I assume that most of my readers lean toward the conservative end of the political spectrum so I will write this post with that with that in mind.
Take a minute and think of two or three nominally-conservative politicians who you feel have betrayed the cause in the last thirty years or so.
***
It is likely that many of you will have names like Dick Cheney, Mitt Romney, George Bush, Lindsay Graham on your list.
If I pressed "Why did you pick him?" your answer would likely be some form of "He didn't serve us. He was a tool of the (Military Industrial Complex, Vampire Venture Funds, Deep State).
Consider that if our representatives and senators are replaced frequently, the only sources of institutional-knowledge will be the Military Industrial Complex, the Vampire Venture Funds and the Deep State. Every politician will be a Bush or Romney or Graham.
And while many assume that a long-time, D.C. politician sold their soul to the devil, does it make sense to abandon the battlefield out of the desire to posture your purity?
It probably takes ten years for a politician to develop his own sources of information. It takes ten years to establish his credibility (or whether his are a screw-ball). After ten years, an R can call a D who is running a committee and actually get them to answer the phone or to return the phone call. And vice versa. A D can call the R and pour out the pain that certain legislation will cause unless it is softened or modified.
Fire up your keyboards and leave a comment. It is cold over here.
Consider that the US is the SECOND LEAST REPRESENTED NATION ON EARTH. If we were to restore the US House to a size that would give everyone American the level of representation we STARTED WITH...we would have to increase the size of the House from 435 to 11,400 members. Don't you think we'd end up with lots of great folks with that level of representation?
ReplyDeleteCalifornia has term limits and nothing changed from my perspective. We found the actual legislative power is in the staff and the permanent bureaucracy, not the puppets on the podium 'voting' on laws.
ReplyDeleteI am against term limits, I am for restoring the reasons term limits were irrelevant.
ReplyDeleteI.e. originally there was no salary there was a per diem while in session and in attendance.
No pension, no life long insurance etc.
Being a representative is to serve your community not a career.
Close the doors to graft and bribery and suddenly the people who run will be people who care. Provide a dorm pay a modest per diem, don’t fund 30 person staffs and advisors….terms will limit themselves.
There is more I could elaborate on, but I am on a phone and this is more than enough typing.
The big money is from insider trading and "sweet deals". Ilhan Omar and Sandy the Bartender didn't rack up net assets of $30M on a $177k/year salary.
DeleteI think Senator Rand Paul sums up my opinion of having any hope for Congress. He talks the talk, but when it came time to make a stand, he voted "yay" on amnesty for illegal aliens. I've never looked back. His actions since have continually proved my opinion of him.
ReplyDeleteAll of them . . are the same. The only benefit of those being Democrat, is at least you know they hate this country, while Republicans, wrap themselves in the flag and talk about god, then stab you in the back with their treachery.
The scope of term limits needs to include staff or we gain nothing and even make it worse. Roger
ReplyDeleteWould term limits have kept a senile delinquent like President Vegetable out of office? If so there must be a case for them.
ReplyDeleteJoe how pray tell would these you mentioned:
ReplyDelete"Consider that if our representatives and senators are replaced frequently, the only sources of institutional-knowledge will be the Military Industrial Complex, the Vampire Venture Funds and the Deep State. "
Fail to corrupt the politicians with the same tools that created as dearieme said "Would term limits have kept a senile delinquent like President Vegetable out of office?"
Biden wasn't the problem just the FACE PERSON Of the Problem of the deep state.
I realize that I am not going to answer your question with the following, but share it so you a sense of where I am "coming from".
DeleteMichigan has been bleeding population relative to other states and redistricting happens on a regular basis. Since Michigan has historically been a "purple" state, Gerrymandering also happens on a frequent basis. That means that you might have entirely different sets of candidates to beat in the next primary and the next election. It is a very dynamic situation.
Michigan aBoth are women.lso has term limits which only sort-of plays into this story.
One of our local politicians (currently a Michigan House Representative) is Angela Whitwer. She is a Democrat.
At one point in recent history, the Democrats held the Michigan House, the Senate, the Executive Office, Attorney General and Secretary of State Office. They proceeded to load the docket with many laws they intended to cram through while they could. They didn't need a single Republican vote. The conservatives were going to be corn-holed dry.
Many of those laws were VERY strict gun control laws including minimum two-week waiting periods.
A conservative who Whitwer had defeated in a previous district reached out to Angela. They talked on the phone for three hours.
Angela and the person who was calling her are both women. Both candidates had stalkers. Both candidates had Personal Protective Orders against them. Both knew that a PPO is only a piece of paper. By the end of the conversation, Angela was convinced that the way that many of the laws were written would prevent women who were being stalked from being able to get emergency Concealed Pistol Licenses AND a firearm to carry. (In the State of Michigan there is an EXPEDITED process to make those two things happen when the shit hits the fan).
Angela single-handedly cock-blocked the mainstream, Democrat, gun-grab agenda, at least for several of the most restrictive ones that were proposed.
That could only happen because Angela had the other person's name in "Contacts" and she answered the phone. She answered the phone because they had a relationship and even though the two people were on opposite ends of the spectrum for most issues, they had mutual respect and would seriously consider the other person's positions.
Of course, this could all be bull-shit, urban-legends but I believe that there is a more than 50% chance that it is true.
An interesting story, probably true as personal contacts even around here get town hall situations resolved long before they show up on the agenda.
DeleteBut the issue Joe, seems to be the deep state's ability to play kingmaker and their power over the DNC and RNC to get folks selected or denied.
They say power corrupts and that's true, but money sure seems powerful in changing our elected "representatives" decisions when it counts.
You and I are NOT Represented. Your story was about ladies who shared a restraining order concern. Not really about Joe or Michael getting a firearm.
My thoughts are that voters have the say. If they’re happy with a 3rd, 4th, 18th term, so be it. If not, show them the door.
ReplyDeleteNow the money, that’s another story. We need donation and campaign spending limits.
Hang the whole lot of them!
ReplyDeleteThank you for that comment
DeleteTerm limits empower the Deep State. Bureaucrats have decades to master the subterfuge and intricacies of government. Term limited politicians have no more than the duration of their term limits to figure out what is going on and bring the Deep State to heel.
ReplyDeleteHonestly friend, how many days-weeks or months does it take for Silver or Lead to get their point across? Suitcase of cash, support for your reelection or an accident?
DeleteThe deep state has plenty of dupes and Jack Ruby's to clean up the loose ends.
There must be someway to remove officeholders who are incapable of doing the necessary work of the position. Term limits, age limitations, mental incapacity, something. Everyone can name one that can't fulfill the office. We have minimum age limits, why not maximum?
ReplyDeleteMake lobbying illegal
ReplyDeleteAnonymous Drugs are illegal. Lobbying is a transfer of MONEY for Influence. Just as addictive to politicians, I bet as drugs.
Delete