Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
upnorth

Food for Thought

21 posts in this topic

This sent to me in an Email. Gotta make you think a little about our politicians in General.

This is a must read, and refresher for those who took Am. Govt 101 back in HS and college. The facts speak for themselves below. It is a good way to understand why we are all so frustrated with our tax bill and maybe more importantly how our money is spent. It seems to me from my memory banks, that another lesson of Am History was that we went to war with Britain to escape ' taxation without representation'........well I feel that way now, but it's our own fault , our 'representation' is a joke, all special interest, pork barrel add ons, and they have the gall to have their own retirement and medical plans that are far and away better than anyone else in the US has, except maybe corp. CEOs. It is outrageous that they reward themselves and then have the gall to tell us how they want to take care of us with higher taxes and more govt involvement in our lives. Maybe we need to secede from the union again!!!

545 People

This is the simplest, most understandable and truest

explanation of the woes of the nation and who caused them,

as well as how to cure them. This should be sent to every

person in the U.S., including the '545'.

545 People By Charlie Reese... Politicians are the only

people in the world who create problems and then campaign

against them.

Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the

Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are

against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and

high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The

president does.

You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to

vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don't control monetary policy, The Federal

Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president and

nine Supreme Court justices - 545 human beings out of the

300 million - are directly, legally, morally and

individually responsible for the domestic problems that

plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board

because that problem was created by the Congress.

In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to

provide a sound currency to a federally chartered but

private central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a

sound reason. They have no legal authority.

They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman

or a president to do one cotton-picking thing.

I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million

dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or

reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the

legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy

convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They

cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is

an excessive amount of gall.

No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker,

who stood up and criticized the President for creating

deficits.

The president can only propose a budget.

He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land,

gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives

for originating and approving appropriations and taxes.

Who is the speaker of the House?

She is the leader of the majority party.

She and fellow House members, not the president, can

approve any budget they want.

If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his

veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million

cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present

facts - of incompetence and irresponsibility.

I can't think of a single domestic problem that is

not traceable directly to those 545 people.

When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people

exercise the power of the federal government, then it must

follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it

unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it's because they want

it in the red.

If the Marines are in IRAQ, it's because they want

them in IRAQ.

If they do not receive social security but are on an

elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's

because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to

bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can

abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can

reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to

regulate and from whom they can take this power.

Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that

there exists disembodied mystical forces like 'the

economy,' 'inflation' or 'politics'

that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the

people who are their bosses - provided the voters have the

gumption to manage their own employees We should vote all

of them out of office and clean up their mess!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Old one, but a god one.

1st time I seen it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UpNorth,

I can't agree with that more! As I stated in a previous post, until we stop arguing with each other about Dem's and Rep's and realize that they are all full of bull we will remain in this never ending cycle of [PoorWordUsage] that we call democracy. We as a country spend to much time complaining and not enough time figuring out solutions to the problems. To many times the people that are educated, intelligent and creative enough to solve the problems are not the ones who have any interest in politics. They are to busy being honest, hard working people and do not want to play the political game. Politicians are great at one thing. Being ego centered and self serving but also intelligent enough to be able to make others believe that they are really there to help us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, have seen this before, but it's a good one. Would be nice to start fresh. Then the people that run though need the big bucks and they are corrupt. We need to have common folk in there. Do away with the millions it takes to get in. I just don't see that happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, have seen this before, but it's a good one. Would be nice to start fresh. Then the people that run though need the big bucks and they are corrupt. We need to have common folk in there. Do away with the millions it takes to get in. I just don't see that happening.

Yeah it's a tough one. I believe the solution is term limits and it should be our next amendement to the Constitution. I don't believe the founding fathers had career politicians in mind when setting up our current system.

The problem is they originate as a Joint Resolution in Congress or they need to be passed by three-fourths of the state legislatures. It is kind of hard for me to envision either one of these happening.

So we are left with voting against the incumbents. And no matter which direction you typically lean, sometimes that is just too distasteful to contemplate. With Congress at a 17% approval rating, I think there are a lot more of us considering it though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how you do away with the cost of getting in.

How do you introduce yourself to 350M people, inform them of your ideals, and secure their votes without spending the cash to do so?

Since every politician is crooked or becomes so once elected, what do you replace them with?

You guys wouldn't trust your own mother in office once she's in there and made a decision that you didn't agree with.

I'm thinking that nary a one of you has ever served in a position of public service for if you had, you would find that it is an impossible position to have without being labeled crooked, inept, or incompetent.

Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the solution is term limits and it should be our next amendement to the Constitution.

How about term limits and some some form of a no compete clause. Meaning, once removed from office you can not go straight to work for the large corporations that you gave tax breaks, contracts etc... to.

I'm not a Franken supporter by any stretch but I do like his message regarding that issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen to all this politician bashing and you wonder why there are no good people in politics Why would anybody with any personal self respect want to put themselves and there families threw this. Even if you are a so called "good" politician you get thrown into the pool of scum.

The person (and mentor) I bought my company from once told me "you go into politics and I will kill you" Good advise.

I totally agree that our founding father did not have career politicians in mind. I believe public service should be something a person who feels they can and want to give something back serves one maybe two terms and moves on the same as we do with the president. Politics should be about public service not a lifetime job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we do have term limits, there called elections. to bad not everyone can get together to decide this persons term is up. oh yea first time i seen this also, interesting but oh so true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow upnorth, a chain email that's actually interesting. Great email. Haven't seen it before.

Not to wizz into the parade, but I think anyone who believe term limits or restricting spending/contributions will solve anything is naive. Term Limits example: first termer Norm Coleman (blech). Small Spending Example: Paul Wellstone (blech - may he RIP).

The real problem is that the people running a country are the ones who have the ego to think they CAN run a country.

Personally I think we should elect economist Robert Samuelson as our next President, at least he could straighten out the economic side of things!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to disagree with you on this one maxium smile. I think term limits would be a factor in reduced spending. As and example, Nobody but a 33 year politician like James Oberstar could get the money to build a bike path like the Masabi trail. Of all the times I have driven by this thing I have never seem one person on it. This was pork barrel spending at it's finest. With Term limits you do not have people spending 20 tears on the same committees, getting to cozy with lobbists etc. Also with term limits you would attract more good people with business backgrouds etc. who want to serve for a few years and go home. Not like we get today which are mostly lawyers that in essence go to collage to become politicians. I believe it is the "single" most important thing we could do to change politics as it is today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a flip side to having term limits. First, note that I don't really know how I stand on the issue.

My political time was spent in an extremely small way. I served as a college student body v. president. The president at that time made a comment once that struck me. He had one year to serve and then would be graduating. I'll never forget one time when we were discussing some spending consideration and his comment was, "We're only here for short time. Might as well spend it."

Term limits could result in similar ideas. Since they have no chance to get re-elected, what does it matter that they are popular and do what the majority want? Those that hope for re-election have to watch their Ps and Qs a little tighter.

Suppose you just won the lottery. How much loyalty would you have for your employer compared to what you had before winning the lottery?

Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BobT, Your point is valid but also look at it this way. If someone is going to run for a single term they are obviously not going to do it for the money. So you are going to attract people who are doing because they have a desire to serve not a desire for a career in politics. Allot of these people would be successful business people and I don't believe they would take the attitude "we might as well spend it" at least not anymore than what we have now.

I also am not 100% for term limits either but I believe it is something worth discussing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My way of thinking it with term limits you bring in fresh people with fresh ideas. You have the same people all the time you are not going to get new ideas, it is going to be the same ol same ol. You also do away with politicians being afraid to [PoorWordUsage] their respective parties(they don't have to worry about being re-nominataed) they can vote to get things done that need to be done as they need to be done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With term limits I wonder if we would get senators and representatives running around learning the system for a big part of the term. Then what do you do. The one who was at the end of his term would have the advantage of knowing the system.

Term limits should be discussed. How many terms should one be limited to. I do think the lifers or the carrier polliticians should be held in check.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think 2 terms would be about right, 1st to learn, 2nd to get something done. And if you have not learned how to get things done 1/2 way through the 1st term, you just don't belong there anyway!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With term limits I wonder if we would get senators and representatives running around learning the system for a big part of the term. Then what do you do. The one who was at the end of his term would have the advantage of knowing the system.

Term limits should be discussed. How many terms should one be limited to. I do think the lifers or the carrier polliticians should be held in check.

Agreed, but it goes further than that. There is a lot of 'institutional knowledge' in those senators and reps that have been there a long time. If you start increasing the turnover through term limits, suddenly the 'institutional knowledge' - and the power that goes with it - is transferred away from the long-term elected representatives and shifted to (largely unaccountable) long-term bureaucrats and the lobbyists. Lobbyists who have been around a long time would gain influence over less experienced senators and representatives, as would career bureaucrats in the executive branch, giving the executive branch more power in relation to the legislative.

Also, with term limits, you have new (inexperienced) candidates campaigning, and you may very well increase the influence of PAC and other campaign contributions. You also increase the importance of the party mechanism (and the party leadership) vis a vis the candidate themselves in the election process.

While there may be some advantages to term limits, there are some significant downsides...I'm not sure this cure may not be worse than the disease itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

remember the founding fathers believed that only men who own land can vote and thus run for elected office.

Also remember when we complain about special interst groups and lobbyists we can lump PETA, NRA, DU and every group that has any agenda into this group.

To be an elected official you have a lot of people and goups to anger. There is always a cause or other that is supported and opposed. Try to do listen to all your constituents and advisors as well as colleagues tel you what to do. It is amazing any of them can make up their own mind when they order dinner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Posts

    • Have a friend that does this....   http://aquaculturenorthamerica.com/Finfish/fresh-water-fish/profitable-commercial-production-for-walleye-and-saugeye/    
    • There's a live rescue going on in Wis Como Lake I think it was right now for a guy that went through but it doesn't look good as they just sent the divers down.   WISN 12 NEWS
    • Ho Ho....   or       Use the fake news thing as a way to censor speech not acceptable to the left.  Yah sure. 
    • Pen raised walleye?   Sounds like fake news.   Lots of Canadian walleye but I think it is netted from wild in places like Lake Winnipeg or Red Lake and so on.   Must be Putin trying to discredit the Canadian Walleye providers. 
    • Quick question. On the striker models they have a setting called the A-scope. It basically widens the right hand part of the screen where it starts so that it works kinda like a showdown at the beginning of the graph which I like on the ice.  Can you check and see if that unit has that?  
    • 5 x 5 will be nor problem for one guy and gear.  I speared out of a two man flip over otter sled for several years and had not problem.  Use to spear out of a 4 x 6 permanent and that is less sq foot than the 5 x 5 hub.  It is nice to have a large hole and yes it lets in more light in those low light conditions but I always used a 3 x 2 spear hole and never had any issues.  It worked, could it be better?  Of course but you just have to figure out what is right for you.  Get a 5 x 5 foot piece of cardboard draw out your hole on it, set up your chair and put all your gear on it and then sit down.  This is probably the closest way to experiencing it prior to doing so...... Good Luck 
    • I've seen walleye at grocery stores in the cities for a buck or two more than king crab.   Yeesh.
    • Well got the unit today first Impressions are I'm really happy with it...I like how the maps included have depth shading...The screen seems very nice...The only thing I don't like so far is the quick release bracket, I feel like I'm going to break it when I pop it off. The transducer is pretty darn huge, not sure if all side imaging ducers are like that or not...Overall very happy for $499, cant wait to get it on the water.
    • Hey you guys!...had to fly into Phoenix couple days ago to check on some golf stuff and while wandering through a big supermarket saw a display of Canadian pen-raised walleye.  It was 18.99 a POUND.   Can you believe that!?  A stinkin'  little 16 ounces of walleye for THAT much money. If a guy could put up with all that sloppy, soft wiggle-wiggle of a battle to boat one a guy could make a pile of money catching them.  Personally,  I'd fall asleep in a walleye hot bite.
  • Our Sponsors