Rand Paul Endorses Romney

Jason P · June 2012

I don't think voting can change much because the current political system is too entrenched. If we could enact term limits, it would help thaw things out, but the old guard in congress isn't going to allow too much to change.

Obama was the first presidential candidate that made people think "holy shit, this guy might actually be able to change things!". But I think anyone that went into a coma in 2008 and just woke up a few days ago would be able to walk around and see much that is different. Obama plays by the rules of the old guard. He has to so he can survive politically.

Cosmo · June 2012

Jason P wrote:

I don't think voting can change much because the current political system is too entrenched. If we could enact term limits, it would help thaw things out, but the old guard in congress isn't going to allow too much to change.

Obama was the first presidential candidate that made people think "holy shit, this guy might actually be able to change things!". But I think anyone that went into a coma in 2008 and just woke up a few days ago would be able to walk around and see much that is different. Obama plays by the rules of the old guard. He has to so he can survive politically.

...
Here's the thing about 'Term Limits'.
Are we okay if we hired someone to work for us and they did a great job and we are completely happy with their work... but, the law says they can only work for us for 8 years?
After that, we have to hire someone new to continue the work he was doing. And we are stuck with that person for 4 years.
...
Probably not.
This is how we get a Ron Paul for a total of 22 years of service. The other side is... this is how we get Strom Thurman or Ted Kennedy.
We have the power of theConstitution in our hands to hire, re-hire or fire people in Government... it's call the 'Ballot Box'. I think we need to arm ourselves with knowledge of what the people we are hiring to do things FOR, are actually doing TO us.

Jason P · June 2012

Cosmo wrote:

...
Here's the thing about 'Term Limits'.
Are we okay if we hired someone to work for us and they did a great job and we are completely happy with their work... but, the law says they can only work for us for 8 years?
After that, we have to hire someone new to continue the work he was doing. And we are stuck with that person for 4 years.
...

I'm willing to take that trade-off, especially if it can reset the current stagnation. And it has worked well with the presidency, so why wouldn't it work in congress?

Cosmo · June 2012

Jason P wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

...
Here's the thing about 'Term Limits'.
Are we okay if we hired someone to work for us and they did a great job and we are completely happy with their work... but, the law says they can only work for us for 8 years?
After that, we have to hire someone new to continue the work he was doing. And we are stuck with that person for 4 years.
...

I'm willing to take that trade-off, especially if it can reset the current stagnation. And it has worked well with the presidency, so why wouldn't it work in congress?

...
Yeah, i see the Pros... I'm just pointing out that there are also some Cons in the equation.
The other Con is that Term Limits will result in the only continuity in our government will be lobbyists. President, Senators and Congressmen will come and go, lobbyists will stay and gain even more power.
...
Just sayin' it's a double edged sword and regret what we'd wished for.
And we... as voters... have the power. We just don't use it. It's not that we can't... more because we won't.

Jason P · June 2012

Cosmo wrote:

...
Yeah, i see the Pros... I'm just pointing out that there are also some Cons in the equation.
The other Con is that Term Limits will result in the only continuity in our government will be lobbyists. President, Senators and Congressmen will come and go, lobbyists will stay and gain even more power.
...
Just sayin' it's a double edged sword and regret what we'd wished for.
And we... as voters... have the power. We just don't use it. It's not that we can't... more because we won't.

I see the lobbies losing some traction, but I could be wrong. If a lobby is in Jon Boehner's pocket, then that lobby wields a lot of power over the entire GOP field. Chances are that the lobby was in Boehner's pocket long before he became speaker of the House. And John had to play the game to get to the point of power he currently has.

With an eight year window, the chances of corruption significantly decrease as the field constantly resets itself. You don't have the high lords twisting the arms of incoming freshman. The way it stands, if you don't learn how to play ball early on, your stay in Washington will be a short one.

If you only have a 4-8 year window, I think you will see elected leaders making more rational decisions instead of following the party line.

That's my take.

Cosmo · June 2012

Jason P wrote:

I see the lobbies losing some traction, but I could be wrong. If a lobby is in Jon Boehner's pocket, then that lobby wields a lot of power over the entire GOP field. Chances are that the lobby was in Boehner's pocket long before he became speaker of the House. And John had to play the game to get to the point of power he currently has.

With an eight year window, the chances of corruption significantly decrease as the field constantly resets itself. You don't have the high lords twisting the arms of incoming freshman. The way it stands, if you don't learn how to play ball early on, your stay in Washington will be a short one.

If you only have a 4-8 year window, I think you will see elected leaders making more rational decisions instead of following the party line.

That's my take.

...
Point taken.
The other thing is that the money is still there for the taking. Makes as much as you can in your 8 years and retire early.
Or move to another district or state and run for that representative's office. As long as dumb-ass voters will vote based upon name recognition... they will get elected.

Rand Paul Endorses Romney

Comments

Categories