Kavanaugh fight shows us that Washington is sick. Very sick.
Comments
-
Not really. Go read again.CirrhosisDawg said:
You are replying to secdawg? Correct? Because “kav” is not charged with anything. Only secdawg and you seem to be implying otherwise.PurpleThrobber said: -
2001400ex said:
Is he innocent or is he not on trial? Can't be both.SECDAWG said:
Huh? Saying he sipping Mai Tai’s waiting on this shit show to be over, over.
-
Dam CD, nothing complicated. He next Supreme Court justice. That is all. Just need that old hag to kill off so Trump can admit another
-
-———-PurpleThrobber said:
Not really. Go read again.CirrhosisDawg said:
You are replying to secdawg? Correct? Because “kav” is not charged with anything. Only secdawg and you seem to be implying otherwise.PurpleThrobber said:
Kav is on trial?
What crime is he innocent of?
———-
All of the crimes he’s never been charged with. Take your pick
———-
Ok. LOL. You are correct.
-
SECDAWG said:
Dam CD, nothing complicated. He next Supreme Court justice. That is all. Just need that old hag to kill off so Trump can admit another
-
Christ.Sledog said:
They did it's the 2nd Amendment,oregonblitzkrieg said:Americas founders made a critical mistake by not including a mechanism in the Constitution for removing the entire power apparatus (every member Congress and the Senate) simultaneously when it become irreparably corrupted. We need to flush the shit, all of it, and start again with a whole new roster of fresh faces.
-
He’s right creepy..it’s the only thing that u can fight back with, die or not..creepycoug said:
Christ.Sledog said:
They did it's the 2nd Amendment,oregonblitzkrieg said:Americas founders made a critical mistake by not including a mechanism in the Constitution for removing the entire power apparatus (every member Congress and the Senate) simultaneously when it become irreparably corrupted. We need to flush the shit, all of it, and start again with a whole new roster of fresh faces.
-
Now thinking it’s Unlikely a vote will occur inside a week. If a vote does occur, Kavanaugh will lose.SECDAWG said:
Too much dilly, dilly -
Kav will b approvedsarktastic said:
Now thinking it’s Unlikely a vote will occur inside a week. If a vote does occur, Kavanaugh will lose.SECDAWG said:
Too much dilly, dilly
-
Him too.creepycoug said:
Christ.Sledog said:
They did it's the 2nd Amendment,oregonblitzkrieg said:Americas founders made a critical mistake by not including a mechanism in the Constitution for removing the entire power apparatus (every member Congress and the Senate) simultaneously when it become irreparably corrupted. We need to flush the shit, all of it, and start again with a whole new roster of fresh faces.
-
It’s the 2-party system that needs to go. Campaign finance reform is a goner already. Congress would still be bought and sold. But no one would have pressure from their party to support or deny Bills that they believe are good ones.BearsWiin said:It's not the people, it's the rules. Rules determine behavior and outcomes. You want better representation, change the rules by which the representatives operate. You throw everybody out and get new ones in there, they'll operate under the same constraints and incentives as the old group.
Start with competitive redistricting and campaign finance reform
And for the life of Me, if it’s good to have term limits for Presidents, why isn’t a good idea to have term limits for Congress? Leaving embedded committee chairs in office for 30 years only allows the special interests to sink their hooks deeper and deeper into them. -
We will have the two-party system as long as we have the current set of plurality, first-past-the-post voting rules. Rules determine behavior and outcomes, and a plurality voting rule means that you'll get two parties. Third parties are underrepresented and tend to wither quickly, if they can't supplant or replace one of the top two parties quickly.
Plurality voting tends to give too much power to the winning party; proportional representation tends to give too much power to smaller parties who may be needed for coalition-building. Pick your poison.
It would be more difficult to buy and sell Congress if campaigns were limited in length and amount of money that could be spent. You want to limit the influence of monied interests, not destroy it altogether. They should still have a say, just not a decisive one.
Maybe it's not good to have term limits for presidents. -
so... Trump should be President for life? hmmmm... interesting point you have there.
-
The collective peabrains of the US interweb mob culture can't handle more than two choices.salemcoog said:
It’s the 2-party system that needs to go. Campaign finance reform is a goner already. Congress would still be bought and sold. But no one would have pressure from their party to support or deny Bills that they believe are good ones.BearsWiin said:It's not the people, it's the rules. Rules determine behavior and outcomes. You want better representation, change the rules by which the representatives operate. You throw everybody out and get new ones in there, they'll operate under the same constraints and incentives as the old group.
Start with competitive redistricting and campaign finance reform
And for the life of Me, if it’s good to have term limits for Presidents, why isn’t a good idea to have term limits for Congress? Leaving embedded committee chairs in office for 30 years only allows the special interests to sink their hooks deeper and deeper into them.
-
Shocking Kunt ran his mouth and now can't back it up and then devolves into gibberish. You just claimed that Trump supported "burn it down" and that it was a "central pillar of trumpism" to get rid of the EPA, Ed. Energy, ICE, Homeland Security and the FCC, now you've shoved your head further up your ass and started talking about Trump centralizing DC power.CirrhosisDawg said:
So you don’t support trump and centralized DC power? Which is it bob?SFGbob said:
Since I didn't vote for Trump just how exactly did I get duped? Second of all, I never heard Trump ever say "burn it down" nor did I ever believe that Trump was a limited government Conservative. Appears the person who was "duped" was you. But as one of the dumbest people to post here, that probably happens a lot to you.CirrhosisDawg said:
Agree. Trump is a buffoon. When do we “burn it down??” There’s no proposal on the table to shut down DC. Why not? EPA, education, energy, ICE, homeland security, FCC... etc. the sooner we shut it down the better. It’s a central pillar of trumpism and I support it. The lack of follow through and inefficiency is just shocking.SFGbob said:
I have an idea, instead of constantly looking for angles to lead us why don't we just limit the power and reach of the Federal Government and then we wouldn't need to concern ourselves so much with the rules or how sick DC. If Congress and the Federal bureaucracy didn't have the ability to impact all of our lives so directly you wouldn't have people throwing so much money at politicians in order sway their votes and pass their legislation.BearsWiin said:It's not the people, it's the rules. Rules determine behavior and outcomes. You want better representation, change the rules by which the representatives operate. You throw everybody out and get new ones in there, they'll operate under the same constraints and incentives as the old group.
Start with competitive redistricting and campaign finance reform
Corrupt, greedy, and incompetent people will always be with us, why not limit the government's power so that when this people get into position power they aren't able to do as much damage as they are able to do now?
You got fucking duped (not surprised).
Why won’t trump cut the power, authority and funding of the federal government?
Like I said, stupid people rarely realize just how stupid they are. How did I get "duped" dumbass?
