An argument for term limits
 

http://funkyimg.com/i/2LBVw.jpg

An argument for term limits
 

On 9/28/18 10:23 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


http://funkyimg.com/i/2LBVw.jpg


Feinstein still seems to have some marbles. The other three are
embarrassments. Take the big money out of politics and you'll have term
limits. Limit donations to no more than $100 from an individual,
corporation, or group, and mandate plenty of free air and debate time on
broadcast and cable TV, and I think that would assure turnover.

An argument for term limits
 

On Fri, 28 Sep 2018 11:35:29 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 9/28/18 10:23 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


http://funkyimg.com/i/2LBVw.jpg


Feinstein still seems to have some marbles. The other three are
embarrassments. Take the big money out of politics and you'll have term
limits. Limit donations to no more than $100 from an individual,
corporation, or group, and mandate plenty of free air and debate time on
broadcast and cable TV, and I think that would assure turnover.

It is still hard to get rid of an incumbent. To start with you are
giving up your state's position on powerful committees. The first
thing that would need to happen is to remove the "time in grade" rules
in congress. This is like the unions. An incompetent person will win
out over a younger more competent one every time simply because they
have been around longer.

An argument for term limits
 

Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/28/18 10:23 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


http://funkyimg.com/i/2LBVw.jpg


Feinstein still seems to have some marbles. The other three are
embarrassments. Take the big money out of politics and you'll have term
limits. Limit donations to no more than $100 from an individual,
corporation, or group, and mandate plenty of free air and debate time on
broadcast and cable TV, and I think that would assure turnover.


Democrats would not go for open debates. Neither would the Republicans.
They all remember being embarrassed by Perot.

An argument for term limits
 

On 9/28/18 3:53 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/28/18 10:23 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


http://funkyimg.com/i/2LBVw.jpg


Feinstein still seems to have some marbles. The other three are
embarrassments. Take the big money out of politics and you'll have term
limits. Limit donations to no more than $100 from an individual,
corporation, or group, and mandate plenty of free air and debate time on
broadcast and cable TV, and I think that would assure turnover.


Democrats would not go for open debates. Neither would the Republicans.
They all remember being embarrassed by Perot.



Well, then, that would encourage a new crop of candidates who can
debate. Oh...Perot...the crazy man.

An argument for term limits
 

Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/28/18 3:53 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/28/18 10:23 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


http://funkyimg.com/i/2LBVw.jpg


Feinstein still seems to have some marbles. The other three are
embarrassments. Take the big money out of politics and you'll have term
limits. Limit donations to no more than $100 from an individual,
corporation, or group, and mandate plenty of free air and debate time on
broadcast and cable TV, and I think that would assure turnover.


Democrats would not go for open debates. Neither would the Republicans.
They all remember being embarrassed by Perot.



Well, then, that would encourage a new crop of candidates who can
debate. Oh...Perot...the crazy man.


Perot May have been crazy, but the debate group hated the embarrassing
questions he brought up.

An argument for term limits
 

Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/28/18 10:23 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


http://funkyimg.com/i/2LBVw.jpg


Feinstein still seems to have some marbles. The other three are
embarrassments. Take the big money out of politics and you'll have
term limits. Limit donations to no more than $100 from an individual,
corporation, or group, and mandate plenty of free air and debate time
on broadcast and cable TV, and I think that would assure turnover.

Yes it would - to the right.

An argument for term limits
 

On Fri, 28 Sep 2018 15:57:49 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 9/28/18 3:53 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/28/18 10:23 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


http://funkyimg.com/i/2LBVw.jpg


Feinstein still seems to have some marbles. The other three are
embarrassments. Take the big money out of politics and you'll have term
limits. Limit donations to no more than $100 from an individual,
corporation, or group, and mandate plenty of free air and debate time on
broadcast and cable TV, and I think that would assure turnover.


Democrats would not go for open debates. Neither would the Republicans.
They all remember being embarrassed by Perot.



Well, then, that would encourage a new crop of candidates who can
debate. Oh...Perot...the crazy man.

It was Perot who buried them with the bitter truth about the debt, bad
trade deals that drove the Clinton/Gingrich tax hikes and spending
cuts.
It was Harry Browne who asked the questions that embarrassed them.
At any rate, after that, nobody but the machine candidates were
allowed to debate.

An argument for term limits
 

On 9/28/18 8:09 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 28 Sep 2018 15:57:49 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 9/28/18 3:53 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/28/18 10:23 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


http://funkyimg.com/i/2LBVw.jpg


Feinstein still seems to have some marbles. The other three are
embarrassments. Take the big money out of politics and you'll have term
limits. Limit donations to no more than $100 from an individual,
corporation, or group, and mandate plenty of free air and debate time on
broadcast and cable TV, and I think that would assure turnover.


Democrats would not go for open debates. Neither would the Republicans.
They all remember being embarrassed by Perot.



Well, then, that would encourage a new crop of candidates who can
debate. Oh...Perot...the crazy man.

It was Perot who buried them with the bitter truth about the debt, bad
trade deals that drove the Clinton/Gingrich tax hikes and spending
cuts.
It was Harry Browne who asked the questions that embarrassed them.
At any rate, after that, nobody but the machine candidates were
allowed to debate.


I recall Perot as nothing more than a gadfly, and his choice of
Stockdale as his running mate was something to behold. I have no memory,
and for good reason, of Harry Browne.

An argument for term limits
 

On Fri, 28 Sep 2018 19:34:11 -0400, Alex wrote:

Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/28/18 10:23 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


http://funkyimg.com/i/2LBVw.jpg


Feinstein still seems to have some marbles. The other three are
embarrassments. Take the big money out of politics and you'll have
term limits. Limit donations to no more than $100 from an individual,
corporation, or group, and mandate plenty of free air and debate time
on broadcast and cable TV, and I think that would assure turnover.

Yes it would - to the right.

The problem is, you have "bundlers" like David Cohen or Sheldon
Adelson, who can take huge contributions and hide them in the
obfuscation of the small contributors. If the UAW (or the Koch
Brothers) gives $5 million, flushes it through a bundler and says it
is $100 from 50,000 individuals nobody would know.
The only way you can take money out of politics is to cut down on
political ads but nobody wants to give up a billion dollar a cycle
business.