The only reason the system is bad is that there are no checks in the system. Need term limits for Congress. Need to get rid of PACs.

Jason Chaffetz gets it. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/house...ry?id=36222967

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Mmmmm bacon bits.

After seeing how amazingly ineffective PACs have been this past year, who's still complaining about them?

PACs are a problem, but what exactly would term limits do other than create a stream of corporate-sponsored revolving "Yes" men with no experience or track record to judge their qualifications on?

You want a Senate full of Tea Party panderers on the right and first-term Obamas on the left? The first thing those term-limited politicians will do after being forced out of office will be a move to the lobbyist sector.

For every 1 billion dollars shaved from the budget, congressmen should be legally granted another wife of child bearing age.

Sent from my XT1030 using Tapatalk

first and prob only time i will ever +rep yer ****tard

No. I want lobbyists to lose their minds...

https://www.termlimits.org/ex-lobbyi...s-term-limits/


Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

You mean they don't do that now?

abolish all forms of government
allow genius mastermind like elon musk/buize/bill gates have absolute power
??
profit

bill gates is a believer of purging the earth of most of its population there guy..

if that was true he wouldnt be saving so many useless Africans.

Is this supposed to be a hit piece or an endorsement?

In Donald Trump***8217;s Worldview, America Comes First, and Everybody Else Pays

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/27/us...gn-policy.html

Did I say that? No.

Of course they do that now, but with term limits you'd have a lot more of them doing it a lot sooner. A politician knowing they're on their way out would also have more incentive to introduce or pass legislation to benefit their future employers, or increase the value of personal investments.

The best way to persuade someone into doing your bidding is to trick them into thinking it was their idea. Abramoff knows that.

Instead of favors for lunches and golf trips we'd just have payback for support during their campaigns.

So by that argument, a politician who is continually reelected would feel secure and pass legislation that is for the good of their constituents? Of course not...they don't now.

So I would much rather they draw the private sector paycheck, but admittedly that doesn't solve the problem. Maybe it doesn't, but at least we are not rewarding them with long term cushy jobs.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

they also make a lubricant for other types of guns
http://www.prmediablast.com/wp-conte...igEasePack.jpg

It's only "rewarding" if they get re-elected. You're more comfortable with limiting the freedom of voters to choose their representatives in a vain effort to reduce corruption. If you're happy with the job your Senator has done for 20 years, why is it better for you if he can't be re-elected?

Who's the sexist pig now?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9MDXJy6BDQ

Fairly certain he says "Don't stand there."