Are Dems really as bad as Repubs? - Page 7 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

retmil46 · #91 10-08-2006, 05:33 PM

When I went thru Navy boot camp back in '77, the old senior chief bosun's mate that was our company commander gave us his political philosophy as it related to the military - "You want a pay raise, vote for a Democrat. You need new equipment, vote for a Republican." Never have been able to find fault with that statement.

Couple of years back I read Christine Whitman's book "It's My Party Too". She was W's first EPA administrator, stepped down when W's White House loyalists wanted her to fudge the science to fit their policies and she refused, had also been Repub governor of New Jersey I believe.

If ANY party truly followed the principles of government she professed in her book, I'd gladly accept their label.

t walgamuth · #92 10-08-2006, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikemover

OK, a nice try on your part....

But how 'bout this:

By your logic, we should allow George W. to run for President again.

Would you be OK with him being elected for a 3rd or 4th term or more?....

Mike

well, no. i was not ok with him being elected once.

but, it worked fine from 1776 til about 1950 or so. and because of roosevelt wining four times the repubs passed the law. and the next pres was one who probably could have been elected again...eisenhower. a repub. so it was imho poetic justice.

but actually i am not sure i want the presidency to be a run as many times as you like office. too much power concentrated there.

tom w

Botnst · #93 10-09-2006, 08:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

well, no. i was not ok with him being elected once.

but, it worked fine from 1776 til about 1950 or so. and because of roosevelt wining four times the repubs passed the law. and the next pres was one who probably could have been elected again...eisenhower. a repub. so it was imho poetic justice.

but actually i am not sure i want the presidency to be a run as many times as you like office. too much power concentrated there.

tom w

Dubyuh set the standard by declining to run for a 3rd term as president in 1796. That precedent established that no president was more important than the country and was followed by popular leaders who could have been reelected right up until FDR decided that the country couldn't survive without him.

It wasn't Republicans who enacted the amendment limiting the term of office. It takes a majority of both houses of Congress and a majority of the states. NO WAY a single party could do that, otherwise we'd have that nutty flag burning amendment passed.

B

t walgamuth · #94 10-09-2006, 09:22 AM

ouch! caught on a technicality.

will you concede it was pushed by repubs?

tom w

mikemover · #95 10-09-2006, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

but actually i am not sure i want the presidency to be a run as many times as you like office. too much power concentrated there.

I think the same thing about Congress... Congress as a whole has at least as much "power" as the office of President does... probably more.

I believe that EVERY elected office--federal, state, and local--should have term limits. Then the "career politician" problem would be a thing of the past.

On an unrelated note... Why do you have your cell phone # on your profile, to be seen by anyone and everyone?... Seems like an invitation for trouble, doesn't it?...

Mike