Smedley_buzk**l wrote:
Personally, I will not v**e for an incumbent more than once no matter how much I like him or her. The Founders never intended for these damn politicians to set up a dynasty in DC. Senate incumbents are reelected at a rate of nearly 97%, and House incumbents at around 90%. The same people who elected and reelected these douche bags then b***h because nothing ever changes.
"Damn, Joe, we'd better stop screwing our constituents. If we keep this up they're liable to reelect us or something."
The same people who holler term limits are the ones who cannot seem to comprehend that we already have them for Congress; they're called E******NS.
What we desperately need are term limits on the Federal Judiciary. A lifetime appointment of considerable power and influence, and the judges would never have even been nominated if they did not reflect the views of the party that controls the Senate at the time. Democrats nominate Liberals, Republicans mostly nominate Conservatives, and ten years from now they will still be on the job no matter how the power structure of the Senate has shifted.
For those of you who say my rule of only v****g for an incumbent once is throwing out the baby with the bathwater, all I can say is I throw out one HELL of a lot more bathwater than I do baby.
Personally, I will not v**e for an incumbent more ... (
show quote)
you know I have to agree with you on that, maybe we should limit the m to 2 terms ? and yes we should have federal judiciary limits as well ? i agree with you on that too !!!! nice to see we can agree on things, we should try more often to get along.