Reply #31: First [View All]

[rpannier]

In fairness to Strom Thurmond, he had a reputation on Capitol Hill that was second only to Sen Edward Kennedy when it came to constituent service. Until 1988, when you called Sen. Thurmond's office and said you wanted to speak to the Senator, he called back within hours -- no matter who you were (This has been mentioned by many Senators, including Kennedy, over the years). His constituents felt he best represented them. Whether you feel that way or not is irrelevant (unless you are from South Carolina), just like my choosing to vote for and represented by Obama and Durbin are my choices and the choices of Illinois voters -- not yours or anyone else outside of Illinois. It's what being in a Republic is all about.
As to your assertion, how would I like scrubbie to be president until 2100? No I wouldn't. But that's not the point. The point is, "Are term limits really democratic?" I think they are not. The people should be allowed to be represented by whom they want -- Hence Franklin Roosevelt won 4 Presidential elections because that's who the PEOPLE wanted to be President. I find it interesting that you use scrubbo to try and defend your point, instead of focusing in on the only man who served more than two terms as president. Thus making it sound bad to want a man to be president more than two terms. How about this for a scenario -- Iwould like Clinton to have been able to have run again. I would have liked Bill to be President 3 or 4 times. Is that more acceptable to you?
And as I have said before. We have had crappy Presidents, Legislators and Judges over the past 200+ years. We have also had very talented Presidents, Legislators and Jurists as well. The country will survive two, or even three of his picks.
In conclusion, I heard this same incessant whining when Reagan picked Kennedy and Bush Sr picked Souter. Get over it. We'll survive.