John Boehner to resign

[mojo84]

We already have term limits. It is called the vote.

The people get the government they vote for. They deserve it and I hope they get it good and hard.

We are never going to vote our way out of the mess. The vote means nothing. Everything that happens in DC is planned.

I would agree if gerrymandering the districts were eliminated. Until they are, we need term limits for all elected officials.

[anygunanywhere]

We already have term limits. It is called the vote.

The people get the government they vote for. They deserve it and I hope they get it good and hard.

We are never going to vote our way out of the mess. The vote means nothing. Everything that happens in DC is planned.

I would agree if gerrymandering the districts were eliminated. Until they are, we need term limits for all elected officials.

Kind of a catch-22. You have to vote in term limits just like you have to vote in true conservatives.

Not going to happen. The vote is not going to change anything. The last mid term election proves it.

[anygunanywhere]

I told you so. Nothing changed after the last election.

viewtopic.php?f=83&t=74996&p=944917#p944917

[mojo84]

I told you so. Nothing changed after the last election.

viewtopic.php?f=83&t=74996&p=944917#p944917

See my post two posts after yours in the thread you reference.

We will never be able to vote enough of them out with the gerrymandering that takes place. Therefore, neither term limits nor election is the practical answer as things stand now.

[ShootDontTalk]

SNIP...
I would urge caution in tinkering with the system the geniuses of the Constitution came up with, that has worked so well thus far.

What "system" is that? The 22nd Amendment is term limiting, but only for the President. Obviously the framers saw the inherent risk in a "ruling class." I'm pretty sure they never envisioned what Congress has become. Listen to what Thomas Jefferson said:

In 1807 he wrote, “If some termination to the services of the chief Magistrate be not fixed by the Constitution, or supplied by practice, his office, nominally four years, will in fact become for life.” In other words, according to Jefferson, either the Constitution had to set a limit or else some limit should be set by convention.

I would register my mild disagreement with your position by stating that the only part of government with a lower approval rating than the man who is arguably the worst president in the history of the republic, is Congress. Perhaps the founding fathers, if they could have foreseen this day, might have implemented something relating to Congress. But, the Congress had served them well, if not perfectly, in establishing the republic. No president to interrupt the process. I doubt they had any reason to believe that august body would sink to the depths we see today.

Still in all, you are right. Whatever is done must be well thought out, not "knee-jerked."

[mojo84]

It was not the intent of the framers of our Constitution for elected politicians to be career politcians. They intended citizen representatives to be elected to represent their constituents and then return home to their normal day jobs. The politicians realized they could become rich by remaining in power and the longer they are in power the richer they become. It was supposed to be an opportunity to serve one's country not capitalize on it.

[Abraham]

Yes, but the political aristocracy has metastasized.

[The Annoyed Man]

Gohmert has just thrown his hat in the ring for the speakership: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01 ... hners-job/

[JALLEN]

SNIP...
I would urge caution in tinkering with the system the geniuses of the Constitution came up with, that has worked so well thus far.

What "system" is that? The 22nd Amendment is term limiting, but only for the President. Obviously the framers saw the inherent risk in a "ruling class." I'm pretty sure they never envisioned what Congress has become. Listen to what Thomas Jefferson said:

In 1807 he wrote, “If some termination to the services of the chief Magistrate be not fixed by the Constitution, or supplied by practice, his office, nominally four years, will in fact become for life.” In other words, according to Jefferson, either the Constitution had to set a limit or else some limit should be set by convention.

I would register my mild disagreement with your position by stating that the only part of government with a lower approval rating than the man who is arguably the worst president in the history of the republic, is Congress. Perhaps the founding fathers, if they could have foreseen this day, might have implemented something relating to Congress. But, the Congress had served them well, if not perfectly, in establishing the republic. No president to interrupt the process. I doubt they had any reason to believe that august body would sink to the depths we see today.

Still in all, you are right. Whatever is done must be well thought out, not "knee-jerked."

I"m not so sure. Congress was enmeshed in dispute, controversy, disagreement, vitriol, and hate and discontent, with duels, fights, disappointment since the first. Those Congresses had their imbeciles, liars, dishonorable members, all white men in those days, so there was not the rich fabric of our melting pot as today. Sam Houston beat a Congressman with a hickory cane for dishonoring Houston on the House floor, and escaped being shot because said Congressman's pistol misfired.

The solution is the ballot box. Who are we to tell the people of Florida they cannot again select as their representative a disgraced Federal judge who was impeached, convicted and removed from the bench for bribery, just because they had already selected him several times before?

Before you become too enthusiastic about this as the solution to all problems, study carefully the experience of California which has had term limits in state legislative offices for some years, and is worse off for it, IMnotalwayssoHO.

[The Annoyed Man]

The people get the government they vote for. They deserve it and I hope they get it good and hard.

True dat, Mr. Mencken, but the problem is that they are bringing me and mine down along with them.

[ShootDontTalk]

The solution is the ballot box. Who are we to tell the people of Florida they cannot again select as their representative a disgraced Federal judge who was impeached, convicted and removed from the bench for bribery, just because they had already selected him several times before?

State office? No. Federal office? We already have some regulations in place that determine who the good people of Florida may or may not elect to federal office. I really think that much of the problems in state houses would work themselves out if we didn't have such a cesspool in DC that every politician aspires to join.

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.[1]"

I think we just need to expand it a little.

Before you become too enthusiastic about this as the solution to all problems, study carefully the experience of California which has had term limits in state legislative offices for some years, and is worse off for it, IMnotalwayssoHO.

I don't really think California should be the measure of how successful or unsuccessful any legislation, up to and including, removal of garbage from city streets should be. When was the last time they did anything right?

I'm well aware of the history of the rowdiness of Congress in the early years of the republic. During the time of the writing and ratification of the Constitution, however, they did get the job done under immense pressure of being captured and hung by the British. Thank God they didn't have the added burden of someone like the current POTUS.

Lastly, I don't have any illusion that term limits would solve all our problems. But when you have roaches in the cupboard, you have to start by getting them to leave. Then, and only then, it is worthwhile to clean up the mess they made.

[JALLEN]

The solution is the ballot box. Who are we to tell the people of Florida they cannot again select as their representative a disgraced Federal judge who was impeached, convicted and removed from the bench for bribery, just because they had already selected him several times before?

State office? No. Federal office? We already have some regulations in place that determine who the good people of Florida may or may not elect to federal office. I really think that much of the problems in state houses would work themselves out if we didn't have such a cesspool in DC that every politician aspires to join.

I refer to one Alcee Hastings, one of the very few U.S. District Court judges to be impeached, convicted and remove vied from the bench, now in his 11th term as a Congressman. It has nothing to do with state office.

.....

Before you become too enthusiastic about this as the solution to all problems, study carefully the experience of California which has had term limits in state legislative offices for some years, and is worse off for it, IMnotalwayssoHO.

I don't really think California should be the measure of how successful or unsuccessful any legislation, up to and including, removal of garbage from city streets should be. When was the last time they did anything right?

I rest my case. Term limits is a bad idea. Pete Wilson got in some good moves when he was Governor ~25 years ago but it's been downhill since.

I'm well aware of the history of the rowdiness of Congress in the early years of the republic. During the time of the writing and ratification of the Constitution, however, they did get the job done under immense pressure of being captured and hung by the British. Thank God they didn't have the added burden of someone like the current POTUS.

Lastly, I don't have any illusion that term limits would solve all our problems. But when you have roaches in the cupboard, you have to start by getting them to leave. Then, and only then, it is worthwhile to clean up the mess they made.

Our way is voting them out. You are upset, as am I, that the voters have made appalling choices, which they will continue to do under term limits. It'll just be new cockroaches replacing the term limited ones.

[ShootDontTalk]

The solution is the ballot box. Who are we to tell the people of Florida they cannot again select as their representative a disgraced Federal judge who was impeached, convicted and removed from the bench for bribery, just because they had already selected him several times before?

State office? No. Federal office? We already have some regulations in place that determine who the good people of Florida may or may not elect to federal office. I really think that much of the problems in state houses would work themselves out if we didn't have such a cesspool in DC that every politician aspires to join.

I refer to one Alcee Hastings, one of the very few U.S. District Court judges to be impeached, convicted and remove vied from the bench, now in his 11th term as a Congressman. It has nothing to do with state office.

That is my point. He is a US Congressman. Federal term limits would remove him from serving 11 terms.

Before you become too enthusiastic about this as the solution to all problems, study carefully the experience of California which has had term limits in state legislative offices for some years, and is worse off for it, IMnotalwayssoHO.


I don't really think California should be the measure of how successful or unsuccessful any legislation, up to and including, removal of garbage from city streets should be. When was the last time they did anything right?

I rest my case. Term limits is a bad idea. Pete Wilson got in some good moves when he was Governor ~25 years ago but it's been downhill since.

My point? Anything enacted in California is a bad idea. That doesn't mean term limits for federal offices wouldn't work in saner parts of the world. I don't see many options to fixing the mess. Do you?

That the country will implode is pretty much a foregone conclusion, I fear, unless something drastic happens. History (The Rise and Fall of The Roman Empire for example) is very clear about the consequences of the path America has/is taking.

I'm well aware of the history of the rowdiness of Congress in the early years of the republic. During the time of the writing and ratification of the Constitution, however, they did get the job done under immense pressure of being captured and hung by the British. Thank God they didn't have the added burden of someone like the current POTUS.

Lastly, I don't have any illusion that term limits would solve all our problems. But when you have roaches in the cupboard, you have to start by getting them to leave. Then, and only then, it is worthwhile to clean up the mess they made.

Our way is voting them out. You are upset, as am I, that the voters have made appalling choices, which they will continue to do under term limits. It'll just be new cockroaches replacing the term limited ones.

I see zero chance on the horizon that voters are going to get smarter. We've been "dumbing down" for 30 or more years. Does anyone see any chance of that trend reversing?

The people of France were faced with a similar dilemma. I would rather we try something, anything, before the people of the former United States resort to the same draconian measures the French chose. Any suggestions?

Don't get me wrong. I pray daily that things will change. Perhaps the Lord will intervene, perhaps not. I found it significant that The Book of Revelation, in describing the events of the end times, makes no mention whatsoever of America having a role. Indeed, it would seem America doesn't exist. I'm concerned that my children may see that come to pass.

[JALLEN]

The people Hastings represents keep voting for him. Who can say that another clown they would support would be better? He represents them, not you.

America didn't exist when Revelations was written, and the ideas that make us America had not been thought of or tried.

Thomas Jefferson and John Adams had the same concerns. A lot of people have ideas about how to make things better, and thankfully, for the most part, the country has had the sense not to try them.

Remember Huey Long, Governor/Senator of Louisiana. He pointed out that "one of these days, the people of Louisiana are going to get good government, and they ain't gonna like it."

[ShootDontTalk]

The people Hastings represents keep voting for him. Who can say that another clown they would support would be better? He represents them, not you.

But how he votes adds to the Democratic agenda, and that does affect me - and you.

America didn't exist when Revelations was written, and the ideas that make us America had not been thought of or tried.

This isn't really for us to discuss here, but it is, in the original language, "The Revelation (singular) of Jesus Christ". And Someone who was, is, and is to come had quite a hand in giving John the visions he recorded while he was on Patmos. It isn't a simple book of past history. It is a book of history and history yet to come.

Thomas Jefferson and John Adams had the same concerns. A lot of people have ideas about how to make things better, and thankfully, for the most part, the country has had the sense not to try them.

Remember Huey Long, Governor/Senator of Louisiana. He pointed out that "one of these days, the people of Louisiana are going to get good government, and they ain't gonna like it."

It still begs the question. What are the options? Many Americans don't like their government now, but I think anyone would be hard pressed to say this current administration is good government. Good discussion with no solution in sight. Back to square one.