You're not giving them enough credit....they know which day they don't have to "show up"....
RE:Are pols so afraid of the NRA that they are frozen in place?
That seems to be heating up...lots of private companies cutting perks NRA were receiving....
![]() | Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years. Thanks, CNET Support |
I get the impression that congress can't agree on what day of the week it is.
If we have a problem with our gun background check system then fix the darn thing.
Are pols so afraid of the NRA that they are frozen in place?
It's baby steps moving forward.
It seems that for some pols if you can't fix everything don't fix anything.
Discussion is locked
Yup..... as long as they don't have to vote on it.
Heating up.......yup ......companies seem to be moving along.
Now if we could just light a fire under congress to get things moving.
questions are obvious.
Turnabout. What's your answer to the Congress problem?
If the other side of the aisle says yes you auto say no or you attach something to the bill that is poison to the other side......what a dumb way to run a business.
My answer..........let's start with 2 terms and your out....perhaps in your second term common sense might kick in.
but I'm going to need to reconsider that by putting my own self in that kind of situation. If I knew my job was temporary, I would be reluctant to take it unless the perks were to good to refuse. I can't think of a reason why a member of congress would accept the current two year term either. I'd almost consider that the majority of their first term and a good part of the next is a "training" period and one of needing to prove their worth. Of course, you might get a lot of lawyers and business people who were already retired or nearing their career end who'd like a chance to go to DC. That could be good or bad. The good would be their life experience and the bad might be that some wouldn't like to populate congress with older people.
I know that, at first glance, term limits seem like a great idea but I'm needing to change my own thinking about that as I grow older and, hopefully, wiser.
What is the answer?
It seems that everything our congress does is about politics.....get reelected.
If I want it you say no.
If you want it I say no.
It seems to be an auto reaction.
If I'm in my last term I'm not worried about getting reelected.
I might give some thought to is this bill a good or bad thing for the country.
of the voters. I'm thinking too few of them are acting in the same way our politicians are in that they want something for themselves rather than for the country. We won't choose the best leaders until we clean up our own act.
Some group wants something and pols when they are running for election address that want.
The group never ask themselves how is this possible, what's it going to cost, who's going to pay for this.
The pol does not care they will promise anything just to get votes.
Then they go to Washington with their promise and it's blocked.
As long as voters keep sending far left or right people to run the country we're going nowhere, they just can not talk to the other side of the aisle.
Well, I had in mind something more constructive than a review of complaints. Although that's a common reply elsewhere also.
'It hurts when I poke my eye with this stick.'
'So, stop poking.'
...
'It hurts when I poke...'
we start now. Firstly, discard the notion that all of one's own ills are the fault of someone else. We are victims of our own laziness or our own doings. Secondly, get rid of all smart phones that are used primarily to connect with social media applications. When I see folks walking, driving and cycling with their faces in these phones, they don't look smart. They look stupid...and the information they get from these things is of questionable reliability so stop blaming the Russians for who is in high office.
If I had my way, I'd also want to drop bombs full of some chemical that would induce mass amnesia on the entire world. That should get rid of all of our prejudices based on those things we've tried to curtail by enacting useless and ineffective laws which do little more than create backlash against them.
Aren't these solutions predicated on changing men's attitudes? Are there not editorials encouraging that? Are there not churches doing the same?
Can men change each other's atittudes toward society? [Without real bombs, which are tried regularly.] Big change of government in Sudan, which now has South Sudan as well. New, hand picked government vetted by the UN. News just in this morning on how that's working out. Seen it?
At the federal level, most politics gets done at committee level, where things are organized first by majority and second by tenure. That is part of the problem, but also how the trains run - when they did run. The transition would be horrendous.
I'll say it anyhow......we used to have moderate Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats who reached across the aisle and got things done because they worked together. When Gore lost his election, the Dems moved far to the left in order to destroy GWB as revenge.....and went even further to the left with BO.....and that, in turn, brought out the Tea Party type Conservative Republicans. The far left consider those Republicans now to be extreme far right when they are nothing of the kind. They are actually the ones who want to go back to the type of Republicans that fight back instead of caving like they have in the past and the establishment Republicans are having a hard time dealing with that because they, like the Dems now, want 'business as usual'. The Dems have gotten so used to their position that now that's all they want in Congress and push for candidates that move that agenda....and the Republicans now want rid of the establishments who are stuck in the past and keep trying to throw their weight around like they used to. Both parties treat the new members of both Houses as slaves to the agenda that the leaders want them to go in or they are refused seats in various Committees where they can actually do good. That's why you see so many new members give up on Congress and leave rather than keep battling some establishment leaders, on both sides.
I don't see either side moving back to the middle any time soon, but I DO see the younger voters getting old enough to realize that a socialist agenda isn't all it's cracked up to be and are moving more to the Conservative side, and become more activist motivated to combat what has happened in our schools/colleges where liberal garbage has been taught and encouraged and where free speech has now turned into battleground. The adage of 'when you are young, you are a Democrat, but when you get a little older you realize you need to be a Republican' is really true.
I don't care if a candidate is a dem or repub.
I listen to what their ideas are and if they come across as extreme I can't vote for that person.
Unless I'm forced to by a choice of bad or worse.
If we keep sending middle of the road types to congress we might get to a point where there are enough of them to get something done.
over the years, during a presidential election, it's about 60% and during midterms it's about 40%.....but things have changed drastically since 2008 when BO campaigned and lied every time he opened his mouth bringing the Tea Party into place in 2010 (and the IRS stopped them in their tracks) and then again when Trump ran when he brought more blacks and Hispanics to his side with his "what have you got to lose" statements.
patriotism. Those figures are about right here, but lower in smaller elections; city and county. Registrations are also lower, so we're talking about a percentage of a percentage. Not good for your system, because it's the local elections where new ideas and people get started, and where [it's hoped that] the people are informed.
The lobbying and influence peddling is mostly in free food at campaign kickoff parties. The smart voters go to all of them.
There has been a growth in town halls since Trump's populist revolution, but Norman Rockwell wouldn't recognize them. It's mostly Toni and Bill yelling at each other; meanwhile, Bob sits in the back, saying 'These people are driving me crazy!' He says that at every meeting.
That's your system, as appraised honestly by an outsider. Do you see change you can believe in? Will your America become great again in this manner?
trying to hand out Watch Tower pamphlets......
I doubt seriously if JP would ever actually show up at a town meeting....he's more comfy being anonymous and spewing dribble/drabble.....Bob, by his own admission, might vote but isn't happy with anybody who runs but will still vote for the liberal no matter what it seems.....at least I show up regularly at mine and have run for office in order to actually BE involved.
No..... I will vote.
Dem or repub does not enter the mix.
I've voted for both sides of the aisle over the years.
but you never even gave me the benefit of that doubt because you wouldn't/couldn't believe I would be capable of being anything other than someone who would vote strictly along party lines.
Unfortunately, based on your own statements here, I tend to NOT believe that you HAVE.
I ever said anything about the way you voted.
How you vote is your business.
You come across as a gun loving righty who lives in the past with a dislike for all dems.
I have said this in the past.
I don't give a HOOT what you believe.
If my vote had anything to do with it it's why I have a repub gov.
and you assume as usual. You really do know NOTHING about me but have formed an opinion that I 'live in the past' with a 'dislike for all dems'.
Actually, I really liked JFK, even with his zipper problem (Bill had the same problem), and voted for him. I totally disliked Johnson because he was a total RACIST (look at his record AND his words) who was PUSHED into signing the Civil Rights Bill....for which Dems have always taken credit even though it was Republicans that fought for and DIED for it. I stopped having all respect for Dems the further left they went with their agendas and recognized the 'lying thru their teeth' rhetoric pretty quickly and it pretty much started with Carter and went downhill from there.
As for living in the past......can you honestly say our country is better now that the family unit has all but disappeared, God is no longer recognized by Dems except superficially when votes count (how many liberal media covered more than a minute or two of Billy Graham's funeral and how many showed up), we had a president who not only hung with and were mentored by people like Bill Ayres and his wife and immediately began dividing our country as he campaigned (BO) but never did a damn thing to help his own hometown and made things worse than they had been 50 years, supported groups like OWS, the New Black Panthers, illegal immigrants (even to the point of advertising on billboards ACROSS the border how they could apply for benefits once they made it here), Black Lives Matter, the Muslim Brotherhood (invited them to the WH), and encouraged riots? I could go on with the list, but you know the drill........and you WILL respond with 'it's in the past, get over it'.......
What you refuse to recognize is that the PAST actions by Dems HAVE caused what has been happening NOW. Are you saying that when someone commits a crime, because it's 'in the past' we should just 'get over it'?
There were many Dems in the Senate and House of Reps that I DID like....but except for a small handful like Joe Mancian, BO managed to cause them all to leave and not stick around because during Obamacare, he lied to every single one of them and they couldn't face their constituents anymore and not be ashamed that they got sucked into his lies.
Yeah....I long for the days that my kids could play outside and not get shot by some gang member, and I long for the day when the biggest threat to our country came from hurricanes, floods, and tornadoes instead of people everywhere wanting us dead and willing to kill themselves doing it, and I long for the day when the Pledge of Allegiance was still said in school and people actually believed in it (people born here or those wanting to become citizens), and I long for the day when I could watch a football game, the academy awards, the country music awards, or some late night show COMIC and not have protesting going on and taking away the pleasure of outright entertainment.
With the rant you just posted.
It's 90% about the past.
You live in the past and have a grudge list.
Your posts have formed my opinion.
It's not that I don't care about the past I just don't see much value in dragging up something that happened 10/20/30 years ago that I thought was wrong and plugging it into an active thread.
Just because someone committed a crime 10 years ago or more, they should walk free because 'it's in the past'........
If someone committed a crime in the past and it's within the statute of limitations then they should be arrested and punished.
This discussion and others is about politics.
Nothing to do with someone who has committed a crime.
You have this obsession with going backwards in time to find some pol that did something you did not like and then carping about it.
Focus on the current admin and forget BO or Carter or others....it's in the past.
IF she ever gets charged for her crimes and it turns out that BO was actually involved in any of them, should BOTH of them just get a 'free pass' because they were 'in the past'? The dots are actually being connected, Bob.....the strands are beginning to break apart so the rope holding them up is getting weaker. Where do YOU think this will end? I know where you HOPE it will end....with Trump being impeached for his 'collusion' or 'obstruction'. You've stayed completely silent on the evidence building that points in the direction of a very corrupt BO/the LIAR administration.....why? You are quick to comment on 'the child', but not a word about 'the corrupt'.
But so far there is NO charge.
If there is a charge let there be a trial.
You have just made up your mind that Clinton and BO are guilty and you want to carp about it.
I don't comment about it because first it's in the past and second there is NO charge.
I'd like to see the child tossed out on his ear but that will be up to Mueller.