Scandals, scandals, scandals

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), August 30, 2001

Answers

What do you find amusing? The classic pot/kettle situation with Clinton and the Republicans, the need to bare one's soul and personal indicretions in order to campaign effectively or the fact that God is running a political campaign by slotting his vessels for each congressional district and senate seat?

Or is it just a general amusement/bemusement at the extent of hypocrisy in the Family Values/Christian Right sector?

-- Jack Booted Thug (governmentconspiracy@NWO.com), August 30, 2001.

GEE,I know sin is considered[ol' fashioned]but ain,t it funny how it pops up from time to time. gosh maybe GOD is right-we are ALL born [in] sin,and HE has the cure!!--------interesting TIMES ahead.

-- al-d. (dogs@zianet.com), August 30, 2001.

Al,

If the Rapture is coming give me some advance notice. I need to get my sex doll inflated.

-- Jack Booted Thug (governmentconspiracy@NWO.com), August 30, 2001.

JBT: I guess I'd summarize my laughing points to these two:

The big question is, how much candor and repentance does the voter require?

Don't give them MORE than they require, now.

God put temptation in his way so that He may use his fleshly vessel for great purposes.

OKAY! Um...on the subject of the rapture, Al, I STILL want to know if I must jump up.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), August 30, 2001.

GEE,I know sin is considered[ol' fashioned]but ain,t it funny how it pops up from time to time. gosh maybe GOD is right-we are ALL born [in] sin,and HE has the cure!!--------interesting TIMES ahead.

I'm really not kidding about this - The person who can decifer al-d's little ascii character-based dialect and write a computer program to simulate it will rule the Christian world.

-- Bemused (and_amazed@you.people), August 30, 2001.

Anita, OKAY! Um...on the subject of the rapture, Al, I STILL want to know if I must jump up.

Just don't jump up through a sun roof while in a moving vehicle.

-- Cherri (jessam6@home.com), August 30, 2001.

The real answer?

Term Limits.

-- Stephen M. Poole (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), August 30, 2001.

Stephen: Can *I* be in charge of determining the terms and the limits?

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), August 30, 2001.

Anita,

I will let my *CAT* be in charge of it ... if we can just GET it.

-- Stephen M. Poole (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), August 30, 2001.

Is this an issue near and dear to your heart Mr. Poole?

-- Jack Booted Thug (governmentconspiracy@NWO.com), August 31, 2001.

Stephen -

You should read Christopher Hitchens's article in the current edition of Vanity Fair (sorry, they don't put articles online) where he discusses the very issue of Term Limits. In a nutshell, he comes down against them as being worse than the ill they are trying to cure and also for being anti-democratic.

I'm too tired to summarize his reasoning, but he made some good points. It's worth buying the mag to read the article (and they have some hot photos of Penelope Cruz........... ;-)

Regards

JC

-- Johnny Canuck (j_canuck@hotmail.com), August 31, 2001.

Shame on you Stephen. We have term limits. They're called elections. Term limits are nothing but an abdicaton of voting rights generally proposed by those who've given up on the electorate. Whence democracy then? Was that really you?

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), August 31, 2001.

Term limits are one solution to the problem of committee chairmanships being slotted for the same person forever. This is not in the Constitution, is not in our law, it is a custom of the Congress, and has the result of concentrating virtually all the power in Congress into the hands of the few who have been there the longest.

Don't want term limits, come up with a reform for the committee chair problem. That's the real problem.

For all I care, have a lottery for the damn things, at the start of each Congress. Or simply require that anyone who has held that chair cannot hold it again for a period of ten years.

But that is the real problem.

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), September 02, 2001.

Well stated Paul.

Carlos, in your opinion should the number of times one can be elected to the office of the President of the U.S.A. be limited?

Does the federal government have an obligation to save the citizenry from themselves? Should the right to vote for ANYONE for a given office be abridged in order to avoid what Paul mentioned above regarding too few people acquiring and holding for long periods too much power? Case in point: if South Carolina really wants a 98 year old who's obviously not capable of rendering service appropriate to the office (IMO) to represent them in the U.S. Senate, I say more power to them.

On the other hand, my ideal of political office at every level is one of short term public service. Get in, do your best, get kicked back out with a thank you for your service. I understand the learning curve is steep with some offices and one cannot be very effective in their first term until the protocols are absorbed. Perhaps this is a red flag that we need to simplify the process wherever possible in order to make government more accessible to the citizenry, thereby providing us with at least a shot at truly understanding the rules and regulations which govern our day to day lives.

I dunno.

-- Rich (living_in_interesting_times@hotmail.com), September 02, 2001.