RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders?

RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

rightwinghippie -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (8/31/2009 11:02:55 PM)
No, term limits are not the solution to our problems, and deprive the voters of experienced representatives.

slutslave4u -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/1/2009 8:37:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rightwinghippie No, term limits are not the solution to our problems, and deprive the voters of experienced representatives. experienced representatives? I'm not asking nor saying a very limited term as in 2-4 years....but what I'm referring to are those that are clearly in dire need of retiring due to either age or health per say more so than anything. When you have one sitting in office that is 91 in a wheel chair and cant do for himself, you feel comfortable in his making decisions for your life? Not to mention that yes, all parties....c'mon, dont you think they are actually in it for the money and prestige for their own right? I mean yes it is true their "pay" could be 6 figures, but then they are making thousands/millions in "other" ways for their being in office....after all, isnt it all about the money for most?

subrob1967 -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/1/2009 3:26:01 PM)
Mandatory retirement at 70 I say

popeye1250 -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/1/2009 4:52:49 PM)
Yes, two terms in the senate and five in the house is more than adequate! Also age 65 should be the cut-off for anyone in govt. judges included.

servantforuse -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/1/2009 7:59:59 PM)
Hi kdsub, A two term presidency is more than a tradition, it is federal law. No one can serve more than two full terms.

ToBUsedandAbused -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/1/2009 8:29:17 PM)
Actually there was no law limiting the Presidency to 2 terms until after FDR. He served 4 terms. I do however believe that Congressmen and Senators should have limits on how long they serve. I think the laws should be changed as follows. Senators should serve 8 year terms and no more than 2 terms. I think Congressmen should serve 4 years terms as they do now but no more than 4 terms total. I think the President should serve 6 year terms and no more than 2 terms. Someone mentioned earlier that we should not be deprived of experienced officals. My opinion is that by allowing the older to remain year after year that we end up depriving our nation of new and fresh ideas. We also deny our young people the opportunity of gaining experience if we keep too many older ones in. I do think there should be a maximum age limit of 75 on any elected offical. I do not believe that any elected offical should be permitted to be employed by any business that has any kind of business dealings with the government either before they become an elected offical nor after they leave office. I believe that ANY politican who is caught lying for any reason (other than national security) should be impeached and removed from office and then prosecuted. This will stop the false campaign promises. Personally I would like to see a law that prohibits any elected offical from campaigning until the last year of their elected term. They are elected to do a job, and they can't do the job they were elected to do if they are out campaigning. Absolutely NO elected offical should be allowed to run for any other office until their current term has expired.

popeye1250 -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/1/2009 9:45:32 PM)
Congressmen serve two year terms.

ToBUsedandAbused -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/2/2009 2:18:33 AM)
I know what the term lengths are currently. I said what I think it should change to

kdsub -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/2/2009 7:28:17 AM)
Before it was a law it was a tradition...check it out. I think because Washington and Jefferson decided not to run for a third term most politicians adhered to their example... I believe only three tried for a third term and only one made it before it was a law about 62 years ago. Butch

popeye1250 -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/2/2009 1:48:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rightwinghippie No, term limits are not the solution to our problems, and deprive the voters of experienced representatives. Hippie, that's the problem in Washington, there's too many people with too much "experience!" They're entrenched there.

SpinnerofTales -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/2/2009 1:56:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery ~FR~ Everybody's against the rascals--but everybody is FOR their OWN rascal. Face it--we have met the people at the trough, and they is us. Sure, it's more complicated than that. But reform starts there--or it dies on election day. You hit the nail on the head. Polls have shown that while people may have a dim view of congressmen and senators, they do like thier congressment and senators. Pork is obviously money given to others, while needed distribution of government funds is what is given to them.

Irishknight -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/3/2009 5:43:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Congressmen serve two year terms. Representatives serve two year terms and Senators serve six year terms. Both are congressmen. Congress is made up of The House of Misrepresentation and the US Senate so both sets of overpaid asswipes are congressmen. Just a further clarification on what Popeye began. And, there most certainly need to be term limits on congressional seats as well as Supreme court appointments. Even the best congressman in the world is going to be out of touch after ten to twelve years in congress. Make them get out and see what is really going on in the country. Set the term limits to so many consecutive terms so that after they reaquaint themselves with those they claim to serve, they can get back to it. Serve for ten to twelve years, take a one four to six year break and then do it again if your interest is truly to serve the people and not to have them serve you.

MrRodgers -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/3/2009 7:14:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thunderbird56 I say no term limits. As desirable and beneficial as the results of term limits might be, it reduces our freedom to say that we can't vote for someone. Clearly John Q. Voter isn't doing his/her job as once in office incumbents in congress have a 98% chance of being re-elected, but that's no valid reason to eliminate one more freedom/choice of the public's. With that I will say, "Throw them out!". Fine, now let's see you vote out MY corrupt 'committee chairman' who allows HIS contributors to write bills that affect you. Term limits will be our only savior. 4 house terms, 2 senate terms. Our country was founded with the idea of 'citizen' legislators who would not even be in session for most of the year. Now we have a political class the vast majority of which are millionaire lawyers. We seek and support the plutocracy with career politicians and...without term limits. Maybe the public will wake up when we have our first $Trillion election cycle. How much free speech do you have in the bank ?

Musicmystery -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/3/2009 2:02:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slutslave4u Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? No. It sounds all cool and shit, but like any other arbitrary reaction, does nothing to solve anything.

slutslave4u -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/3/2009 2:12:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: ORIGINAL: slutslave4u Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? No. It sounds all cool and shit, but like any other arbitrary reaction, does nothing to solve anything. so you do not think fresh faces and new ideas are a good idea, rather the same old tired idiots, crooks and tyrants stay in office for and til the end of their lives solely for their own gain to pad their pockets with the $$$$$ that they are and will be getting BESIDES their "salary" for the job they are suppose to be doing? some mention experience.....so how is anyone to gain experience when you have the same old tired ones taking office and living it, and thinking they "own" the position as family position instead of what it was and is intented to be? I'm sorry, while yes I do enjoy the different comments and statements made......me, yes I do believe there should be term limits in place for ALL political positions from the President on down to the local city council period!

popeye1250 -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/3/2009 4:06:33 PM)
I think that anything that "limits" govt. is a good thing.

Acer49 -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/4/2009 6:17:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven It's not the length of service that I object to, it's the fact that clout is related directly to seniority. Thus a Thurmond, Byrd, Kennedy, or Ted Stevens is able to consistently deliver "the goods" (pork) back home. It's a kickback system that's entirely legal and open - the Congressperson/Senator uses the resources of the United States to get goodies for his or her home state and receives reelection as a reward. I wish there was a solution. The line-item veto gives the President too much power IMO. If I understand line item veto, it stops lawmakers from piggybacking questionable legislation on a desired bill. I do not see this as a bad thing, because good legislation will stand up on its own

Musicmystery -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/4/2009 7:30:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slutslave4u quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: ORIGINAL: slutslave4u Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? No. It sounds all cool and shit, but like any other arbitrary reaction, does nothing to solve anything. so you do not think fresh faces and new ideas are a good idea Know what? I think scoring well in mandatory classes in logic, economics and history should be prerequisites to the right to vote. Twisting a statement into its opposite does not follow. Nowhere did I raise any objection to fresh faces and new ideas. That's your miscreation. I DID say that throwing out experienced legislators wholesale as an arbitrary reaction would solve nothing. Fresh faces come wholesale into the House periodically, by the way. It creates buzz for a while. Then it settles into business as usual. That's because things happen for structural reasons, not because of cool sound bites.

slutslave4u -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/4/2009 9:41:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: ORIGINAL: slutslave4u quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: ORIGINAL: slutslave4u Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? No. It sounds all cool and shit, but like any other arbitrary reaction, does nothing to solve anything. so you do not think fresh faces and new ideas are a good idea Know what? I think scoring well in mandatory classes in logic, economics and history should be prerequisites to the right to vote. Twisting a statement into its opposite does not follow. Nowhere did I raise any objection to fresh faces and new ideas. That's your miscreation. I DID say that throwing out experienced legislators wholesale as an arbitrary reaction would solve nothing. Fresh faces come wholesale into the House periodically, by the way. It creates buzz for a while. Then it settles into business as usual. That's because things happen for structural reasons, not because of cool sound bites. and nowhere did I say that you did....simply was a question, no twisting of anything and no miscreations......rather questions

Musicmystery -> RE: Should There Be Limits On Terms In Office For Our Political Leaders? (9/4/2009 10:12:16 AM)
Look up rhetorical question. Then disingenuous.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0390625