Paul Ryan is reported as NOT seeking re-election.

[DixonHur 11154]

We really need congressional term limits.  Anytime I hear the term "retire" in reference to a politician it makes me angry.

The founders never intended serving in congress to be a full-time career.  It was supposed to be a type of public service, like joining the military.  But these jackasses just go to Washington to stuff their pockets.  It's always interesting how most of these leeches see their net worth go up dramatically while in office, while "we the people"  get to pick up the tab.  And I hardly blame them, they're just taking advantage of the system that's in place.  And it's unlikely to change because most of the population treats voting like an inconvenience instead of a duty.

Ok, sorry, had to vent.  Rant over.

[Kyrie Eleison 9312]

1 minute ago, Pods said:

The only dinosaurs the survived the asteroid impact and following extinction were birds, so I'm going to go with yes. 

fucking T-Rex should've never refused getting on the Ark when Moses told them to it was time to fly...

[Pods 7525]

1 minute ago, Kyrie Eleison said:

fucking T-Rex should've never refused getting on the Ark when Moses told them to it was time to fly...

Yep, it's a shame so much of their brain is dedicated to smell. Assholes couldn't smell the rain I guess. 

[Pescado_Rojo 19330]

https://politics.theonion.com/entitled-deadbeat-finally-breaks-out-of-20-year-cycle-o-1825185530

 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Speaking of hypocrites, Boehner has changed his tune on legal pot now that he's getting a fat check to lobby for the industry.  

[FWD 297]

Ryan will be remembered as the guy who exploded the federal deficit for years to come and did everything in his power to prevent oversight of the Trump administration's public corruption. Good riddance.

[Pods 7525]

Just now, FWD said:

Ryan will be remembered as the guy who exploded the federal deficit for years to come and did everything in his power to prevent oversight of the Trump administration's public corruption. Good riddance.

Hopefully he realizes this and spends the rest of the time redeeming what he can. I'm not holding my breath though. 

[ShaggyBevo RIP 3868]

5 hours ago, Mojo Hand said:

Nobody ever wants to spend more time with their kids.  It's partly the political wind and partly just grabbing the cash after throwing a bomb into our nation's finances.  They don't want to be around for the wreckage. 

This. He wants to spend the $56 million in his campaign  coffers on himself before the GOP realizes his platform alienated the people enough to make them get out and vote. 

[Kyrie Eleison 9312]

34 minutes ago, Pods said:

Yep, it's a shame so much of their brain is dedicated to smell. Assholes couldn't smell the rain I guess. 

huh...always thought it was gay homosexuality that killed the dinos. 

[jimmyjazz 45538]

1 minute ago, Kyrie Eleison said:

huh...always thought it was gay homosexuality that killed the dinos. 

Well, that and Allah.

[ShaggyBevo RIP 3868]

8 minutes ago, FWD said:

Ryan will be remembered as the guy who exploded the federal deficit for years to comeand did everything in his power to prevent oversight of the Trump administration's public corruption. Good riddance.

That was the plan, so they could then justify draconian cuts in social services.  

Edited April 11, 2018 by ShaggyBevo RIP

[Buzzrock 14870]

5 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

so his reason is "i want to spend more time with my kids."

that seems noble, but i don't buy it. i think it absolutely means the wind is stronger than we may have previously thought.

That and his job has to SUCK.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33831]

21 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Speaking of hypocrites, Boehner has changed his tune on legal pot now that he's getting a fat check to lobby for the industry.  

saw that, and almost threw up. fuck that Half-Life scientist looking motherfucker

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

48 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

We really need congressional term limits.  Anytime I hear the term "retire" in reference to a politician it makes me angry.

The founders never intended serving in congress to be a full-time career.  It was supposed to be a type of public service, like joining the military.  

Not sure there is much support for that.  They formed a democracy that had no term limits at all among a background of other representative governments where representatives served indefinitely.  

[Pods 7525]

14 minutes ago, Kyrie Eleison said:

huh...always thought it was gay homosexuality that killed the dinos. 

That too. It's a multivariate analysis. 

[SmokeyBear1861 107]

Thank God.

[Ghost of LL 15469]

1 hour ago, DixonHur said:

We really need congressional term limits.  Anytime I hear the term "retire" in reference to a politician it makes me angry.

The founders never intended serving in congress to be a full-time career.  It was supposed to be a type of public service, like joining the military.  But these jackasses just go to Washington to stuff their pockets.  It's always interesting how most of these leeches see their net worth go up dramatically while in office, while "we the people"  get to pick up the tab.  And I hardly blame them, they're just taking advantage of the system that's in place.  And it's unlikely to change because most of the population treats voting like an inconvenience instead of a duty.

Ok, sorry, had to vent.  Rant over.

Yeah--would you care to provide a cite for that?  It's been a long time since I read through the Federalist, but I don't remember anything that would support your conclusion.

[In10se 175]

1 hour ago, Pods said:

Hopefully he realizes this and puts a gun in his mouth and pull the trigger until it goes click. I'm not holding my breath though. 

 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33831]

Edited April 11, 2018 by Longhorn_Fan68

[Jhawk 1075]

Paul Ryan is a world class piece of shit. I hope he rots in hell right next to John McCain. 

[DixonHur 11154]

3 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

Yeah--would you care to provide a cite for that?  It's been a long time since I read through the Federalist, but I don't remember anything that would support your conclusion.

First off, I'd like to point out that the Constitution was a compromise (primarily) between the Federalists, and Anti-Federalists.  I'm not sure why people only seem to cite the Federalist papers when talking about the Founding Fathers. 

The truth is both sides were against a political class, i.e. professional politicians, but the Federalists simply had more faith in the people than turned out to be warranted.   Their argument against term limits were 3 fold:

1. The people have a right to determine who they will and will not elect
2. It reduces the incentives for accountability
3. Deprives the society of experienced public servants

Some of the evidence that supports the idea that the Founding Fathers did not want career politicians are:

• Term limits for Congress were included in the Articles of Confederation (Article 5)
• During the first 66 years of the US, from 1789 to 1855, there were only 2 years that the members of Congress earned an annual salary.  The other 64 years members of Congress got paid $6 - $8 a day, and then only when they met...that's about $115/day in today's money
• These quotes from Thomas Jefferson (Anti-Federalist) and John Adams (Federalist)

Quote

"Like bubbles on the sea of matter borne, They rise, they break, and to that sea return. this will teach them the great political virtues of humility, patience, and moderation, without which every man in power becomes a ravenous beast of prey."  - John Adams, proposing the need for annual elections, Republican Government,  1776

 

 

Quote

"I proposed the representatives (and not the people) should choose the [State] Senate... To make them independent I had proposed that they should hold their places for nine years and then go out (one third every three years) and be incapable forever of being re-elected to that house. My idea was that if they might be re-elected, they would be casting their eye forward to the period of election (however distant) and be currying favor with the electors and consequently dependent on them. My reason for fixing them in office for a term of years rather than for life was that they might have an idea that they were at a certain period to return into the mass of the people and become the governed instead of the governor, which might still keep alive that regard to the public good that otherwise they might perhaps be induced by their independence to forget." --Thomas Jefferson to E. Pendleton, 1776.

 

Quote

"I apprehend that the total abandonment of the principle of rotation in the offices of President and Senator will end in abuse.  But my confidence is that there will for a long time be virtue and good sense enough in our countrymen to correct abuses. " --Thomas Jefferson to E. Rutledge, 1788.

 

Quote

"Our public economy is such as to offer drudgery and subsistence only to those entrusted with its administration--a wise and necessary precaution against the degeneracy of the public servants." --Thomas Jefferson to M. de Meunier, 1795.

 

Quote

"All [reforms] can be... [achieved] peaceably by the people confining their choice of Representatives and Senators to persons attached to republican government and the principles of 1776; not office-hunters, but farmers whose interests are entirely agricultural. Such men are the true representatives of the great American interest and are alone to be relied on for expressing the proper American sentiments." --Thomas Jefferson to A. Campbell, 1797.

 

Quote

"Whenever a man has cast a longing eye on [offices] a rottenness begins in his conduct." --Thomas Jefferson to T. Coxe, 1799.

 

Quote

"General Washington set the example of voluntary retirement after eight years. I shall follow it, and a few more precedents will oppose the obstacle of habit to anyone after a while who shall endeavor to extend his term. Perhaps it may beget a disposition to establish it by an amendment of the Constitution." --Thomas Jefferson to J. Taylor, 1805.

 

• Even good ole Constitutional expert Ted Cruz got into the issue in his Op-ed with Sen. DeSantis.

Quote

“Though our Founding Fathers declined to include term limits in the Constitution, they feared the creation of a permanent political class that existed parallel to, rather than enmeshed within, American society.”

So those are some of the reasons I think that...

 

[Fudge Nuggets 19144]

Quote

The other 64 years members of Congress got paid $6 - $8 a day, and then only when they met...that's about $115/day in today's money

Fucking hell, I'm all for this.  Make serving in Congress as lucrative as jury duty and that will scatter these assholes real quick like.  We can set up a dorm to house them when they are in DC complete with a shitty cafeteria.  Getting to and fro DC... your ass is flying coach at best and preferably taking Greyhound.

And before anyone gets on their high horse and bitches about the quality of representation this will bring, need I remind you of the current state of affairs?

[Grade of D as in David 13253]

3 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Fucking hell, I'm all for this.  Make serving in Congress as lucrative as jury duty and that will scatter these assholes real quick like.  We can set up a dorm to house them when they are in DC complete with a shitty cafeteria.  Getting to and fro DC... your ass is flying coach at best and preferably taking Greyhound.

And before anyone gets on their high horse and bitches about the quality of representation this will bring, need I remind you of the current state of affairs?

I thought about the same thing regarding housing, but in all seriousness that would make for a really nice target for the bad guys.

I do think we should do away with their pension and 401k matching. We should make them liquidate all assets except for primary residence in their district, so that they can't legally benefit from inside trading knowledge, stop giving away 40k for furnishings for home state offices, as well as stop paying for in district offices. Make them pay for health insurance and their gym membership while we're at it.

 

Regarding the pay, I don't think that we should lower it to jury duty levels but we should only pay on the days they are in session or committee meetings. Although with the median net worth of a congressman over one million dollars I would be fine with that too.

[Tuco 5076]

I thought about the same thing regarding housing, but in all seriousness that would make for a really nice target for the bad guys.
I do think we should do away with their pension and 401k matching. We should make them liquidate all assets except for primary residence in their district, so that they can't legally benefit from inside trading knowledge, stop giving away 40k for furnishings for home state offices, as well as stop paying for in district offices. Make them pay for health insurance and their gym membership while we're at it.
 
Regarding the pay, I don't think that we should lower it to jury duty levels but we should only pay on the days they are in session or committee meetings. Although with the median net worth of a congressman over one million dollars I would be fine with that too.

Sounds like a great way to insure that only the wealthy and corrupt should have the ability to serve in Congress.

[Washpark 176]

 

 

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

10 hours ago, DixonHur said:

First off, I'd like to point out that the Constitution was a compromise (primarily) between the Federalists, and Anti-Federalists.  I'm not sure why people only seem to cite the Federalist papers when talking about the Founding Fathers. 

The truth is both sides were against a political class, i.e. professional politicians, but the Federalists simply had more faith in the people than turned out to be warranted.   Their argument against term limits were 3 fold:

1. The people have a right to determine who they will and will not elect
2. It reduces the incentives for accountability
3. Deprives the society of experienced public servants

Some of the evidence that supports the idea that the Founding Fathers did not want career politicians are:

• Term limits for Congress were included in the Articles of Confederation (Article 5)
• During the first 66 years of the US, from 1789 to 1855, there were only 2 years that the members of Congress earned an annual salary.  The other 64 years members of Congress got paid $6 - $8 a day, and then only when they met...that's about $115/day in today's money
• These quotes from Thomas Jefferson (Anti-Federalist) and John Adams (Federalist)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• Even good ole Constitutional expert Ted Cruz got into the issue in his Op-ed with Sen. DeSantis.

So those are some of the reasons I think that...

 

This is a good post and you should feel good. 

[GSU&UT 1798]

2 hours ago, Tuco said:

Sounds like a great way to insure that only the wealthy and corrupt should have the ability to serve in Congress.

Isn't this pretty much already the case? It's extremely difficult to get elected to Congress without having a nice chunk of money that you're willing to spend.

[bernorange 8348]

3 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Isn't this pretty much already the case? It's extremely difficult to get elected to Congress without having a nice chunk of money that you're willing to spend.

Poor people can still win, they just have to be bigger whores/puppets than their opponents.  But yes, the system is currently designed so that deep pockets control the process for the most part.

[Ghost of LL 15469]

11 hours ago, DixonHur said:

First off, I'd like to point out that the Constitution was a compromise (primarily) between the Federalists, and Anti-Federalists.  I'm not sure why people only seem to cite the Federalist papers when talking about the Founding Fathers. 

The truth is both sides were against a political class, i.e. professional politicians, but the Federalists simply had more faith in the people than turned out to be warranted.   Their argument against term limits were 3 fold:

1. The people have a right to determine who they will and will not elect
2. It reduces the incentives for accountability
3. Deprives the society of experienced public servants

Some of the evidence that supports the idea that the Founding Fathers did not want career politicians are:

• Term limits for Congress were included in the Articles of Confederation (Article 5)
• During the first 66 years of the US, from 1789 to 1855, there were only 2 years that the members of Congress earned an annual salary.  The other 64 years members of Congress got paid $6 - $8 a day, and then only when they met...that's about $115/day in today's money
• These quotes from Thomas Jefferson (Anti-Federalist) and John Adams (Federalist)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• Even good ole Constitutional expert Ted Cruz got into the issue in his Op-ed with Sen. DeSantis.

So those are some of the reasons I think that...

 

But as you point out--term limits were in the Articles of Confederation.  And the Constitution specifically omits term limits.  So when they were drafting the Constitution, the Framers knew how to write a term-limit provision, and they made the specific decision not to.

Moreover, as you point out, Congress was an unpaid gig.  That doesn't indicate that they didn't want "a political class," as you conclude.  It indicates that they completely wanted a political class.  By making Congress an unpaid gig, they excluded all but the upper class from holding office.  Farmers who worked their own land couldn't afford to be in Washington for most of the year away from their farms.  Merchants whose livelihoods depended on day-to-day trade couldn't afford to abandon their shops and trade for years at a time.  Only the plantation class from the South and the wealthiest of the merchant class in the North could afford to hold congressional office.

The expansion of the franchise gets a lot of the recognition, but the democratizing force of making Congress a paid position is under-recognized. 

Finally, I think your reliance on Adams and Jefferson is misplaced.  Adams and Jefferson are looking back at the only previous republic available for comparison at their time: the Roman Republic.  And their view was that the Republic fell because of the hyper-ambition of a small number of politicians (Caesar, Sulla, Marius).  They took inspiration from the system of electing magistrates annually, and preventing a consul from holding consecutive terms.  But that doesn't mean that you didn't have professional politicians--you absolutely did.  The senatorial class was a distinct class in Rome that held office from the time of maturity to retirement.  Consuls became proconsuls.  And then they would come back and run for another consulship.  Their idea was that, as in Rome, offices would rotate among a very small class of politicians.

[jimmyjazz 45538]

22 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Isn't this pretty much already the case? It's extremely difficult to get elected to Congress without having a nice chunk of money that you're willing to spend.

Well, yeah, so fix the problem.  Pay a good wage -- say $150K per year -- and limit total campaign expenses to something drastically lower than is currently the norm.  Hell, let the government supply that funding (HRRRRGGGHHHHHHHHHHH Big Government!!!).

[Judge Roybeanbag 11802]

23 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Isn't this pretty much already the case? It's extremely difficult to get elected to Congress without having a nice chunk of money that you're willing to spend.

True.  There has to be a better way than what we're doing now.

[Grade of D as in David 13253]

2 hours ago, Tuco said:

Sounds like a great way to insure that only the wealthy and corrupt should have the ability to serve in Congress.

Isn't that what's already happening?

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

Flexing nuts via Wikipedia gives me tired head.  

[Bateshorn 9897]

As a swamp creature, Paul Ryan was terrible on two fronts:

1) Unwillingness to defend the institution of the House of Representatives.  As a former House staffer, it just drove me insane. 

2) He was always an intellectual fraud.  His numbers never added up for all his big "reform" proposals.  Like, a simple peak under the hood made you realize how laughable his proposals were.

Either be a real fucking wonk and learn that shit and be able to back it up, or just be the MOC who will honestly answer "not my area of expertise, go ask Ways and Means."

[Bateshorn 9897]

Also, Politics is the only profession where people seem to prefer a lack of expertise in who they want running things.  In every other field, you want somebody with specfic schooling and job expertise in the field.

In politics, do you want somebody who has a degree in political science, immediately went to work for a local official, eventually ran for state office, then runs for national office?

Most Americans: "FUCK THAT!  Let's elect a dentist!!!"

 

[thrillhammer 683]

23 hours ago, hpslugga said:

Where do they differ ideologically? Yeah, he is a bully, unethical and an idiot like you say, but where do he and Ryan diverge politically? Trump served as Ryan's useful idiot to distract people from what Ryan and his cohorts were doing in Congress.

the fact that they shared ideology is not the point.  that might make them evil to some, but we should be able to coexist peacefully with those we disagree with.  there is an old saying, "it's not whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game"  for trump, clearly a win is a win.  he doesn't care how the game is played.  he has made america immature again.  in case you missed it, here is jeff flake's resignation speech. lots of great stuff in here, insights and observations.  in my opinion he was too restrained.  this fell on deaf ears in the whole of congress:

Mr. President, I rise today to address a matter that has been much on my mind, at a moment when it seems that our democracy is more defined by our discord and our dysfunction than it is by our values and our principles. Let me begin by noting a somewhat obvious point that these offices that we hold are not ours to hold indefinitely. We are not here simply to mark time. Sustained incumbency is certainly not the point of seeking office. And there are times when we must risk our careers in favor of our principles.

Now is such a time.

It must also be said that I rise today with no small measure of regret. Regret, because of the state of our disunion, regret because of the disrepair and destructiveness of our politics, regret because of the indecency of our discourse, regret because of the coarseness of our leadership, regret for the compromise of our moral authority, and by our -- all of our -- complicity in this alarming and dangerous state of affairs. It is time for our complicity and our accommodation of the unacceptable to end.

In this century, a new phrase has entered the language to describe the accommodation of a new and undesirable order -- that phrase being "the new normal." But we must never adjust to the present coarseness of our national dialogue -- with the tone set at the top.

 

 

We must never regard as "normal" the regular and casual undermining of our democratic norms and ideals. We must never meekly accept the daily sundering of our country - the personal attacks, the threats against principles, freedoms, and institutions, the flagrant disregard for truth or decency, the reckless provocations, most often for the pettiest and most personal reasons, reasons having nothing whatsoever to do with the fortunes of the people that we have all been elected to serve.

 

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

18 hours ago, BrickHorn said:

I know a huge conservative who posts self-righteous shit on FB from time to time.  But when his kids were in school, he hid income from his business to qualify for free lunch aid.  I guess it’s only welfare when people who actually need help get free stuff.  

I've got a very rich aunt who's also a big Republican when she bothers to think about politics. She sent all her kids to pricy private schools, but if the public schools opened a week or so earlier than the privates, she would send them there as free day-care centers. Sidenote: when she goes to a Mexican restaurant, she asks for more chips right before she gets the check, and then puts the chips in a plastic bag and stuffs them in her purse. (You might think she got rich on her own, but she married her money.)

[jimmyjazz 45538]

10 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

Also, Politics is the only profession where people seem to prefer a lack of expertise in who they want running things.  In every other field, you want somebody with specfic schooling and job expertise in the field.

In politics, do you want somebody who has a degree in political science, immediately went to work for a local official, eventually ran for state office, then runs for national office?

Most Americans: "FUCK THAT!  Let's elect a dentist!!!"

 

Really?  Because Obama was castigated for his lack of experience (as if being a Senator is somehow less relevant than being, say, a movie star turned governor).

[High Plains Drifter 10970]

In honor of the invertebrate slinking off with his boneless tail between his legs:

 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

21 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Really?  Because Obama was castigated for his lack of experience (as if being a Senator is somehow less relevant than being, say, a movie star turned governor).

It's almost like a double standard was applied to him, and the same people who criticized his lack of experience elected someone with literally zero experience. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

The sad thing about Political Science today is it teaches you more about manipulation and statistics than it does good responsible governing.  

Probably has a lot to do with the field striving to be a "Science" as opposed to part of the humanities. 

Edited April 12, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Bateshorn 9897]

37 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Really?  Because Obama was castigated for his lack of experience (as if being a Senator is somehow less relevant than being, say, a movie star turned governor).

Obama was involved in community organizing, then worked in the state legislature prior to running for the Senate.  That's actually a policy/politics background.

Is that the same as having been a 2 term governor? No, but you have a familiarity with policy and the legislative/administrative process. And to be clear, I don't view outsider as a plus.  I actually think expertise is important. 

Also, I'm not sure what you guys are talking about with political science, you still take all the same core courses: Political Theory, Law and Politics, International Relations, Polling and Statistics, etc.  Most liberal arts programs also require a focus on some aspect of policy as well: Transportation, Healthcare, Tax Law, Energy/Environment, etc.

Edited April 12, 2018 by Bateshorn

[Hornius Emeritus 12408]

18 hours ago, Mojo Hand said:

Speaking of hypocrites, Boehner has changed his tune on legal pot now that he's getting a fat check to lobby for the industry.  

His position has "evolved."
 

[Hornius Emeritus 12408]

18 hours ago, Buzzrock said:

That and his job has to SUCK.

VOX did a pretty good story re: how Donald Trump broke Ryan.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/4/11/17223998/retire-paul-ryan-reelection-speaker

[jimmyjazz 45538]

7 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

Obama was involved in community organizing, then worked in the state legislature prior to running for the Senate.  That's actually a policy/politics background.

That's my point.  He was criticized for his lack of experience, which was actually fairly substantial, and yet magically Trump gets floated as candidate then wins because he's an "outsider".

I think we see what electing an "outsider" can lead to.

[Pescado_Rojo 19330]

31 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

It's almost like a double standard was applied to him, and the same people who criticized his lack of experience elected someone with literally zero experience. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

14 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

That's my point.  He was criticized for his lack of experience, which was actually fairly substantial, and yet magically Trump gets floated as candidate then wins because he's an "outsider".

I think we see what electing an "outsider" can lead to.

Electing outsiders isn't necessarily a bad thing as long as they're good natural leaders, willing to put the work in to educate themselves, and in it for the right (benevolent) reasons. 

No amount of political experience or education can adequately prepare someone for the enormous burden of being POTUS. 

[jimmyjazz 45538]

Some experience in government is FAR better than no experience.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

19 hours ago, FWD said:

Ryan will be remembered as the guy who exploded the federal deficit for years to come and did everything in his power to prevent oversight of the Trump administration's public corruption. Good riddance.

Yep.  I think at the outset, Ryan and pals thought that they could suppress info about Trump, corruption, and Russia indefinitely if not permanently.  They started out thinking they were burying a molehill, but realized they were trying to bury a mountain.

[kevwun 15608]

I'm sure they never dreamed he would fire Comey.  I don't think the investigation would have gotten this far without a special counsel.  Of course thinking they could work with and influence a stupid, loudmouth conman in the first place was a really bad decision.

Edited April 12, 2018 by kevwun