65% Favor Getting Rid of Entire Congress and Starting Over

reply to post by Mak Manto

Eliminate the Department of Defense!

cant do that man its in the constitution to make provisions for it!!!

Eliminate Wall Street!

cant do that either wall street isnt the creation of the federal government they are in fact private ventures heavily regulated by the congress


how far am i willing to go? AS FAR AS IT TAKES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


and yes you can throw out congress by vote or by the proxy left to us by the founders


when government becomes the enemy of the public its is our duty to throw off such government.

sorry man thems the brakes.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Mak Manto

 

Eliminate the Department of Defense!

cant do that man its in the constitution to make provisions for it!!!

Eliminate Wall Street!

cant do that either wall street isnt the creation of the federal government they are in fact private ventures heavily regulated by the congress


how far am i willing to go? AS FAR AS IT TAKES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


and yes you can throw out congress by vote or by the proxy left to us by the founders


when government becomes the enemy of the public its is our duty to throw off such government.

sorry man thems the brakes.

edit on 28-10-2010 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

See, what you're talking about is not having them voted out. Nobody on here is talking about having them voted out, because nobody is going to vote them out.

You're referring to THROWING THEM OUT, and like I said, if you're throwing out ALL OF CONGRESS, and reworking ENTIRE PARTS of the government, you're looking at an open revolution.

So, what, are the people of this thread revolting? What, are you going to revolt against Congress, and against anything that isn't explicitly stated in the Constitution, despite the fact it's been here for many decades?

And who are you going to bring in to replace them? Do all of you have a list of people ready to fill in their spots?!

Jeez, I see these threads so often anymore, and it's like insanists get together. NOBODY KNOWS what to do AFTER we throw Congress out, BUT WE HAVE TO!

reply to post by Mak Manto


not necessarily revolt yeah but by the power of their votes

you can effectively remove all congressman by pulling that lever and it has nothing to do with armed revolution

who am i going to bring in? people who have never served a day in public office all their lives.

what to do is simple FOLLOW THE CONSTITUTION!

it isnt hard the blueprint is there it just needs to be read.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by wcitizen

 

add one makes it 66%

fire them all

Add 1 more - Make it 67%

The problem is as follows. The newest line of tea party endorsed senators aren't the first to say they are gonna run in and clean house... Most politicians say this and some probably even mean it when they say it, but when you have lobbyist backing up truck loads of cash to your office things change. I'm not saying its a bad thing people are starting to see how corrupt our leaders are, I'm saying that they're just a part of the problem (and a small one at that).

reply to post by neo96

add one makes it 66%

So, according to you, out of 100 people 66 say we should get rid of congress, then we should do it because 66 people say we should?

What kind of idiot response is that? Bout the dumbest thing I have ever read on this site.

outlaw all special interests including corporations and unions

I might agree with that line.

laws forbiding borrowing from any foreign nations

Uh huh, kinda goes against article I section 8 of the US Constitution, but you haven't read that important document well enough to know that.

restore the second ammendment of the constitution

Last time I checked I can still get a gun, so for me the second amendment is unscathed.

eliminate the patriot act

I can agree with that line

set term limits

But that would mean that the right wing God Ron Paul wouldn't be in congress anymore.

eliminate political action committees.

I can agree with that line.

eliminate the federal reserve

I can agree with that line.

eliminate the epa

Why so that companies can pollute the water air soil as much as they want? That's pretty stupid I think.

eliminate the department of education

Yes, cause Americans aren't dumb enough to swallow the right wing lies, let's get rid of education altogether so that we can have a country of complete idiots.

hell eliminate all laws made by congress for the past 100 years.

Oh that's nice, let's see, according to you women shouldn't have the right to vote, and segregation should still be legal, and with this one line you have just flip flopped on your own term limits arguments. Great Job! Never read past the 10th Amendment have you?

restore the constitution period congress original intention was just to be the purse strings of the government

Obviously you have not read this document at all, let me help, www.archives.gov...

Please for the love of all that is good about this country, spend some time and actually read this document, you might actually be surprised at what it says about things. Really, seriously.

restore order to the chaos that is american politics!!

I can agree with this line. But not the way you present it.

reply to post by whatukno

So, according to you, out of 100 people 66 say we should get rid of congress, then we should do it because 66 people say we should?

yup 60% of the country wanted obama elected i figured 60% is good enough to get rid of congress.

What kind of idiot response is that? Bout the dumbest thing I have ever read on this site.

*sigh typical response you give the majority of people you disagree with you always just have to go there

Uh huh, kinda goes against article I section 8 of the US Constitution, but you haven't read that important document well enough to know that.

guess you havent read the constitution either cause i remember somewhere in there there is those things called freedom of speech and expression.

Last time I checked I can still get a gun, so for me the second amendment is unscathed.

last time i checked i was being told what kind of guns i get to own how many rounds it can have what it can look like how many rounds i can keep on my premises oh and its illegal to discharge it in public so no the second ammendment is not unscathed.

But that would mean that the right wing God Ron Paul wouldn't be in congress anymore.

good hes a career politician and all of them must go they have made lifetime commitments screwing people over for their own ends.

Why so that companies can pollute the water air soil as much as they want? That's pretty stupid I think.

why not have companies self govern themselves thats what that constitution was all about the limited role of governmental effect on the lives and properties of its citizens to seek absolute totalitarian rule over their actions is stupid and nothing but fascist.

Yes, cause Americans aren't dumb enough to swallow the right wing lies, let's get rid of education altogether so that we can have a country of complete idiots.

yes americans are stupid and they use to be smart before the department of education and the clear result is this current society and the election of obama and its clear that we do have a nation of complete idiots that clearly do swallow the lies of the left wing machine.

Oh that's nice, let's see, according to you women shouldn't have the right to vote, and segregation should still be legal, and with this one line you have just flip flopped on your own term limits arguments. Great Job! Never read past the 10th Amendment have you?

fine women can vote and segreation should still be illegal i will give you that one.

Obviously you have not read this document at all, let me help, www.archives.gov...

i am not the only one thanks how about we read it together?


sorry man to each his own and i am passing your what your offering

:p

reply to post by wcitizen

It would be nice if it would help, but honestly I think once they get in there they
will be subverted just like the last batch.

There are a few exceptions like Ron Paul and a few others, but by and large most are
owned by different special interest.

I think ppl will find that it is 2 sides of the same coin, and the Republican version of
change will be no better than the current mess.

After all this economic collapse began on Shrub's watch, and after almost 2 years
and tons of lying Obozo isn't doing much better, except maybe the lying part.

How come I wasn't polled? I think the results might as well be over 70%....Congress is an absolute disaster...Any informed American would realize this. It's been stated many times before that they do not even read most of the documentation that they are given to pass bills, that is, if it is even supplied...Although I'm certain if it isn't, you won't hear the slightest protest. Congress has 'fiduciary responsibility' and they know what that is. I'm not even sure they have a function at all.

By the looks of it members of congress prefer to sign off on things they haven't read and quickly get back to their recreational activities.

reply to post by Mak Manto

Eliminate Department of Homeland Security!
Eliminate the Democratic and Republican Parties!

Actually, the Department of Homeland Security can and should be eliminated. The DHS is not a Constitutional mandate, nor are political parties. Of course, political parties have every right to exist in the U.S., but there can, and very probably should be an Amendment created to restrain the influence and stranglehold political parties have on this nation.

The problem with political parties, any political party, is that they invariably seek to hold power. I find it interesting that there is even a Libertarian Party in existence. If one reads the Libertarian Party Platform it becomes fairly evident at some point that if they actually stick to their principles they could never rise to political power, and certainly, if they somehow did momentarily gain this power, they could never hold it...unless they sacrificed their principles in order to hold that power, and therein lies the problem with political parties.

There is no Constitutional mandate for political parties. That they arose so quickly after the founding of The United States of America, and that the two party system that exists today has done so for quite some time does not mean that they are necessary for a robust and healthy political system. In fact, the animosity they foster, the endless bickering and squabbling they engage in, suggests that they are antithetical to a strong and healthy political system. It may be inevitable that people will find political allegiances through like minded people, but allowing political parties to dictate the electoral process is antithetical to free elections.

That said, it should be noted that Presidents are not elected popularly, but are elected by an Electoral College. There was a time when Senators were not elected by popular vote, but instead were chosen by the State legislature from the State they represent. It is my firm belief that the decidedly anti-democratic nature of the Constitutional mandate, rendered moot by the 17th Amendment, that Senators be chosen by the State legislature from which they reside was intended to slow down the legislative process, and hopefully keep a tight reign on Congress.

The primary argument for passing the 17th Amendment came from a problem that arose when gridlock happened in certain states, and no Senator was chosen in time for the next session of Congress leaving enough vacant seats that Congress could not pass legislation that session. I respectfully submit that this is not such a bad thing, and given the immense amount of legislative acts currently on the books, arguably it would be a good thing.

You seem to be outraged that people want to "throw the bums out" of Congress. You insist that there is no "reset button", but the passing of the 17th Amendment, and indeed, the passing of the 12th, and the very necessary 13th Amendments were, in effect, "resets" that corrected problems that arose, or inherent problems that existed, and due to the "three-fifths" Clause, that came with the Constitution.

The Amendment process is just one necessary tool for revolution in this grand political experiment we call the American Experiment. It is doubtful that "throwing the bums" out of Congress will derail the country and ensure disaster, and arguably will keep the country on the right track, which is a government of the people, for the people, and by the people. Either both the federal and state governments exist to protect the individual and unalienable rights of all people, or they exist for some other reason not expressly mentioned by Constitution. The granting of privileges that both federal and state governments are inclined to do is a big problem, and privileges tend to be elevated above unalienable rights. In a free nation, with a government mandated to protect the individual rights of all people, privileges are antithetical to this purpose, and should be, as if they aren't all ready, expressly forbidden.

reply to post by neo96

guess you havent read the constitution either cause i remember somewhere in there there is those things called freedom of speech and expression.

Oh fail is your middle name, I got it now! Freedom of Speech is the 1st Amendment, you know, that same amendment right wingers want to get rid of?

last time i checked i was being told what kind of guns i get to own how many rounds it can have what it can look like how many rounds i can keep on my premises oh and its illegal to discharge it in public so no the second ammendment is not unscathed.

See, sometimes I have a hard time defending the 2nd Amendment because of sentences like this, so you want some massive machine gun with a ton of rounds to start spraying bullets randomly in public? Really? So basically you want to shoot up a mall, and you think that's ok, am I getting this right?

why not have companies self govern themselves thats what that constitution was all about the limited role of governmental effect on the lives and properties of its citizens to seek absolute totalitarian rule over their actions is stupid and nothing but fascist.

Because they won't self govern, companies do things for the bottom line not what is best for the environment.

Besides Article I Section 8, you might want to read that sometime.

reply to post by neo96


Eliminate the EPA? Are you insane?

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that people on here would advocate for that. Enjoy the destruction that occurs when you open up land to greedy corporations. I'm sure the water will be safe to swim in after all the pollution that seeps into it.

reply to post by whatukno


I would not waste any time engaging this user. They are pretty much stuck between the far right and the bottom of a cliff.

reply to post by neo96


Companies will NEVER self-govern themselves as long as there is money to be made.

Any rational American knows this, just like the 66% of loons that would support armed revolution.

reply to post by whatukno

Because they won't self govern, companies do things for the bottom line not what is best for the environment.

The problem with this is that the government doesn't govern them either. Instead what they do is develop a "win-win" scenario between the two, and by the two I mean corporations, where the government imposes a fine that is affordable, and in fact, all too often far more affordable than complying with the legislation intended to regulate them. Thus, when it comes to pollution, for example, if complying with the standards of regulation regarding pollution are more costly than paying the fine, then companies will do precisely what you say they will do, they will act in accordance with the bottom line, not what is best for the environment, and the government receiving the fine due to this decision will act in accordance to their bottom line and not what is best for the environment.

A regulatory agency can, and should, petition the state in which a charter was granted for the offending corporation and apply the charter revocation laws, asking that state to revoke the charter because of the offense. Instead, they take the money and run. To hell with the people. Sadly, this ritual is viewed as some sort of satisfactory problem management instead of being viewed for what it is, corruption.

reply to post by Infringed


There is no such thing as the "leftist" media.

I suppose it's futile to try and explain this to brainwashed righties.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


The EPA is far from perfect but without it, it would be nothing but chaos.

I don't care how many arguments you put forth. It was established for a reason and it can be improved. Perhaps starting over with the EPA along with Congress and other vital agencies is the best course and a fair compromise.

reply to post by The Sword


I would suggest that doing away with the government granted privilege of charters of incorporation would be a stronger move. Your adoration of the EPA is fine, but if the EPA can't grow some balls, and develop a backbone with their ethics firmly in place, then they are no better than any offending corporation. An appearance of propriety is just that, an appearance...an illusion. Don't let government illusions become your delusion.

reply to post by wcitizen





The only real problem is in all the conflicts of interest that our representatives have. Involvement in congress by businesses is at the heart of the problem. Stop these. Free speech should not include attempts to influence congress through bribery and other means. Get rid of lobbies in DC and watch things return to whatever normal is. It will take a real civil war or serious revolution by the people to make this happen. It may be too late already. Corporations are too strong and they have access to private militaries all their own.

gg

112th congress, 112 popes......

Do we really want to get rid of congress?