Skip to main content

View Diary: Hatred of Congress gets personal (88 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I still think service in congress (9+ / 0-)

    should be like jury duty.  No incumbencies, serve 1 year, then OUTCHAGO, in with the new.  No more political careers, just good old public service rendered by the duly appointed custodians.

    Obviously our present system has been overrun by oligarchs who are all too happy to see the rest of us unemployed and starving/dying.

    •  I like the idea of dragging some unfortunate off.. (5+ / 0-)

      ....to Washington and toss them into a Congressional office, slam the door and the Sergeant at Arms locks the door....

      "You wanna eat? LEGISLATE, Motherfucker!"

      < /snarkoff>

      "Ronald Reagan is DEAD! His policies live on but we're doing something about THAT!"

      by leftykook on Tue Aug 05, 2014 at 12:48:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  And I thought my preference for (0+ / 0-)

      mandatory voting was extreme... I like it. It could go with my concept of the 'minimum income'...

      "...So the world might be mended"

      by Cofcos on Tue Aug 05, 2014 at 01:41:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  That's a long-time Republican strategy (5+ / 0-)

      An ideal version of the old "term limits" mantra.

      The underlying purpose is to advance oligarchy and give all the power to the wealthy. The United Cabal of Robber Barons.

      If all the lawmakers are inexperienced, naive, and gullible, they'll hang their hat on ALEC boiler-plate legislation and pretend to take credit themselves.

      Sound familiar?

      Eliminating pensions, power-thru-seniority, extra income for committee membership, and shit like this would be much more effective than term limits or turnover solutions.

      Taking back the public airwaves would turn everything around. Hate radio and TV is destroying minds. The First Amendment was intended to apply personally and locally and within regional boundaries, mostly, imo. People were worried that a federal structure could take over and fuck up local traditions and culture. So we got assurances that the people would not be prevented from presenting our grievances.  But when we created the ability to multiply hate speech and lies by broadcasting it over OUR public airwaves (the telegraph before that), the personal First Amendment protections really don't address these new issues any more.

      The people should have a whole lot of power and influence over this kind of shit. We don't.

      [/small rant]

      "Never wrestle with a pig: you get dirty and the pig enjoys it"

      by GrumpyOldGeek on Tue Aug 05, 2014 at 02:58:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        J Orygun

        You write"  If all the lawmakers are inexperienced, naive, and gullible, they'll hang their hat on ALEC boiler-plate legislation and pretend to take credit themselves."

        YOU ARE OF COURSE AWARE THAT THIS HAS BEEN OUR EXISTING SCENARIO FOR AT LEAST THE PAST 14 YEARS???

        Public service belongs in the hands of the public, not these lobbyist whores.  As far as I'm concerned, trained chimps could do this job better than the 535 fucktards in office now, Dems AND Repugs.

        DOING THIS WILL REQUIRE SOME PREPARATION and some changes in existing law.

        The number ONE order of business will be to define and restrict the "rights" of artificial persons aka corporations.

        "Speech" must be re-defined as ... er.. speech, and spending money must be UN-defined as "speech."  Or, obviously everyone has to have the same amount of money or some people will have more right to free speech than others!  Simple!

        Campaign contribution limits will not be necessary, as public office will change hands every year and will be done by random mail selection.  Neither will Americans have to endure 3 1/2 years of political propaganda in-between election years.

        And of course, BRIBERY, aka, lobbying should once again be made ILLEGAL.  

        In fact, in this era of internet there is no reason that the PEOPLE couldn't directly contribute to the crafting of laws that affect them.   Perhaps it is time to take some of the burden off our "representative" democracy and try moving, at least to some extent, to a direct model.  This, coupled with ending incumbency and hence, endless campaigning and advertising as we know it, could only result in putting the "public" back into public service.

        I'm sick to fuckin' death and have had it beyond up to here with the useless professional whores and talking heads in Congress... it's time to return Mr. Smith to Washington.

        •  So replacing the stupid with stupider solves this? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sychotic1, War4Sale

          The stated purpose of this web site is to elect more and better Democrats. It's not to drop a nuke on Congress and start over with random unknown people.

          "Never wrestle with a pig: you get dirty and the pig enjoys it"

          by GrumpyOldGeek on Tue Aug 05, 2014 at 04:10:28 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Actually yes (0+ / 0-)

          Look to California.  I deal with the state legislature quite frequently and Grumpy is right.

          "I watch Fox News for my comedy, and Comedy Central for my news." - Facebook Group

          by Sychotic1 on Wed Aug 06, 2014 at 07:33:27 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  How about a third house (0+ / 0-)

          I too have thought that a collection of random voters can't possibly be worse than the collection we have now.
          But I also appreciate the need for professional lawmaking.  What if we have yet another house of congress: the Jury.  It's composed of a few randomly selected voters from each CD.  And every law has to be passed by them as well.  They are randomly selected so there's no money involved. There identities are secret until their terms are up.  Some will be nuts, but probably not most of them.  Maybe there's some Jury selection process.  They change every year.  Their sole purpose is to prevent congress from passing laws that most people don't agree with.  

          I'm still mad about Nixon.

          by J Orygun on Wed Aug 06, 2014 at 02:11:38 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (171)
  • Baltimore (87)
  • Community (84)
  • Bernie Sanders (66)
  • Freddie Gray (60)
  • Civil Rights (57)
  • Elections (41)
  • Culture (38)
  • Hillary Clinton (36)
  • Media (35)
  • Racism (33)
  • Law (32)
  • 2016 (31)
  • Labor (26)
  • Education (26)
  • Environment (25)
  • Politics (23)
  • Republicans (23)
  • Barack Obama (22)
  • Economy (20)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site