Are You Willing to be Non-Partisan ? What is Your Liberty Worth ?

here's a list of legislation...summaries and long text, that were passed by congress, and signed into law by the president during 2013.
www.congress-summary.com...

talk about a do-nothing congress.

Much of the problem right now in the USA, is that no one is willing to compromise, and in fact, compromise has become a four letter word for political suicide. Until the 70% in the middle of the political spectrum learn to ignore both the far right and far left, and the art of compromise is relearned, we will continue to be divided by these stupid party lines.

Politics should not be "My way or the Highway" from either side, because these extremes rarely represent the majority of the citizens they are representing.

reply to post by BubbaJoe


Getting some real debate now.

I want to be clear. I do not blame our system. I honor our Founders.

It is clearly the people who are repeatedly elected who have ruined our Nation.

Our system was designed to serve a term. Go home and live under the laws you passed.

Not to stay for decades. Not to win re-election at any cost.

Service was based on Pride and Honor. A time when shame was called what it is.

I am an American first. Maybe we can start with term limits. Can we agree on that?

reply to post by whyamIhere


No problem from me on term limits, 3 terms in the HOR and 2 terms in the Senate should be enough for anyone. I think this has worked well at the Presidential level.

Right off of the bat, common sense can see a problem, when people spend millions of dollars to win a job that pays 175K a year. Tells me they are seriously lining their pockets from other sources.

whyamIhere
It is clearly the people who are repeatedly elected who have ruined our Nation.

Who is it that provides the seeming choice.
Those people who are up for election are all from the ruling bloodline.
No matter where the x goes - it is says 'I want to be ruled'.

BubbaJoe
Right off of the bat, common sense can see a problem, when people spend millions of dollars to win a job that pays 175K a year. Tells me they are seriously lining their pockets from other sources.

Not only that, their absolute lust to be re-elected.

What is it that makes seemingly good people go to DC, and they sell their soul?

reply to post by Itisnowagain


Surely some form of governance is required in a population of 310 Million people, or are you suggesting that we simply revert to warring local populations as we currently see in 3rd and 4th world countries. I for one, have served this country and believe in some level of law and order as laid out in our founding documents.

whyamIhere

BubbaJoe
Right off of the bat, common sense can see a problem, when people spend millions of dollars to win a job that pays 175K a year. Tells me they are seriously lining their pockets from other sources.

Not only that, their absolute lust to be re-elected.

What is it that makes seemingly good people go to DC, and they sell their soul?

If we could answer that question, we could easily solve the issue. I am going to rely on my usual answer as to what is wrong with this country, and that answer is greed, and lust for power, the inner need to feel important.

we already have term limits...it's called voting....if enough people don't like what their local politician is doing they will vote him out....if they DO like what he is doing, they would want to keep him in....
200 years ago, legislation was for fewer states, with a few million population in the entire country. there was no electricity, muskets were the most advanced personal weapon, farming was the largest industry, 90% of the people had no formal education, slavery was an excepted form of employment, infrastructure was practically non-existent, there was limited voting reserved for only a select few, etc....the complexity of our modern country, is far removed from that of when our constitutional government was set up....
what I'm getting at is that, it takes time when elected to congress, to understand all of the competing interests, and whether they are good or bad for the country as a whole. to become proficient it takes more than one 2-year term.

reply to post by jimmyx


I would wholeheartedly agree with you, so there for a limit of 12 years in either house. When most of us are only offered 2 choices in the District or State elections, and these two choices are brought forth via primaries. Maybe it is time to rethink the primaries, and bring all the candidates together in a single general election.

BubbaJoe
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

Surely some form of governance is required in a population of 310 Million people, or are you suggesting that we simply revert to warring local populations as we currently see in 3rd and 4th world countries. I for one, have served this country and believe in some level of law and order as laid out in our founding documents.

you're noticing that too?...I think there are "members" that would love nothing better than to see chaos reign in this country. it's easy to criticize, but quite another to come up with the best viable solutions for the majority of Americans. wealth, power, and special foreign/domestic interests, have always to worked to separate us into "them and us" camps.

jimmyx

BubbaJoe
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

Surely some form of governance is required in a population of 310 Million people, or are you suggesting that we simply revert to warring local populations as we currently see in 3rd and 4th world countries. I for one, have served this country and believe in some level of law and order as laid out in our founding documents.

you're noticing that too?...I think there are "members" that would love nothing better than to see chaos reign in this country. it's easy to criticize, but quite another to come up with the best viable solutions for the majority of Americans. wealth, power, and special foreign/domestic interests, have always to worked to separate us into "them and us" camps.

Yes, I believe we have more than a few keyboard warriors on here that are too busy fantasizing about being all powerful if there were a civil war, to actually sit down and try to work out any solution that doesn't include them being a victorious warlord like they are in their video games.

reply to post by BubbaJoe


Hey, how about highlighting some of those comments (internet warriors)

The condescending tone from the Democrats in here is overwhelming. Hey, lets work within the system.....I bet they were screaming bloody murder when Bush was in office. Lets vote them out of office. How well has that worked out? Same song and dance promoting the status quo.

No one is hoping for a collapse, but some of us don't see any viable solution to prevent it.

BubbaJoe
reply to post by jimmyx

 

I would wholeheartedly agree with you, so there for a limit of 12 years in either house. When most of us are only offered 2 choices in the District or State elections, and these two choices are brought forth via primaries. Maybe it is time to rethink the primaries, and bring all the candidates together in a single general election.

if we could somehow get a movement going that would slowly start to diminish the power of money in politics, it could make our politicians more responsible to those that are in the bottom 90%....I found one of the most interesting aspects of the "occupy wall street" was how (at first) it was a diverse group as reported in the media ...white, black, Asian, latino, oldsters, youngsters...but, was quickly put down and marginalized as a "hippie" "dope smoking" group of protesters very shortly after it started to gain a little interest from others...they were the one group that came out and had valid arguments against the control wielded by the 1% 'ers....this is the movement that "wealth and power" are truly fearful of. it's not left or right, white or black etc....it's top versus bottom, and anything that can be done to distract the American people from that fight, will be well-funded and organized.

MidnightTide
reply to post by BubbaJoe

 

Hey, how about highlighting some of those comments (internet warriors)

The condescending tone from the Democrats in here is overwhelming. Hey, lets work within the system.....I bet they were screaming bloody murder when Bush was in office. Lets vote them out of office. How well has that worked out? Same song and dance promoting the status quo.

No one is hoping for a collapse, but some of us don't see any viable solution to prevent it.

edit on 10-11-2013 by MidnightTide because: (no reason given)

How about reading what is written, no where in here, or anywhere else on this site have I declared to be a Democrat or Republican, in fact I have mentioned that I am fiercely independent at times, and in fact have agreed with many portions of the Libertarian platform.

What I find interesting is that those who swear by the constitution are up in arms because "Their guys" aren't in office, and "Their platform" is not being pushed. So with name calling and bashing, they demean the very offices of government that were established by our founding documents, and now that things are not going their way, they call for civil war and revolution. Seriously, most of us in the middle of the political spectrum are tired of the teeth gnashing from both ends of the political spectrum.

I'm all for term limits.

It's as non-partisan as issues get.

The president has term limits, why not the weasels in congress?

For that matter, why should The Supreme Court have life-time appointments?

jimmyx

BubbaJoe
reply to post by jimmyx

 

I would wholeheartedly agree with you, so there for a limit of 12 years in either house. When most of us are only offered 2 choices in the District or State elections, and these two choices are brought forth via primaries. Maybe it is time to rethink the primaries, and bring all the candidates together in a single general election.

if we could somehow get a movement going that would slowly start to diminish the power of money in politics, it could make our politicians more responsible to those that are in the bottom 90%....I found one of the most interesting aspects of the "occupy wall street" was how (at first) it was a diverse group as reported in the media ...white, black, Asian, latino, oldsters, youngsters...but, was quickly put down and marginalized as a "hippie" "dope smoking" group of protesters very shortly after it started to gain a little interest from others...they were the one group that came out and had valid arguments against the control wielded by the 1% 'ers....this is the movement that "wealth and power" are truly fearful of. it's not left or right, white or black etc....it's top versus bottom, and anything that can be done to distract the American people from that fight, will be well-funded and organized.

When the supreme court grants personhood to corporations, and does everything it can to remove campaign financing reform regs, it is hard to take the money out of it, but I agree that it needs to happen.

OWS and the TP both started out as grass roots organizations, but big money figured out on both sides that they could use it to their advantage. I don't think there is anyone that believes, right or left, that our tax dollars are being spent properly.

Need to use a right/left paradigm to make this make sense, and it is pretty simplified.

That being said, the TP started out with the smaller gov't platform, but once the big money on the right got involved, it became anti gov't. The big money backers on the right had much to gain from reduced regulation, from labor to safety to the environment, not to mention corporate tax rates and rates on the highest earners. Big money on the left, took a fringe portion of the TP and used it to paint the whole movement as racist. The fundamental message of the tea party was lost among all of the big money on both sides.

OWS wanted more regs on the banks, and wall street. In addition they wanted a reduction in income inequality, this threatened big money, so they used that big money from the right to paint them all as dope smoking hippies, unfortunately there is enough big money on the left, that they allowed this to happen, because it threatened their lifestyle.

I am not sure what the answer is, but until a platform is established that can satisfy about 55% of the population, I think the current system is going to continue.

reply to post by beezzer


I would agree with you on this Beezer, stagger them, so that 1 or 2 get an up/down vote every 2 years, or limit them to 10 years period.