Skip to comments.Term Limits: No more Harry Reids and Arlen Spectors
Posted on 08/07/2012 5:59:16 AM PDT by 1pitech
In this episode of the Conscience of Kansas radio program on KRMR The Patriot 105.7FM, Dr. Paul A. Ibbetson talks about Harry Reid's unfounded attacks on Mitt Romney and the need for term limits to reduce the corruption brought about by lifetime politicians.
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
My boy Steny Hoyer has been in Government almost since the day he got out of colleghe. Sucking on the Government teat.
He has no idea that his constituency has to work for a living, unlike him.
Over 30 years in the House, for the last 10 years hardly breathing a breath of fresh air as he has his nose so close to Pelosi’s butt.
I would add John McCain, Orin Hatch, oh the list just goes on and on!
Let’s make them constitutional..............
But then, again—it’s the people we want to term limit that would have to get the legislation passed......somehow I don’t think that’s going to happen any day soon.
I am no longer convinced that the individual representatives are the problem, it is the Parties that have such a strangle hold on the system. Neither reid nor pelosi have the intelligence to generate such wide ranging controversy and legislative abuse on their own. Someone is directing them, i.e. the DNC, Soro, et. al.
Hmmmm.......then why is it constitutional to term limit the President?
Most likely you will say “because the Supreme Court said so”.
I think millions of us still clinging to the hope that our AR 15’s can forever stay packed away in their cases in the closet would agree. These “millions” would love to see US as a nation go over the Supreme Courts head and ammend the basic law of the land to have the Presidential term limit similarly imposed on our senators and representatives along with several other basics like Congress cannot declare itself exempt from its own laws to name just one.
Term limits for all of them..........
"Term limits are unconstitutional; you cannot diminish someone else's franchise because you don't like who they vote for."
Nice legalistic theory. The only problem is that many states and local government entities have term limits in place. Nobody seems to have a problem with those.
And if you introduce FEDERAL term limits by Constitutional amendment (which is the only way to implement them), your problem disappears. An amendent TO the Constitution cannot be "unconstitutional", by definition.
Term limits very good. "Unlimited tenure" breeds corruption in all sorts of ways. The longer a politician occupies an office, the more likely he is to become corrupt. That is so true as to be almost a "law of nature".
Agreed. The House was supposed to be made of Representatives, i.e. the Barber, the Butcher, and the Baker, NOT career politicians.
We have gotten away from the governmental framework that our Founding Fathers laid for us.
Term Limits would be a great step back in the right direction.
I will be supporting candidates who favor a constitutional amendment for Term Limits.
Anyone have a list of such candidates?
Now, I'm not sure if those rumors are true, but if they aren't, Reid needs to provide evidence that he's not keeping a cage full of underage illegal boys in his basement for sex and cannibalism purposes.
Because HE HAS. Or that's what I heard anyway.
or Robert Byrd
He'd be running for a 17th term (and winning, without a doubt!) if not for redistricting.
One of the real problems the Founders likely didn’t see is the way that society has become segregated by political affiliation.
So you get congressional districts that will NEVER elect anybody but an ardent leftist. Then as people like Pelosi, Waxman, etc get entrenched for life and build up super seniority, they become committee chairs.
When their party gets power (2009) these extreme libs are in charge of making policy.
1. Two Terms in the Senate (12 years) then sit out a term (6 years)to regain Senate eligibility's.
2. Six terms in the House (12 years) then sit out 3 terms (6 years) to regain House eligibility.
By forcing a period where the political careerist goes home and is “governed” instead of doing the “governing” would be very educational for them. (yeah I would like an "100 miles exclusion' zone ringing DC for these clowns during their period of ineligibility. But that's probably too much too ask!) Also it lets the career politician have a “political career”, his/her “groupies” could support the critter in other political offices, Governor, County Commissioner, state legislature, mayor. Maybe the critter should “dare I say it!” get a job in the private sector. Even George McGovern admitted that his “private sector” experience was a real “eye opener” regarding the problems of government imposed regulations.
That’s why they are all millionaires.
No more than 2 terms for either House or Senate, and a maximum age limit of 82. No retirement bennies for either.
You want to ensure that dhimmicrats rule us in perpetuity? Then you want term limits. Term limits favor the left. Why? Because leftists are interchangeable. Yes, term limits would restrain dingy harry but there would be an endless string of cookie-cutter dingy’s right behind him.
Have you ever noticed how difficult it is to find good conservative candidates to support? Many good conservatives watch the bloodsport that the MSM wages against conservatives and decide that it is too much to expose their families to. Consequently we find candidates who are drawn to the pomp and circumstance of political office, not because they want better government. Leftist candidates.
Term limits favor the left.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.