You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #11: sure it is... [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
apnu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-13-04 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. sure it is...
... and hauling out the Contract with America? Boy that died a horrible death didn't it? Whee! Term limits on committee chairs in the House... Big whoop. CA didn't change a damn thing, it was a sham from beginning to end. But the best lies are the ones with a nugget of truth in them aren't they? Kinda like the Compassionate Conservative manafesto... a whopper of a lie with a few nuggets of truth in them. Don't be decieved...

No, complete term limits on all elected officials, means that our entire government will basically have to fire itself if it ever enacts a such a law. Which will never happen, that would be like me firing myself after 3 years at a job because it's time for someone else, it's a hard thought, and one that's extremely unlikely to ever see the light of day, but I do believe that our government should serve the people. And that our current system is not serving that end. It's pretty clear.

Why would a corporation invest tons of time and money on a senator or rep when they only have 2 or 3 terms to be the puppet of the special interest? Being able to only "rent" a senator for a limited time, and then being forced to start the courting process all over again would make it cost INeffective to continue.

As for sending their own senators into the mix, should complete term limits be implemented, don't they do that already today? At least with term limits, they wouldn't be able to entrench that stoolie, and would be forced to re-invest in a new stoolie every so often. Also an expensive proposition. And one thing corporations hate with a passion is spending their money.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC