She was not introduced as a comic, but as an “actor and activist”.  So maybe my daughter is not the only person with the “not funny any more” opinion. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms45EzMR0f8

More seriously, term limits are called ‘elections.’ If people are not willing to vote their representatives out, it is somewhat cowardly to legislate to force them out. It serves to deprive voters of their choice to keep or dump someone.

Virginia has extremely strict term limits on the state house, limiting the governor to a single term… a good governor gets in and barely gets settled and he is out again. It makes stability of policy impossible when the entire executive structure changes every four years.

to finish my thought…

we are electing officials that have so many conflicts of interest that there is no way to ensure that they are making decisions that are going to benefit the average citizen.. If you scratch just below the surface of most of the legislation and deregulation that has plagued the US for the past 20-30 years, (from Reagan to the Bushes, to Mr Blowjob himself) its almost pathetic how many top officials ended up making millions upon millions on the back end while the rest of us are barely making our rent and car payments (if you are even lucky enough to have either)..

The whole idea of being a “public” servant has gone from a noble, genuine want to help the society as a whole and ensure the safety and well being of our neighbors to some get rich quick scam.. Its rather sad..

I just don’t think it is beneficial to ANY society to have the same people in charge, just playing magical chairs for 30 + years.. The lines between what is good for the country and what is good for “me” get blurred..

And whats even worse, is that we have guys’ like Madoff and Blagovich that are just as crooked as crooked can be, yet they won’t get prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.. After all the dust settles, they will still end up rich.. I mean jesus.. Blagovich already has a book deal.. 

Then, you have some kid in Los Angeles that gets busted for a couple grams of marijuana and boom.. federal prison for 5-10.. so what kind of an example does that set for our so-called “equality?” We have a completely segretated legal system that rewards the rich and punishes the poor..

I think on top of term limits, there should be an over all cap on how long you can be in one branch of the government.. period.

Let me clarify my stand on this one..

I agree 1000% that this isn’t a Republican or Democratic “problem,” but rather, a fundamental error in the structure of our Government… we are electing officials on ALL levels of Government that have so many differnt

It is worth noting the majority of the respected economists bashing the Paulson/Geithner bailout want to see a more aggressively Keynesian program including more government regulation of how banks function and emergency nationalization of the most damaged banks. One radical policy suggestion (which I find interesting) is to pass anti-usury laws favoring credit unions over banks.

nomoreGOP — I’m not going to argue with any of what you said here.

However, I will remind you about stones and glass houses, and how in a mixed economy, no matter who’s “in charge,” one doesn’t have to look far to see an example of an odious relationship between BIG Government and BIG Business (it’s called Corporatism, I believe).

Front and center is the banking/credit crisis as big name economists continue their attacks on the Obama bank rescue programs.

Yesterday Willem Buiter, one of Europe’s most highly respected macroeconomists, continued his salvos, contending that the funding was woefully inadequate to recapitalize or otherwise prop up financial firms. The longer the US delays winding up sick banks, the more time wasted and good money thrown after bad.

Nobel prize winner Joseph Sitglitz issued even blunter criticism today (and it’s hard to be more caustic than Buiter), accusing the Administration of wanting to aid industry incumbents rather than fix the system.

The worst is that the dim of criticism has been rising, yet Team Obama seems insistent on sticking with Plan A. At the rate they are going, they will succeed in proving the current system is beyond repair, and have spent enough firepower so as to have closed off other options.

See: “Nobel prize winner Joseph Sitglitz Says White House Ties to Wall Street Doom Bank Rescue“

Nobody hopes this turns out to be correct more than me.

And I completely agree with you about Bush — the cost of Iraq was (and is?) still kept off the budget books, most to help “sell” the war by hiding the true costs. 

It’s not fair, but Presidents and the majority party are almost always held responsible for the economy, even when we’re going though a global synchronized recession, like now, where the variables at play are out of any one person’s or county’s hands.

Where are things in the current “game?” It’s early, but Obama and congress have yet to make a first down, and the defense (the down turn) is, so far, outmanoeuvring them:

The Economy Is Contracting A Lot More Rapidly Than The Government Is Reporting, Per TrimTabs (Zero Hedge, 4/1/09)

A number of years ago (1997 to be exact), a bunch of political activists in Seattle sat down at a coffeehouse, sipped their lattes, and decided to get the signatures together to put a gay rights anti-discrimination initiative, a marijuana initiative and a gun registration initiative on the ballot.  All together.  On an odd-numbered year.  Because all of their other friends on Capitol Hill were against discrimination, liked pot, and disliked guns.

The result was rather predictable.

While I do agree with a lot of your points about the arrogance of the US and UK politicians in not acknowledging the problems that paralleled the Japanese in the early 90’s, I do have a pretty big problem with this easy dismissal of what Bush and his cronies did to our country financially BECAUSE of Iraq and Afghanistan..

Because of their “creative” budgeting during the past 8 years, they have done a great job in clouding any solid, concrete numbers for the spending that has occurred in the Middle East, but even with some pretty light estimates, the 1 trillion mark has been mentioned quite a bit..

And honestly, I dont care if its 1 trillion or “only” 750 billion, the bottom line is that this money is GONE.. Not invested, like the recovery packages that Obama & Co. have put into place.. So to just say that Iraq is “far far away” is just plain not true..

While I do think that this bubble was going to burst at some point, the bottom line is that the past 8 years accelerated AND magnified the current financial situation that we are in right now.. I mean lets be realistic here..

In Bushes tenure, there was almost ZERO investment into our own Country (unless you include Defense Spending).. Zero investment into anything at all that is going to better the lives of Americans while also aiming to increase the GDP, or to ensure that we ARENT dependent on foreign energy.. All things that Obama has at least talked about.. Something the Bush administration could only seem to do when it came to this so-called “war on Terrorism.. ”

It amazes me that everyone seems to forget good old Rummy saying this entire “conflict” would only cost 150-200 billion..  And who knows, maybe that really is the amount that was spent actually fighting the war.. the rest went to no-bid contracts and industries (banking, oil, defense prescription drug) that almost all of Bush’s cabinet stood to make HUGE profits from, if those industries were to thrive.. And thrive they did…

I mean jesus.. The Bush family is so deep in oil money its disgusting…  Cheney was CEO of Halliburton.. which was the parent of Blackwater (now Ze) whos company grew something like 1000% in the Bush years.. Weird.. Then we have good old Rumsfeld.. CEO of GD Searle & Co, a Major Pharmacutical Company in the 80’s.. sells that and becomes CEO of ANOTHER Pharmacutical Company, Gilead Sciences, in the 90’s before Bush got elected..

AND these douche bags are life-politicians (which honestly is one of our largest problems in Government today.. when people personally stand to gain from political decisions that they can influence.. sounds like a conflict of interest to me.. but thats an entirely different story..)

So.. I am going to have to disagree whole-heartedly of your assumption that Obama will make a more negative impact/imprint during his time in office.. Monetarily or not..

To be honest, I dont think we will EVER have another President as bad as Bush was.. Not only financially, but also ethically… Bush effectively tainted the entire United States, in the view of the World.. A pretty large “accomplishment” in such a short amount of time..

Title: Obama the Divider?
URL: http://essenceoftoday.livejournal.com/1872.html
(My new politial journal)