Term Limits Imposed On 46 Years of Ted Kennedy

[redfish64]

I will not make some of the vial comments made about the death of a politican like the left has made about those on the right. My condolences go out to the Kennedy family, and I pray that God forgive his child of his sins. With that being said, is death the only way of getting a liberal out of office? It took 46 years to get to this point, where we can stop the spending bills, corruption, and ferlandering headlines of Teddy. The father of big spending, high tax, and bigger government is gone. If there ever in our history was a reason for term limits, it is the history of Ted Kennedy.

The recent example of him calling out to the State Governor, and telling him to change back a law on appointing his successor, would cause legions of lawyers to decend upon anyone that dared to try that on the right. Can anyone in their right mind imagine the media frenzy of CNN,ABC,CBS,and NBC if anyone on the right would have driven their secretary off of a bridge and left to die?
Plain and simple fact is, the family grabbed power, and with that power covered up messes they did, and as of recently, were even able to change laws that work against them.

As a Christian I forgive Kennedy for whatever sin he has committed on this earth, but the moutain of liberal laws and bills that he has been part of have not only weakened us, but put us where we are today, bankrupt. Kennedy was nothing but a great spender of other peoples money. Just like Biden and the rest of them on the democratic side, you look at their tax returns, and they may have given a few hundred dollars to charity, but passed bills of billions taking our money to give to those that don't have. The people have finally caught on to the democrats in Congress, and don't think for a moment that this is just about dems, this is about a corrupt and out of control Washington DC, and Ted Kennedy was a big part of what stinks up there.

[Lawson_Raider]

I can assure you that Ted Kennedy is not an atheist right now.

[Dr. Funkenstein]

I can assure you that Ted Kennedy is not an atheist right now.
***?

When was Kennedy ever an atheist?

[Camp]

Makes a 24 year term limit sound reasonable.

There was a time when party leaders would have taken the ethical road and gently pushed out the old guard.

Today the ego claws for every validation it can get. That is how I will recall the Kennedy brother that survived and Arlen Spectre and Robert Byrd and...

[Dr. Funkenstein]

Makes a 24 year term limit sound reasonable.

There was a time when party leaders would have taken the ethical road and gently pushed out the old guard.

Today the ego claws for every validation it can get. That is how I will recall the Kennedy brother that survived and Arlen Spectre and Robert Byrd and...
...and Strom Thurmond and Ted Stevens (who would have kept running, with party support, until his damn dying day)

[Mohawk5]

Hey! The Kennedy's are royalty! He deserved that position til he passed!

:rolleyes:

[redfish64]

Got a question for you guys and girls. Congress at present is loaded up with years of experience and Congressmen who have served for well over 15 and 20 years, career politician if you will. With all that experience and power, shouldn't we be in a different position today, and not facing bankruptcy or depression? I mean, if the reason for keeping someone like Kennedy in there so long was his power and experience, why is his state and our country in such a mess as a result of what he has done, alone and with others?

The fact is, term limits would provide us with less corruption since they do not have that long to grab power with their grubby little fingers. Second, no politician should serve a longer term than a President. Third, term limits are our only step in taking back power and putting back in the hands of the people. It will guarantee that no one person shall ever gain such power again!!

[Dr. Funkenstein]

Got a question for you guys and girls. Congress at present is loaded up with years of experience and Congressmen who have served for well over 15 and 20 years, career politician if you will. With all that experience and power, shouldn't we be in a different position today, and not facing bankruptcy or depression? I mean, if the reason for keeping someone like Kennedy in there so long was his power and experience, why is his state and our country in such a mess as a result of what he has done, alone and with others?

The fact is, term limits would provide us with less corruption since they do not have that long to grab power with their grubby little fingers. Second, no politician should serve a longer term than a President. Third, term limits are our only step in taking back power and putting back in the hands of the people. It will guarantee that no one person shall ever gain such power again!!
Fourth, term limits bar people from being able to vote again for politicians who might actually be effective at what they do for their communities and is a really stupid idea.

[redfish64]

Makes a 24 year term limit sound reasonable.

There was a time when party leaders would have taken the ethical road and gently pushed out the old guard.

Today the ego claws for every validation it can get. That is how I will recall the Kennedy brother that survived and Arlen Spectre and Robert Byrd and...

I say Senators should be cut down to 4 years and able to serve two term only. Same in house no more than two terms. No politican can serve more than 12 years in Congress.

[redfish64]

Fourth, term limits bar people from being able to vote again for politicians who might actually be effective at what they do for their communities and is a really stupid idea.

No not stupid really, it is an idea that has been around and proposed by much wiser men than you. Term limits exsist with the President of the United States and should be go enough for anyone. The idea that no one good enough will be in line to succeed is rediculous, and a tactic used by lefties.

[Spiked101]

We already have term limits and they are imposed by the constitution. People have a chance to turn out their representatives every two or six years. We don't need any other limits in my opinion. Let people do what they are supposed to do. Term limits are for a lazy poplulace.

[Dr. Funkenstein]

No not stupid really, it is an idea that has been around and proposed by much wiser men than you. Term limits exsist with the President of the United States and should be go enough for anyone. The idea that no one good enough will be in line to succeed is rediculous, and a tactic used by lefties.
It's not a matter of "no one good enough being in line", it's a matter of allowing voters to vote for who they want to vote for.

I'm in favor of repealing the 22nd Amendment too. It's patently stupid that when a person is doing a good job, their reward is a kick in the ass and a "don't let the door hit ya where the Good Lord split ya".

And for the record...the Founders (wiser than most of us) didn't see fit to limit anyone's number of terms. They trusted the electorate, which is something that the supporters of term limits refuse to do.

[redfish64]

It's not a matter of "no one good enough being in line", it's a matter of allowing voters to vote for who they want to vote for.

I'm in favor of repealing the 22nd Amendment too. It's patently stupid that when a person is doing a good job, their reward is a kick in the ass and a "don't let the door hit ya where the Good Lord split ya".

And for the record...the Founders (wiser than most of us) didn't see fit to limit anyone's number of terms. They trusted the electorate, which is something that the supporters of term limits refuse to do.

I can spend all day on this so let me say that the founding father never in their wildest dream would have expected the politicans of today to have completely turned their intent on its ear. The founding fathers did not mean by "serving ones country", to garnish as much power and use it in a corrupt way, by voting oneself an automatic pay raise, voting oneself health insurance for life, voting oneself a pay check for life, and spending billions of tax payer dollars in the purchasing of votes.

The simple fact is term limits are good enough for the President and they should be good enough for any Congressmen. The Politicians in Congress have made an utter mess of our government, and can be trusted no longer to hold the power that they have taken from the American people.

[Dr. Funkenstein]

We already have term limits and they are imposed by the constitution. People have a chance to turn out their representatives every two or six years. We don't need any other limits in my opinion. Let people do what they are supposed to do. Term limits are for a lazy poplulace.

quoted for truth...I don't care if he's a Dodger fan.

[redfish64]

We already have term limits and they are imposed by the constitution. People have a chance to turn out their representatives every two or six years. We don't need any other limits in my opinion. Let people do what they are supposed to do. Term limits are for a lazy poplulace.

I totally agree that voting is the way we the people can inforce term limits, but the founding fathers never figured on ACORN, Seiu, Afl-cio, Zsars, Bias Redistricting, Corrupt Internet fund raising, and Criminals like Tony Rezko giving money to canidates.

[Dr. Funkenstein]

..

[Vaard]

***?

When was Kennedy ever an atheist?

roman catholic.. atheists...... pretty much the same thing.......

[hwyflier]

No term limits. The people have the right to choose their representation for their state.

What is conservative about a federal law directing a state's right to vote for who they want as many times as they want?

Should someone in Kentucky be able to limit the will of the voters of Massachusetts?

I think Byrd and Strom should have been spending their golden years enjoying sunsets not trying to legislate in this new technological world, but I would never impose a federal restriction on another state to get my way.

[redfish64]

No term limits. The people have the right to choose their representation for their state.

What is conservative about a federal law directing a state's right to vote for who they want as many times as they want?

Should someone in Kentucky be able to limit the will of the voters of Massachusetts?

I think Byrd and Strom should have been spending their golden years enjoying sunsets not trying to legislate in this new technological world, but I would never impose a federal restriction on another state to get my way.

I have watched Byrd on numerous occasions sleeping in the Senate, and it should be a wake up call for people of that state that are against term limits. Senators debate on behalf of the country as a whole, while the House members debate on behalf of the states. So when it comes to a Senator, any Senator is fair game in deciding or debating this countrys future or direction.

[Buffalo]

Conservatives against the Constitution!

[redfish64]

Conservatives against the Constitution!

Liberals against Liberty and Freedom!

[7ranz]

Liberals against Liberty and Freedom!

Because term limits are really what liberty is about.

[CaughtInTheMiddle]

No term limits. The people have the right to choose their representation for their state.

What is conservative about a federal law directing a state's right to vote for who they want as many times as they want?

Should someone in Kentucky be able to limit the will of the voters of Massachusetts?

I think Byrd and Strom should have been spending their golden years enjoying sunsets not trying to legislate in this new technological world, but I would never impose a federal restriction on another state to get my way.

Perfect post!

[Buffalo]

Liberals against Liberty and Freedom!
Yes they are, you guys should get a room.

[johnrocks]

The people of Massachusetts kept reelecting him;as is their right; I'm also pretty confident that he won't be replaced by any kind of conservative, I pray Massachusetts surprises me.

[Dr. Funkenstein]

Because term limits are really what liberty is about.
Isn't this really about conservatives trying to control the electorate?

[Buffalo]

The people of Massachusetts kept reelecting him;as is their right; I'm also pretty confident that he won't be replaced by any kind of conservative, I pray Massachusetts surprises me.
I'm pretty sure you're right.

[GregMartin]

I'm for term limits: 0

[redfish64]

I still come back to the same question. Our country is facing massive unsustainable debt, and they are still spending with yet another 1.5 to two trillion more spending on the boards, with healthcare. We at present have Congressmen who have been in the Congress for an average of 15 years. So how can anyone make an arguement to not have term limits? If these men and women are there for us to use the experience of their years, and our country is bankrupt, shouldn't we change what is not working?
The reasoning for keeping Kennedy, Mccain, Byrd and many other is because of the power and experience they have amassed over decade in office, and with that power and experience they can help us. Well, look where we are today, almost bankrupt. What has all that time, experience, and power done in helping our country? Nothing, they have stuffed their pockets, inpowered their families, and garnished as much of the public wealth for themselves as they could.

[GregMartin]

roman catholic.. atheists...... pretty much the same thing.......
:)) Baa haa haa ha! :))

Funny. Of course its nowhere near true, but its funny. I say this because some would argue it is true. I know a couple of those people. I am not one of them. I don't want to be mistaken for one of them.

[Dr. Funkenstein]

To recap: We need term limits because congressmen/women who have been there "too long" can be corrupted. And corruption would abate because the corrupt forces wouldn't be able to focus on one person for more than 12 years (per your limits).

Correct?

Campaign meme from 2008: McCain was extra-qualified because of his "experience" advantage over Obama. Obama was unqualified because of how exposed to corrupt forces he was because he was inexperienced.

:eh:

[Thanatos144]

Term limits are needed.

[Buffalo]

To recap: We need term limits because congressmen/women who have been there "too long" can be corrupted. And corruption would abate because the corrupt forces wouldn't be able to focus on one person for more than 12 years (per your limits).

Correct?

Campaign meme from 2008: McCain was extra-qualified because of his "experience" advantage over Obama. Obama was unqualified because of how exposed to corrupt forces he was because he was inexperienced.

:eh:
:think:

[supreme_war_Pig]

I say Senators should be cut down to 4 years and able to serve two term only. Same in house no more than two terms. No politican can serve more than 12 years in Congress.

Too complicated. Just limit them to 2 six year terms.

[GregMartin]

To recap: We need term limits because congressmen/women who have been there "too long" can be corrupted. And corruption would abate because the corrupt forces wouldn't be able to focus on one person for more than 12 years (per your limits).

Correct?

Campaign meme from 2008: McCain was extra-qualified because of his "experience" advantage over Obama. Obama was unqualified because of how exposed to corrupt forces he was because he was inexperienced.

:eh:McLame is not your best argument to Conservatives.

[Spiked101]

quoted for truth...I don't care if he's a Dodger fan.

::slaps Dr. Funk::: How dare you equate me with the Bums! Okay now I'm insulted...;)

[Dr. Funkenstein]

::slaps Dr. Funk::: How dare you equate me with the Bums! Okay now I'm insulted...;)
:doh: My fault...got you confused with signcut.

Giants, right?

[Dr. Funkenstein]

McLame is not your best argument to Conservatives.

This has nothing to do with "conservatives vs. liberals" though. It's about some wickedly blatant hypocrisy.

[gdoane]

I'm just waiting for some nutcase to say we need to pass healthcare reform because "Teddy would have wanted it."

Nevermind that Teddy was the principle author of the horrific HMO Act and brought America the sufferings of the very system Democrats are demonizing now in calling for "reform".

We're supposed to have a citizen form of government, representation of Americans by foks who have been on the highways and byways, but instead we get folks stuck in the D.C. beltway for decades who don't stay in touch.

Even if you believed that Ted Kennedy was a good Senator, you'd have a hard time believing that in 40+ years that he's the best Massachussetts could come up with in all this time. Politicians should be rotated out regularly. Changed like diapers and for the same reason.

[GregMartin]

This has nothing to do with "conservatives vs. liberals" though. It's about some wickedly blatant hypocrisy.
I don't think many Conservatives were advancing the notion that McLame's psychotic experience was an advantage over ob*******.

I think what they were advancing was the notion that a non-communist America lover was better than a communist America hater and the resulting ob******* wrought disaster we predicted dead on rightly.

[Mojotiger]

To recap: We need term limits because congressmen/women who have been there "too long" can be corrupted. And corruption would abate because the corrupt forces wouldn't be able to focus on one person for more than 12 years (per your limits).

Correct?

Campaign meme from 2008: McCain was extra-qualified because of his "experience" advantage over Obama. Obama was unqualified because of how exposed to corrupt forces he was because he was inexperienced.

:eh:


But sometimes they get so old that they're not only corrupt but catatonic. See Ole Strom.

[Dr. Funkenstein]

But sometimes they get so old that they're not only corrupt but catatonic. See Ole Strom.
The worst part about this post is it actually does expose the one thing I'd use to limit political terms and should have brought up long ago...:doh:

The federal employee retirement age limit.

[Mojotiger]

The worst part about this post is it actually does expose the one thing I'd use to limit political terms and should have brought up long ago...:doh:

The federal employee retirement age limit.

Yep, I agree. I'm convinced Strom could win today in my state if his name was on the ballot.

[Dr. Funkenstein]

Yep, I agree. I'm convinced Strom could win today in my state if his name was on the ballot.
<nodding in agreement>

[gdoane]

But sometimes they get so old that they're not only corrupt but catatonic. See Ole Strom.

Hey, just because you're dead doesn't mean you can't be a good Democrat. Ted Kennedy probably still has a few good votes in him yet.

[CaughtInTheMiddle]

McLame is not your best argument to Conservatives.

Every time you call him McLame I'm reminded of a post where you said you voted for him.

[AZslim]

I will not make some of the vial comments made about the death of a politican like the left has made about those on the right. My condolences go out to the Kennedy family, and I pray that God forgive his child of his sins. With that being said, is death the only way of getting a liberal out of office? It took 46 years to get to this point, where we can stop the spending bills, corruption, and ferlandering headlines of Teddy. The father of big spending, high tax, and bigger government is gone. If there ever in our history was a reason for term limits, it is the history of Ted Kennedy.

The recent example of him calling out to the State Governor, and telling him to change back a law on appointing his successor, would cause legions of lawyers to decend upon anyone that dared to try that on the right. Can anyone in their right mind imagine the media frenzy of CNN,ABC,CBS,and NBC if anyone on the right would have driven their secretary off of a bridge and left to die?
Plain and simple fact is, the family grabbed power, and with that power covered up messes they did, and as of recently, were even able to change laws that work against them.

As a Christian I forgive Kennedy for whatever sin he has committed on this earth, but the moutain of liberal laws and bills that he has been part of have not only weakened us, but put us where we are today, bankrupt. Kennedy was nothing but a great spender of other peoples money. Just like Biden and the rest of them on the democratic side, you look at their tax returns, and they may have given a few hundred dollars to charity, but passed bills of billions taking our money to give to those that don't have. The people have finally caught on to the democrats in Congress, and don't think for a moment that this is just about dems, this is about a corrupt and out of control Washington DC, and Ted Kennedy was a big part of what stinks up there.

So,as a good conservative, you want the government to tell you how long you may keep a politician in office?

[Calibabe]

roman catholic.. atheists...... pretty much the same thing.......

Excuse me!!!

How in all of your logic do you even begin to explain that one coherently?

This ought to be a beaut :rolleyes:

[Dr. Funkenstein]

Excuse me!!!

How in all of your logic do you even begin to explain that one coherently?

This ought to be a beaut :rolleyes:

I can assure you that Ted Kennedy is not an atheist right now.

***?

When was Kennedy ever an atheist?

Just to recap...vaard's comment was in response to my comment, which was in response to Lawson_Raider's comment.

So vaard is saying that to the poster who said that "Kennedy is not an atheist right now", a roman catholic (which is what Kennedy is) is the same thing.

I don't think vaard is actually saying that roman catholics are atheists. I could be incorrect on that, but I don't think I am.

[Drawz]

Wow. A conservative, who presumebly is all about putting power into the hands of the American people and not the government. Wants the Congress (the group of people he's criticizing) to enact a law that takes power away from the American people?

Where's my dictionary? I gotta look up "irony"...

[Spiked101]

:doh: My fault...got you confused with signcut.

Giants, right?

:hug:

[hwyflier]

I have watched Byrd on numerous occasions sleeping in the Senate, and it should be a wake up call for people of that state that are against term limits. Senators debate on behalf of the country as a whole, while the House members debate on behalf of the states. So when it comes to a Senator, any Senator is fair game in deciding or debating this countrys future or direction.

Senators debate as representatives chosen by their state. If state chooses a sleepy 99 year old then that is who they chose to represent them.

There are all sorts of senators and congressmen I'd love to see replaced.

I can't for the life of me rationalize limiting by way of federal mandate how another state chooses their representation.

I can choose to look at the state poorly that elects people I don't like. I can choose not to do business with that state.

I disagree with you because I think term limits conflict with my conservative values. I'm wondering how other conservatives come favor the idea of term limits.....which is why I asked:

What is conservative about a federal law directing a state's right to vote for who they want as many times as they want?

Should someone in Kentucky be able to limit the will of the voters of Massachusetts?

There are other way of going about ousting bad politicians that don't involve limiting liberty.

[hwyflier]

.....It's the people who kept voting Teddy back in. What makes anyone think that a term limit would have put in anyone different? The voters obviously wanted a senator like Ted Kennedy for 46 years.

[gdoane]

.....It's the people who kept voting Teddy back in. What makes anyone think that a term limit would have put in anyone different? The voters obviously wanted a senator like Ted Kennedy for 46 years.

Sucks to have a freshman senator is the thing. Senate rules give TONS of power (committees, chairmanships) to the old guard while newly elected freshmen don't even get thrown a bone.

Massachussets is mourning the loss of 40+ years of seniority in the Senate. In a system that has rules based on time in service, incumbency isn't only an option, it's an INVESTMENT.

There's no chance or even speculation that the next Massachusetts Senator will be the chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committee. They're going from power player to beggar as Chris Dodd of Connecticut sets himself up as heir apparent for the Kennedy legacy.

The outcome of re-re-re-re-re-re-electing a 70+ year old guy dying in office may be a lot of things, but unpredictable isn't one of them.

It could be worse for Massachusetts. They could have John Kerry for their senior senator...

[hwyflier]

Sucks to have a freshman senator is the thing. Senate rules give TONS of power (committees, chairmanships) to the old guard while newly elected freshmen don't even get thrown a bone.

Massachussets is mourning the loss of 40+ years of seniority in the Senate. In a system that has rules based on time in service, incumbency isn't only an option, it's an INVESTMENT.

There's no chance or even speculation that the next Massachusetts Senator will be the chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committee. They're going from power player to beggar as Chris Dodd of Connecticut sets himself up as heir apparent for the Kennedy legacy.

The outcome of re-re-re-re-re-re-electing a 70+ year old guy dying in office may be a lot of things, but unpredictable isn't one of them.

It could be worse for Massachusetts. They could have John Kerry for their senior senator...

Very good point. So why not work to change the way power is balanced in the senate instead of term limits?

Term Limits just seem like taking a chainsaw to a dandelion when it comes to the overall problem.

I think I agree with a lot of you on the problem, just not the solution.

[gdoane]

Very good point. So why not work to change the way power is balanced in the senate instead of term limits?

The problem isn't just in the Senate, it's in the beltway and on K-street where lobbyists peddle and purchase influence. These relationships between lobbyists and politicians have to be curtailed and term limits is just one step towards getting rid of career politics. We need to get rid of lobbyists too, those vile creatures who influence elections in States where they're not even voters.

Part of the reason the District of Columbia never had any electoral votes until the ill-conceived 23rd Amendment to the Constitution gave it to those idiots was because living in D.C. should have penalties attached to it, namely losing your voice in D.C. so that you can't be a fox guarding the henhouse. Since the passage of the 23rd Amendment, the 3 Electoral Votes of D.C. have ALWAYS, 100% of the time gone for the Democrat. Those idiots even voted for Walter Mondale over Ronald Reagan.

Like a still pond goes poisonous, the 90% incumbency (recidivism) rate in D.C. poisons the beltway and creates an Emerald City where a corrupt Wizard of Oz can set up shop for his trickery and fraud.

The solution is to get rid of the old and replace with the new. Term limits of two terms for all elected officials and an age limit of age 65 on all elected officials is the way to do that.

Term Limits just seem like taking a chainsaw to a dandelion when it comes to the overall problem.

If it solves the problem, a flamethrower would work fine too. You can never have too much overkill when dealing with corrupt politicians.

I think I agree with a lot of you on the problem, just not the solution.

My solution would be a lot more draconian than term limits. I'm just for term limits because I'd never get what I really want, and that's a law mandating that elected officials stay out of Washington, D.C. for 90% of the year so that out of 52 weeks, they spend at least 47 weeks WHERE THEIR CONSTITUENTS ARE.

NOBODY has constituents in Washington, D.C. do they? Can you name the Senators from Washington D.C.? The Representatives? Of course not, so how representative is a government of the people, by the people and for the people when they're holed up in the beltway AWAY from the people who elected them?

We've got communications systems good enough that they don't need to be meeting in some musty old building nestled centrally amongst the 13 original colonies. There's plenty of opportunity for telecommuting. It would get the representatives back out among the people and turn K-street into a dust bowl. What's bad for the lobbyist is great for Americans.

[CaughtInTheMiddle]

I used to believe in term limits. Until someone explained to me that no one should be able to take away my right to vote for whomever I want.

[gdoane]

I used to believe in term limits. Until someone explained to me that no one should be able to take away my right to vote for whomever I want.

I never vote for who I want. I just vote against the guy I hate more. There's no politician who is actually likable.

[CaughtInTheMiddle]

I never vote for who I want. I just vote against the guy I hate more. There's no politician who is actually likable.

Me too. If Jesus came back and ran, by the time the media, on both sides, got through with him, he would seem like the lesser of two evils. Such is the political world we live.

[Thanatos144]

Term limits are a must. Cause no one should have that much power to long cause then they start getting more corrupt and less for the people. It is time. Time to send them all out.

[blackmesa741]

No not stupid really, it is an idea that has been around and proposed by much wiser men than you. Term limits exsist with the President of the United States and should be go enough for anyone. The idea that no one good enough will be in line to succeed is rediculous, and a tactic used by lefties.

Appealing to the wisdom of other people in this matter rather than arguing the merits of term limits is fallacy. Term limits should not exist for the President. The president that the term limits were designed to restrict being re-elected again died in office anyway. There should be no term limits save being voted out of office.

[Thanatos144]

Appealing to the wisdom of other people in this matter rather than arguing the merits of term limits is fallacy. Term limits should not exist for the President. The president that the term limits were designed to restrict being re-elected again died in office anyway. There should be no term limits save being voted out of office.

Term limits limit voter fraud.