friends to run. then you should be able to get rid of all the shitty politicians in your state.

He DOES live in Cali, can you blame him for incessently complaining about that hole in the wall?

[domenick2x]

He DOES live in Cali, can you blame him for incessently complaining about that hole in the wall?
Just like the gay marriage advocates, he's welcome to move elsewhere where the general public matches his convictions.

[mosaic]

Just like the gay marriage advocates, he's welcome to move elsewhere where the general public matches his convictions.

He strikes me as the kind of gentle-fellow who want complain even if the general public matches his convictions. Wouldnt shock me at all, actually..

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

Just like the gay marriage advocates, he's welcome to move elsewhere where the general public matches his convictions. Much like i've told you regarding political parties, i don't run, i'd rather stay and fight the good fight.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

yet you still complain about what's going on in your state. i guess you just need to work on more campaigns and get more of your friends to run. then you should be able to get rid of all the shitty politicians in your state. Funny thing is, i might complain, but i *do* something.

You...???????

[hannitykillspuppies]

Funny thing is, i might complain, but i *do* something.

You...???????
yes you do something which you claim to be the real solution. which you've proven is not a solution at all.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

yes you do something which you claim to be the real solution. which you've proven is not a solution at all.
How is getting folks elected- who i favor over other candidates- "not a solution at all"????

You really can't be this stupid, can you???

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

yes you do something.... Shoulda just stopped your post right there.

[hannitykillspuppies]

Ohh the 90's, even more relevant.

That's when CA passed term limits and the dumbass Republicans who went for it thought there'd be way in hell the dems would ever return to power like they had with Willie Brown at the helm.

When's the last time we had a GOP Speaker of the Assembly??? GOP State Senate leader????

Buehler....Buehler.....anybody???

Second question: How's that economy/budget been doing ever since CA passed term limits???

Buehler.....??????

How is getting folks elected- who i favor over other candidates- "not a solution at all"????

You really can't be this stupid, can you???

you seem to have an issue with how your state is being governed. you claim to have the solution, which is not term limits. you said you've used your solution. yet you're complaining about how your state is being governed.

hopefully that was simple enough for you to understand.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

you seem to have an issue with how your state is being governed. you claim to have the solution, which is not term limits. you said you've used your solution. yet you're complaining about how your state is being governed.

hopefully that was simple enough for you to understand. This particular thread seems to be more Drunk Tank than Think Tank.

Thanks again, Chuckles.
:rolleyes:

[hannitykillspuppies]

This particular thread seems to be more Drunk Tank than Think Tank.

Thanks again, Chuckles.
:rolleyes:

i'm thrilled i was able to start a thread where not one single person agrees with you.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

i'm thrilled i was able to start a thread where not one single person agrees with you. Big whoop.

Start a Dodgers thread in the Phllies forum on the other board.
:rolleyes:

[domenick2x]

i'm thrilled i was able to start a thread where not one single person agrees with you.
To be fair, I'm not sure I disagree with Ghost about term limits.

[hannitykillspuppies]

To be fair, I'm not sure I disagree with Ghost about term limits.

then voice your agreement and be forever shamed.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

To be fair, I'm not sure I disagree with Ghost about term limits. It's not all it's cracked up to be.

And that's me taking a run at one of my own (a Republican Congressman who i've met and knew fairly well back in the day). He was on-board with term limits assuming that it'd be the GOP's savior to get Willie Brown out of office.

So now we've had how many 'Willie Browns'???

Brown dominated the Speaker's office for 15 years. In almost the past 15 years, we've had dems do the same thing. Same party, different person, and the over all business up North (the budget) has actually gotten worse.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

then voice your agreement and be forever shamed. Gotta love how folks with weak spirits/little backbone have to resort to the 'Survivor island' tactic of getting others to go along with them so they feel special and liked.

Thanks for your input, Corky. You're definitely special.

[domenick2x]

then voice your agreement and be forever shamed.
With us or against us?

[hannitykillspuppies]

With us or against us?

with straw or against straw.

[hannitykillspuppies]

Gotta love how folks with weak spirits/little backbone have to resort to the 'Survivor island' tactic of getting others to go along with them so they feel special and liked.

Thanks for your input, Corky. You're definitely special.

you'd have to have a backbone in order for me to give a shit about you commenting about mine.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

you'd have to have a backbone in order for me to give a shit about you commenting about mine.

Post= what again????

[hannitykillspuppies]

Post= what again????

care. it's not difficult to remember. then again i'm talking to a guy who doesn't understand the lotto.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

care. it's not difficult to remember. then again i'm talking to a guy who doesn't understand the lotto.
Guy wins a small $3 mill jackpot. 1 million tickets were played/bought for that drawing. It was the first drawing for that jackpot since it was beginning of a new round.

Several months later, a guy wins a HUGE jackpot for $300 million. The pot had to roll over several times and the numbers of players/tickets bought increased dramatically.

Yup, the odds on each of those- when you compare the number of tickets sold/bought in each case to how many people won the jackpot- were exactly, precisely the same.

:rolleyes:

[kydoty]

Gotta love how folks with weak spirits/little backbone have to resort to the 'Survivor island' tactic of getting others to go along with them so they feel special and liked.

Wouldn't somebody with a little backbone feel the need to go line by line with a large political party in order to make themselves feel better instead of actually having a sack and admitting that they disagree with some aspects of the agenda despite the backlash it will cause?

[mosaic]

Im not sure Ghost doesnt have backbone. I think that was a poor choice of description there Hkp.

[kydoty]

Guy wins a small $3 mill jackpot. 1 million tickets were played/bought for that drawing. It was the first drawing for that jackpot since it was beginning of a new round.

Several months later, a guy wins a HUGE jackpot for $300 million. The pot had to roll over several times and the numbers of players/tickets bought increased dramatically.

Yup, the odds on each of those- when you compare the number of tickets sold/bought in each case to how many people won the jackpot- were exactly, precisely the same.

:rolleyes:

I've been ignoring this for awhile, but I can't anymore. Yes, the odds are exactly the same. Take a look at Powerball, for example.

http://powerball.com/powerball/pb_prizes.asp

The odds of winning the $20 million jackpot are the same as winning the $200 million jackpot, 1 in 195,249,054.

What part of this concept is so hard to understand?

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

I've been ignoring this for awhile, but I can't anymore. Yes, the odds are exactly the same. Take a look at Powerball, for example.

http://powerball.com/powerball/pb_prizes.asp

The odds of winning the $20 million jackpot are the same as winning the $200 million jackpot, 1 in 195,249,054.

What part of this concept is so hard to understand? You're talking about something i'm not even addressing.

Yes, that'd be a problem.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

Wouldn't somebody with a little backbone feel the need to go line by line with a large political party in order to make themselves feel better instead of actually having a sack and admitting that they disagree with some aspects of the agenda despite the backlash it will cause?
What does admitting that i have a problem with certain Republicans have to do with why i shouldn't vote for 'em (especially if they're closer to my ideology than anybody else on the ballot????)

Having stones, or sack or whatever term you wanna use doesn't translate into not voting for the closest candidate to one's ideology.

I'm not entirely thrilled with Carly Fiorina, but i'd rather see her in office than Barbara Boxer.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

I've been ignoring this for awhile, but I can't anymore. Yes, the odds are exactly the same. Take a look at Powerball, for example.

http://powerball.com/powerball/pb_prizes.asp

The odds of winning the $20 million jackpot are the same as winning the $200 million jackpot, 1 in 195,249,054.

What part of this concept is so hard to understand? The person who won $20 million beat the stated odds very easily (but didn't profit as much). That person's real/actual stats would've been somewhat lower than the guy who won $200 mill.

Capiche???

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

"Keep the Democrats out the boardroom and keep the Republicans out of the bedroom." - Jesse Ventura Ohh the irony.

First, we've got KY talking about voters using big brass ones when not voting in partisan-fashion.

But then we've got KY's sigline quoting a guy who told tall tails about how he'd reform State giov't.

...but then fled- after one term- the first chance he got.

Seems the only person not in the boardroom is ole Jesse 'cut-and-run' Ventura.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

Beginning about the 1830s, Jacksonian democracy introduced a less idealistic twist to the practice of limiting terms. Rotation in office came to mean taking turns in the distribution of political prizes.[17] Rotation of nominations to the U.S. House of Representatives – the prizes – became a key element of payoffs to the party faithful. The leading lights in the local party machinery came to regard a nomination for the House as "salary" for political services rendered. A new code of political ethics evolved, based on the proposition that "turnabout is fair play."[18] In short, rotation of nominations was intertwined with the spoils system.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Term_limits_in_the_United_States

Yup, Wiki-stoopedia even says that a dem did this.
-------------------------------------------------
Federal term limits

As of 2007, term limits at the federal level are restricted to the executive branch and some agencies. Judicial appointments at the federal level are made for life, and are not subject to election or term limits. The U.S. Congress remains (since the Thornton decision of 1995) without electoral limits.

Same source.

:rolleyes:

In case those of you who thought term limits was actually an option...

In May 1995, the United States Supreme Court [21] 5-4 in U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779 (1995) that states cannot impose term limits upon their federal Representatives or Senators.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

/idiot thread

[domenick2x]

The person who won $20 million beat the stated odds very easily (but didn't profit as much). That person's real/actual stats would've been somewhat lower than the guy who won $200 mill.

Capiche???
No, you lunatic. The odds of winning the jackpot are exactly the same! It's not about 'beating the odds', it's the odds of winning.

[domenick2x]

with straw or against straw.
So if he says he hates Al Sharpton, I have to say I like Al Sharpton?

Denied.

It's an issue by issue thing. On this issue, I'm not so sure I'm against his point of view.

[hannitykillspuppies]

So if he says he hates Al Sharpton, I have to say I like Al Sharpton?

Denied.

It's an issue by issue thing. On this issue, I'm not so sure I'm against his point of view.

everyone hates al sharpton.

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

everyone hates al sharpton.
So you're now saying you wanna be on the same side as me, huh??

[Fire Millen]

I think career politicians have become a huge issue. Especially in congress where congressmen and women seem to start their re-election campaign right after winning said seat.

I'd like to extend the term to 3 years with 4 term limit and for the senate a
3 term limit.

[KinjaKahn]

care. it's not difficult to remember. then again i'm talking to a guy who doesn't understand the lotto.
Says the guy in need of a sandwich instruction manual... :)

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

I think career politicians have become a huge issue. Especially in congress where congressmen and women seem to start their re-election campaign right after winning said seat.

I'd like to extend the term to 3 years with 4 term limit and for the senate a
3 term limit. Problem, though (like i pointed out previously), is that term limits for Federal offices are unconstitutional. So that pretty much makes Chuckle's thread a moot point.


As far as arguing the academic nature of this, personally, i'd rather have the career politician in office than the p/t flunkie who doesn't know where the proverbial bodies are hidden.

What i've seen here is Sacto go from a place where the long-term politicians (from both parties) knew they'd be in office for quite some time so they worked with each other even if they hated one-another. And that has transformed into the lobbyists knowing more than the elected official does about everything from Robert's Rules to who to go to when writing a bill. And when i say 'lobbyist' that would include former long-term/career politicians who've gone to the other side (and that's happened on both sides of the aisle, not just with one party).

Now, getting back to my point about people working with one another, the reason we've seen such vitriolic hate inside the Beltway is because of the Feingold-McCain bill and it allowing outside groups to sling the mud on their behalf.

When campaigns can have a surrogate- that they don't control- sling the crapola, they're more likely to just point to that org's ad and shrug their shoulders and not try to influence that org to play fair. Afterall, the Feingold-McCain law makes it illegal for a candidate to- in any way- influence an org.

And i also still am of the mindset that most politicians- however ineffective- aren't corrupt....the system, however, puts them at odds with higher-ups who are corrupt.

Even with term limits, you're always going to have the Chiefs and the Tribesmen. And the Tribesmen will always have to follow a Chief's orders to some degree. It's in the natural order of things for humans to want to coalesce/become part of a group and for a leader to arise out of said group. And anybody who thinks that reforming the party system will do the trick is daft. A bunch of 'Independents' will also coalesce/caucus with other politicians (the ones in Congress caucus with the dems, btw).

[domenick2x]

Problem, though (like i pointed out previously), is that term limits for Federal offices are unconstitutional. So that pretty much makes Chuckle's thread a moot point.




Maybe I need to go back and reread it, but I thought that what you posted said that STATES cannot force term limits on federal offices. Clearly it'd have to be an amendment to the Constitution to enact term limits, which then wouldn't be unConstitutional - or, theoretically, Congress could pass a law that would enact term limits (and just as easily remove them at a later date).

[Jesse Helms' Ghost]

Maybe I need to go back and reread it, but I thought that what you posted said that STATES cannot force term limits on federal offices. Clearly it'd have to be an amendment to the Constitution to enact term limits, which then wouldn't be unConstitutional - or, theoretically, Congress could pass a law that would enact term limits (and just as easily remove them at a later date). Congress and us citizens can pass a term limits Amendment, but that takes all sorts of politicking and voting or a major event to happen lest it be seen as one party trying to term limit the other (as with what happened in FDR's time).

I honestly don't think a Term Limits Amendment would even get off the ground very well. There'd have to be a 'perfect storm' type of event for that to happen....say a whole bunch of politicians being caught doing something illegal.

And we've had that in the past (ABSCAM comes to mind) and even then folks didn't get all in an uproar to limit the terms of Congressmen/Senators

As i mentioned previously in this tread, the vast majority of politicians in DC aren't corrupt. Maybe they don't vote the way we want them to, but that's not going to get 'term limits' off and flying as a viable Amendment to the Constitution.

[Iron Jaw]

Problem, though (like i pointed out previously), is that term limits for Federal offices are unconstitutional. So that pretty much makes Chuckle's thread a moot point.


I doubt the ratification process for an amendment to the constitution to "make it constitutional" (like they did with the office of president) would be difficult. The problem would be getting it through the federal legislature by a 2/3 majority vote.