Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

"Senate rules generally trust that senators act in the public interest, even if they have a financial stake in legislation, ..."

Right!

They skee-rew us at every turn, while profiting massively on our time and payroll.

TERM LIMITS!

1 posted on 07/06/2008 5:34:44 PM PDT by STARWISE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: rodguy911; SE Mom; Bahbah

~~DING!


2 posted on 07/06/2008 5:38:02 PM PDT by STARWISE (They (Dims) think of this WOT as Bush's war, not America's war-RichardMiniter, respected OBL author)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

Any mention of Senator Feinstein in this article and her grievous conflict of interest in pushing govt pork towards her husband’s company or is this just another hit piece on a Republican? Don’t answer, I’m pretty sure I know the answer.


3 posted on 07/06/2008 5:42:13 PM PDT by saganite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE
If we had true investigative journalism like the New York Times was 100 years ago when it brought down the corrupt Tammany Hall machine, we wouldn't need to consider term limits.

If people will refuse to buy/watch/click on anything that isn't true investigative journalism--or buy from their advertisers--we CAN get it back. Yagottawanna bad enough. But if you keep on doing what you've always done, you'll keep on getting what you always got.
8 posted on 07/06/2008 6:10:16 PM PDT by The Spirit Of Allegiance (Public Employees: Honor Your Oaths! Defend the Constitution from Enemies--Foreign and Domestic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE
“Mr. Wertheimer said.”
Mr. Wertheimer is a bigger and bigger government advocate that should be listened to with great caution.
9 posted on 07/06/2008 6:11:07 PM PDT by Whispering Smith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

Yes term-limits. But this writer is onto something I said many times in the last two years: As long as policymakers have the ability to legislate or non-legislate but STILL able to invest in any of America’s critical infrastructure’s you’ll always will have bad policy. Energy is such a recent example but agriculture has been played with for 70+ years since the Great Depression days.

Bill Clinton signed a bunch of executive orders before he left office siphoning off a ton of land as off limits to business. The Clinton’s net worth was $3 M leaving office, but now it is $100 M. Gee, wonder what happened? I guess he gets paid $3 M per speaking engagement.

30 years of no energy independance. You will see little to none until either heads are hanging on pikes or laws are created that forbids investment into things like food, real-estate, energy and defense, the basics of life and necessary for our nations survival for 2 years prior, during and 2 years after term (includes family).


12 posted on 07/06/2008 6:57:10 PM PDT by quant5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

You mean like Blanche Lincoln, Senator from Arkansas who owns a several thousand acre farm in NE Arkansas who directly benefits from the farm subsidies she not only votes for, but cosponsors?

Nahhh... No conflict of interest there. Move along, nothing to see.


14 posted on 07/06/2008 7:11:40 PM PDT by TheBattman (Vote your conscience, or don't complain about RINOs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson