Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: SUSPEND US CONGRESS for TWO YEARS, they don't use War powers, don't pass a Budget, National Referendum

Posted 2 years ago on Oct. 8, 2012, 1:04 a.m. EST by Middleaged (5140)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

The Gist is that the US Congress gets the US into Trouble, Receives Many Gifts, Accepts Foreign Lobby Dollars, Takes Money from Wealthy, Corporations, PACs and Soft Money Organizations. And it looks like War is a Racket. War is pushed by Lobbyist. War is an industry and a Business. Plus, of course, there is not "Clear Direction" in US Foreign or Domestic Policy other than doing whatever Wall Street wants. Congress sees 'No Evil':

1) Libor Scandal was no Crime
2) Sub-Prime Mortgage Scandal was no Crime
3) Naked Short Selling and Price Fixing through Computers was no Crime
4) Deregulation of Banks was not the cause of global Financial Crisis
5) Financial Crisis of 2008 was not a Crime
6) The Dot Com Crash of 2000 did not represent a need for Strong US Ratings Agencies and Strong US Independent Auditing Agencies and Auditing Rules.
7) The fact that 1000 people were prosecuted in the Savings and Loan Scandal of the 80-90s does not represent the need for Regulations.
8) There is no need for Glass-Steagal Act or separation of Banks.
9) There is no problem with TBTF Banks being to big to go to jail.
10) Yes, there was a lie told to the run up to the IRAQ War, but there is no problem with US Decision Making.

NO ONE is going to Miss Congress except for the Lobbyist!!

I think it is a great IDEA. Suspend Congress for 2 years. No Pay. No Travel Reimbursement Either. Let the elected Reps sit at home. It is easy to make the case that most of us won't know the difference. Only negative is a positive - with continuing resolution authority the Federal Budget won't increase and No Major Programs will be created.

Let President Obama and the Department of Justic take the Heat from the Media, US Citizens, and Foreign Agencies. Let's see how Congress likes to sit on the "Sidelines" and how agency Directors like answering to the Public all on their own, taking full responsiblity, and having no one in Congress to blame.

The President is using war powers now. This means there is No Risk to National Security. We don't need Congress.

Because most of us are Stakeholders and we sense the Uselessness and Horror of WAR as well as the Hardship of refugees...Suspend US Congress 2 Years.

And it looks like we are Headed to War again, because Businesses are Bored, Coffers are Low, there is a General Malaise in Business, and the Isrealis have a bug up their Butt.

Noam Chomsky is always worth the read for his command of the language.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/issues-that-obama-and-romney-avoid-by-noam-chomsky/
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article32667.htm

One of the first actions should be to dismiss the US Senate and House of Represenatives for the Next 2 years to prevent Useless, Costly, Human Misery of War.

Quote from Chomsky Article and Voice of America reflects recent Senate Action:

"The Senate just voted 90-1 to support the Israeli position."

So we need a National Referendum to Suspend the US Senate and US House of Representatives and Censure the US Senate Vote above. I think that means we would need a General Election to pass such a Vote. Obviously we would have to Petition to get a General Election to take this action against the US Senate. Think about it, If Congress is out of Session MAYBE there is no reason for Lobbyist to continue to "Give" money until they are Nearly back in Sesson. The power to Legislate is the only Power that Lobbyist Need??

1) Libertarians should support this. 2) Tea Party should supprt this. 3) OWS should support this. 4) Socialist, Anti-war, Anti-nuc, Anti-Empire, Anti Military Expansion, and all Human Rights organizations, The Legue of Women Voters, The Green Party, Hollywood, New York City, NAACP, Green Peace, and the Sierra Club should all Support this. 5) NATO should support this. 6) The UN Should support this. 7) The EU should suppor this.

So Pass the Word????

And you can find plenty of support for this from accross the US Political Spectrum.

A) Mike Gravel former Senator, says US like war hungry Drunk. Very refreshing to hear from a politician. He says leave Iran alone. He sounds like an OWS Protester when it comes to Corporations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVQm-fY4qvQ&feature=player_embedded

B) Micheal Scheuer, ex-CIA analyst, Washington Creates Enemies and is creating new Generation of Enemies. Israel Lobby drags US into War.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLjZoA3GaVE&feature=player_embedded

Original article found at Informationsclearinghouse:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article32667.htm

http://www.voanews.com/content/us_senate_passes_resultion_against_irans_nuclear_program/1513151.html

41 Comments

41 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

No, don't suspend Congress.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

Thanks.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

And if you got a splinter in your toe, you would cut off your leg?
the problem is not our economic system
the problem is not our political system


the problem is the connection between the two


SHOULD?
"1) Libertarians should support this. 2) Tea Party should supprt this. 3) OWS should support this. 4) Socialist, Anti-war, Anti-nuc, Anti-Empire, Anti Military Expansion, and all Human Rights organizations, The Legue of Women Voters, The Green Party, Hollywood, New York City, NAACP, Green Peace, and the Sierra Club should all Support this. 5) NATO should support this. 6) The UN Should support this. 7) The EU should suppor this."


So what EVIDENCE is ther that ANY of these groups DO support this?


Have you seen the evidence that 80% of Americans do support ONE solution? Do you know what 80% of Americans support ?

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

Well, bud. Nothing happens without a Groundswell and probably without Leadership. So Nothing will happen.

I just put Ideas out there on the Internet with the feeling that it won't make any difference. I'm always right, but at least I put out Solutions. I see people put out a lot of bitches. But I don't see many solutions.

But you are right. The people have not spoken. The people will not speak. The people will forget to vote. The people are brainwashed consumers and this country is not at all what I thought it was. I was wrong to ever think this country was innocent and fair.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

the people HAVE spoken and endorsed and signed and resolved


We can do what 80% of Americans say they want
We can do what 1,900,000 Americans signed
We can do what 363 local & state resolutions call for
We can do what 1,309 American mayors endorsed


Virtually every OWS goal –
jobs, taxes, government honesty, energy, environment, economy
all go back to EXACTLY one place
MONEY IN POLITICS

And there is EXACTLY one first step:

╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬

A constitutional amendment to
Overturn Citizens United and Corporate Personhood

╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬

▬► http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com ◄▬

╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬

For a complete analysis of the amendment issue,

and the text of all amendments,
and our comparison of all of the amendments,
and the Citizens United case transcript,
and the Citizens United decision,
and the Buckley decision,
and analysis of corporate personhood,
and analysis of Article III,
and the ABC News poll on CU / CP,
and the PFAW poll on CU / CP,
and 70+ videos on CU / CP from

Chomsky, Hedges, Witchcraft, Reich,
Warren, Lessig, Hartmann, Maher, Sanders, Hightower, etc.

and our voting bloc petition & plan.

http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com
no password or signup

JOIN our OWS Working Group:
http://nycga.net/groups/restore-democracy

REGULAR MEETINGS:
Wednesdays 5:30-7:30PM @ 60 Wall St – The Atrium

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6413) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

You mean congress hasn't been gone the last two years?

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

Oh, I better check on that and get back on this. <sad>

[-] 1 points by TruthRightsFreedom (259) 2 years ago

This is what would happen if Americans knew what was going on. The authority to do it comes from Article V. In preparation fo Article V we need 3 amendments:

1) End the abridging of free speech.

2) Reform campaign finance (citizens united)

3) Secure the vote (diebold)

After 1), citizens would know an infiltration of civilian government has occured. The principles of the republic are not upheld by representatives therefore it is justified that their authority is suspended. After that 2) & 3) makes an open and focused election because the first need is unifying the people around knowing and using constitutional intent.

Article 5 - Amendment

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, **which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

This is how we become "the rightful masters of the congress and the courts", (Lincoln 1859).

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

Very Intelligent Response. Thanks very much for Reading and Responding. I need input and I have much to learn. I see the Link here http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/articlev.htm

Amendment of the US Constitution. The United States Constitution is unusually difficult to amend. As spelled out in Article V, the Constitution can be amended in one of two ways. First, amendment can take place by a vote of two-thirds of both the House of Representatives and the Senate followed by a ratification of three-fourths of the various state legislatures (ratification by thirty-eight states would be required to ratify an amendment today). This first method of amendment is the only one used to date. Second, the Constitution might be amended by a Convention called for this purpose by two-thirds of the state legislatures, if the Convention's proposed amendments are later ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures.

You may be the last Resistance.

[-] 1 points by TruthRightsFreedom (259) 2 years ago

In 1911 the requisites for Article V were met.

*"the Constitution might be amended by a Convention called for this purpose by two-thirds of the state legislatures, if the Convention's proposed amendments are later ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures."

Which was the basis for first a civil suit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs7qIQ1VkEg

Then a criminal complaint against all members of congress.

http://my.firedoglake.com/danielmarks/2012/02/18/congress-refuses-to-call-a-convention-to-amend/

The key to implimenting Article V is for Americans to understand preparatory amendment.

http://articlevconvention.org/showthread.php?33-Amendment-By-Layers-Of-Priority-Amendment-Package-Making-CONST.-Intent

Sorry if there are warnings. The site has caused no problems with computers. We seem to be targeted for minor hacking.

[-] 1 points by jtland (30) 2 years ago

Pretty radical, but, your kind of right... No one should make a career out of being a politician! http://vote-pedia.com

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

Short and Sweet. Thanks. I'll check you out. I'm suprised at the people replying with solutions or networks.

[-] 1 points by jtland (30) 2 years ago

our platform drops in less that 6 weeks! i encourage everyone who wants meaningful change to check it out, and get invovled

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

I would support just about anythign that would radically shake up those clowns at this point.

I mean, if they are suspended, whats the worse that happens? Maybe people wake up and start participating again, crafting their own ideas and legislation and party platforms,.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

Yeah, that is where I'm at. Thanks.

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

I am working on the plan for the future. This is part of it:

http://www.naturalmoney.org/theplan.html

See "National emergency" near the bottom of the page.

The idea is that emergency legislation should be implemented, bypassing Congress and the Senate, but backed by referendum laws to safeguard abuse of power by the president.

You need a good plan on beforehand, which tackles all relevant issues, otherwise it will not solve anything. I have worked on it for four years, so this can be the starting point.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

Thanks. It is easy to read and I see some good work. Will take a look.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

Congress is indeed a huge part of the problem but to "suspend" it would require a really strong social movement from below &/or a POTUS who really had the interests of The US 99% at heart. The dangers of a 'putsch' and a demagogue would also be present, especially as all 'check and balance' would be obviated. The key factor from my 'pov' would be the mass-movement from below to push for change. What form the change took would follow from there. Of course any and all such radical socio-political change would be fought tooth and nail by the Corporations and their wholly owned MSM and stooges.

pax...

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

Hm...True. There would be a danger of a junta. A military or Congressional take over of the Government. And you probably heard the story about such a thing in FDRs days. But seems like all powers are restored and charges can be layed for impeachment when congress comes back.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

a) "Major General Smedley Butler & The Fascist Takeover Of The USA - A Warning From History" : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMEI8bnbw1o (3:45m) ;

b) "The Fascist Plot to Overthrow FDR" (FULL) : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTdx6vEUtIA ;

c) Relevant Post : http://occupywallst.org/forum/americas-hidden-history-the-plot-to-overthrow-fran/ &

d) "War is Still a Racket", by Charles Sullivan : http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13762.htm .

fiat lux et fiat pax ...

[-] 1 points by Underdog (2971) from Clermont, FL 2 years ago

Although I agree that Congress is the most do-nothing part of government, I find your proposal frightening for one reason. It would essentially put the President in a position of dictator. One of the chief balances of our "three-legged stool" (Legislative, Administrative, Judicial) is the power of impeachment to remove personal abuses of power. Remove Congress and there is nothing to prevent military dictatorship. It might get there soon enough anyway with Executive Order, but I wouldn't want to hurry it along by your proposal.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2697) 2 years ago

I agree. There is no means in constitution to suspend a congress.

Our course is to focus on congress and senate. House is Republican majority and will be after elections, due to gerrymander and people who vote for GOP - Greatly Organized Pirates | Senate will be a close one on which party has majority.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

Well give the Idea a chance. The problem is that Congress Acts for Big Money Interests and Does Not Act for Common man on Main Street. What does the Constitution Provide other than a Constitutional Convention.

Clearly there is a question of Law here that came up with Fascist Governments in WWII.

Should Majority Rule or Should Principals Rule over the Majority?

Are Human Rights, the Rights of Soverignity, and the RIghts of Liberty of a people greater than the Rights of a Government, Ruler, King, or Dictator. Meaning that a vote in Government can be questioned if it is not in the best interest of Individual Rights, human Rights, the right to Equality and an Equal Voice?

Are you saying we have to have a constitutional convention, then adopt rules that allow adult voters to suspend Congress?

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

Are you sure we have that Third Leg right now?

I'm thinking we could talk with you about what you are getting and not getting. Maybe I have a Blind Spot here. But I don't see where Either House of Congress is preventing anything like what you describe and I am only Talking about 2 years. They still retain Impeachment Powers when they come back - just as they did after George W. Bush was out of Office.

Maybe you are right on one hand - that it starts to sound like an episode of Star Trek the orginal series.

[-] 1 points by Underdog (2971) from Clermont, FL 2 years ago

So exactly what is served by removing them for two years? Are you trying to teach them a lesson? Doubt they'd learn anything.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

I'm thinking we are marginalizing them. We are taking away the very Power that Corporations and Lobbyist want from them. The power to distribute Taxpayer Funds (US Dollars, and Riders) and to create Legislation that 1) deregulated 2) Regulates with big holes for Cronies 3) Tax Loopholes 4) Tax Bills with big holes for Cronies.

[-] 1 points by Underdog (2971) from Clermont, FL 2 years ago

I get that angle. But are you aware of this Executive Order that Obama signed back in March? If not, read it in detail. Very frightening. Setting the stage to take over the country and implies possible "national emergency" (or excuse of one) to take over complete control. This has never been signed before in peacetime to my knowledge.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

Okay. The smart spider is always ready for any decision that I make. I have to admit. I'm going to lose against a smart guy in the government. Meaning, yes, the President Could throw the country into turmoil and I'd be partly responsible for dismissing congress.

There are Risks with the Paper you just posted. I don't dismiss all those Risks. Obama is a War time president and the president and agency heads sort of always had the reach and power over all the agencies (I might be missing civilian implications for the time). I sort of question if the President or Agency Heads want to Write Procedures. That is not really normal. Agency Heads are like a Headquarters and they play with Policy and Orders. (which is kind of what this Executive Order does)

1) Risk of Draft - military have dismissed this for years, they prefer a volunteer army, and contract Army known as Mercs, Subcontractors for support....But in a big WWIII, sure I can see Executive Order implying broad presidential power and agency power.

2) There are other Defense Stockpile agencies (of which I don't know all of them, I saw a small one on the internet, and we know there are petro reserves that we can sell to change the price of oil), there are Future Risks in any war time, but not normally in overseas wars thousands of miles away. Still the US is creating a new generation of Enemy in the Middle East and doesn't mind creating Enemies in China. The Risk of water, Fuel, Construction Materials, war materials, always exists in an uncertain future, global climate change, economic wars, lack of gold and precious metal reserves, high debt to large foreign nations like China.

3) The Risk of Huge Military Industrial Complex, and the Risk of Huge Economy Based on Military Spending... There is a Gap in the Economy and I think we see a problem with Jobs as a result. There is a Risk from Establishing huge security struture in the US. It is a kind of Empire that will be a self-fullfilling prophesy. We have a BATF, so they find problems and kill civilians. We have a large security army in the US and they will confront civilians and probably cause killings because they exist. It is a collison course.

4) Risk of large number of Civilians who are former military and police trained to be aggressive. I'm not sure we have ever seen a problem with our former Military people being aggressive. We see problems with bath Salts in similar numbers.

5) The Military is a huge Socialism Kind of Organization. The Executive order formalizes Socialism. But this is sort of normal when you spell things out on paper. US President didn't want control of the Military except in war (up until George W), didn't want a state security apparatus (even under Reagan we knen that the East Germans and Russian were bad because of the security apparatus). Lyndon B. and Richard M. might have loved to have this Executive Order, but then didn't and probably didn't think they could get away with it. So it is a clear sign of militarization and securitzation of the US.

6) There has been an increase in the Federal Budget that would indicate an increase of federal authority across the spectrum of government. (as government gets big you get more bosses).

7) I heard there was an effort to Inventory assets across the USA (Alex Jones). This kind of sounds like this Executive Order.

8) If you look at the Federal Budget you see Trust funds are used in many places. Some of them are revolving Funds for business activities. Some you know as the SS, Medicare, unemployment. The military also uses these, but there is probably more than one reason for this. Personally I think Trust Funds are Financial Schemes except for SS & Medicare. But I notice they have alocated funds for transportation in case fuel-transporation cost go up. Makes sense in that each government organization can't not go over their budget (regardless of what you hear). War or catastrophe would soak up all budget dollars.

9) Hard to conclude much. This is what Socialism Looks like! I bet China has a longer more detailed document that we could look at if we read mandarin. I have suspected that the US is taking clues from China and the Catholic Church for some time now. I call it tribalism as the needs of the Tribe are more important than the Individual. Micheal Scheuer calls it Collectivism.

10) Let me know if I have missed implications to Civilian. I'm not a good reader. Clearly the Federal Government is so big and established as a security organization, probably including TBTF Banks, and all Financial organizations, that - it just can not ever shrink and won't tolerate funding cuts to make it smaller. Unfortuneately, it looks like if Energy Sector says we have to go to war to secure energy - the President Probably will go to war. I just don't know who pulls the strings and says we have to listen to Israel and go to war with Iran.

Here is a question:

What does this executive order provide that you didn't think the US Government had a right to do anyway? I mean I get a little afraid. But I sort of always see the Executive Office as the top of the pyramid.

I think I am most afraid of the financial ties and the size of the federal government which indicates its power over everything in the US. The federal government Doubled when George W. came in and still growing.

[-] 1 points by Underdog (2971) from Clermont, FL 2 years ago

My concern about this EO is that it formally states an intent to take over, and it doesn't even specify (to my knowledge, although I may have missed something) what would trigger that action. I mean, this document basically says they can implement "national emergency" procedures (without defining what that even is), including taking over water supplies under the DoD, mobilizing civilians (whether said civilians want to be mobilized or not, aka slavery), and so forth. So the stage is either being set or has been set for complete dictatorial control. The KEY question is -- "What motivated it at this particular time?" One could speculate endlessly about that. Even if Obama came out with a press release or even addressed the nation on TV about it and gave some type of explanation designed to calm people down about it, there is no way to know if he is telling the truth about it.

My personal guess, for whatever it's worth, is that the Government sees something coming and is getting ready NOW. Whether it is foreign or terrorist nuke attack, or internal breakdown of our society due to full-scale economic collapse leading to attempted overthrow of the Government by the civilian population, I don't know. I just know that I don't feel good about this EO, don't know why he signed it in peacetime (unless one considers Afganistan not to be peacetime, but that is not like WW2 or something, it is a relatively minor skermish, so to speak and we have been involved in lots of these "police action" wars since Korea, with no formal declaration of war by Congress).

I remember a while back when England was saber rattling about invading Iran regarding their nuke development and Putin basically said that any attempt to invade Iran and threaten their oil would result in Russian counter-attack not excluding nukes. So that was a pretty brave show from him. Obama's EO may all revolve around Iran. Israel would have invaded or attacked Iran a long time ago, imho, if the US and UN had not been restraining them. But Netanyahu's recent UN speech (the famous red-line bomb diagram) would seem to indicate that a "day of reckoning" is coming. An attack on Iran would have worldwide consequences in global oil stability. Oil destablization could potentially crash the global economy or at least have a very big impact.

I could speculate until doomsday (oops...poor word choice) about why Obama signed this EO, but don't see the point. Whatever the reason, I don't see how anyone could walk away with a "warm fuzzy" feeling about this.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

I agree mostly. I am speculating also.

1) Remember that rocket on video that launched from California Coast... I'm thinking we could be in a cold war with China, Russia, and a few others. But China can get up to our coast and launch a show of force.
2) If the US was hit by a missle with nuc sized damage, then the EO would be needed to keep order and calm (maybe).
3) Obama may have signed the EO just becaue of politics - he has to look tough to get elected and all democrats have to work to look tough in face of Republican carping.
4) Most of the Fear mongering in the US about communism taking over the world, cuba, South American Communism, going to war in Vietnam, First gulf war, Iraq War (WMDs), War on Drugs, War on Terror... it is mostly fear justifying actions, but in hind sight looks like over kill. There is even a story about US Military creating terrorism in Europe in the 1980s. There doesn't seem to be a link between reality and most of our Fear in the past. However, who knows there is a huge Risk in having to feed, provide water, provide gas, and banking for 300 M people in the USA.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

seems like that gets signed every 3 months by somebody

z powers like to tell us that they are in control

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

About the executive order and all the war and military expansion by the US over the last 11 years.... Maybe I'm naive. Maybe the US has to double federal government in size to match China.

Having a large and active Military is one way, and veterans can then be recruited to work in other parts of the federal government (loyal employees with military background). Maybe going to war and expanding the federal government is all just an attempt to match the kind of loyal government employee in China. Militarization as a strategy to create strong loyal generations to work for federal and state government jobs. More important as older government workers (baby boomers) reitre.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

i'd work \for the government if i could live off the income

but not in weapons

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

Yes, well probably boring work, long term committment, hard to get to good positions or good work that you would like.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Congress is a big problem. I think we must re populate congress! That is the mechanism we have of correcting their failures.

I think the biggest problem in congress is the extremism, and the lack of compromise, civility. This is what leads to the lack of productivity. We have to change the filibuster rule so that compromise becomes an option again.

Why compromise if you can obstruct until you get your way.?

So that is my suggestion.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

Yes, like term limits. 4 years for Congress. 6 years for President (one term). 2 years of Lame duck is bad...

Anyway good Idea to keep. Like Getting Money out of Gifts, Lobbys, and Campaigns. And like getting corporations prohibited from Free Speach. And prohiting Shell Companies. And regulating Shadow banking and Derivatives.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Definitely money out of politics.

http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com

Term limits are tougher for me to accept but I might support if the other issues are pushed.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Treasonous, unpatriotic, selfish, greedy.

They should be charged with crimes against the nation for their obstruction.

[-] 1 points by Underdog (2971) from Clermont, FL 2 years ago

Agreed. This has been fully exposed, but has received NO msm attention at all. Why? You know why.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

It's all corrupt and broken.

Break up the media conglomerates while we're breakin up the banks.