Print
E-mail
Share
digg
Newsvine
Facebook
Stumble
Technorati
reddit
Fark
twitterLetter to the editor:
Elected officials not fighting for us
Friday, Oct. 23, 2009 | 2:05 a.m.
I agree with William G. Becker’s Wednesday letter to the editor in the Las Vegas Sun, headlined “Term limits could put things in order.”
I also know that many people are fed up with our elected officials, and that we need to have term limits on all the members of the U.S. House and Senate.
At first these elected officials promise they will do everything for the people. Well, the people are tired of them now — they don’t even fight for the people anymore.
We the people elect them and we the people can take them out of office. I don’t care if they are Democrats or Republicans. Please vote to make your voice heard.
Discussion: 17 comments so far…
Post a comment
- Most Read
- Discussed
- Most E-mailed
- Kirk Kerkorian: CityCenter is ‘simply the most amazing’ Vegas project ever
- Rain - possibly even snow - heading to Las Vegas
- Road warriors: No. 24 UNLV squeaks by Santa Clara, 66-63
- Dawn Gibbons’ story: First lady talks about divorce, humiliation, fears
- One killed, one wounded in shooting at party
- Gorman cruises past Del Sol for championship
- California’s trash could be our treasure
- Instant replay used for the first time in Nevada fight during Jon Jones disqualification
- High-speed rail proving ground proposed in NLV
- Notebook: Kruger says K-State will be ‘best team we’ve played’
Blogs
Elsewhere
TUF 10 Finale fighter salaries
The Kats Report
Announcements on the Strip on a chilled Monday morning
Cowboy Steve Wynn recalls days of ropin' on Ralph Lamb's ranch (7 Comments)
Elsewhere
Dawn Gibbons' story: First lady talks about divorce, humiliation, fears (20 Comments)
The Kats Report
Kirk Kerkorian: CityCenter is 'simply the most amazing' Vegas project ever (26 Comments)
Robin Leach's Las Vegas Celebrity Watch
Great Santa Run: Unofficial 14,595 runners would be a new record
Elsewhere
Rampage Jackson to return to UFC (4 Comments)
Calendar »
- 7 Mon
- 8 Tue
- 9 Wed
- 10 Thu
- 11 Fri
-
Save Tony Verdugo fundraiser at Jet
Jet | 8:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m.
-
Rockhouse’s Rodeo Roundup
Rockhouse Bar & Nightclub | 10 p.m. to 11:59 p.m.
-
Dom Irrera at the Riviera Comedy Club
The Riviera
-
Football specials at Diablo's
Diablos Cantina
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.
We will not become to "Silenced Majority"
As an illiterate unwashed redneck white trash tea-bagger I realize that we have no right to question the spin that the Democrats are putting out.
Obama in addressing the American Nation from the "Halls of Congress" felt he was right to ridicule and call my opposition position "a lie, plain and simple.
I know that Obama must be true to his South Side Chicago political craft to "call out people who challenge his positions. Obviously because Obama feels we have "phony claims" and I am unable to understand what is good for me.
We have learned that to get off the Obama/Garofalo enemies list we need to be sent to a community organized Mao re-programming camp to stop asking "WHY" of Obama policies.
We must become the "Silenced Majority".
We welcome "Harvard Graduate" Obama's elite snarling smack down public rebuke of opposition who do not trust him or believe him. This is the kind of leadership change we can believe in.
It is an ill conceived notion that the unwashed public, the un-elite, should view a congressional bill and believe we could understand it.
Obama, Reid, and Pelosi are tone deaf. They do not respond to our phone calls, e-mails, townhalls, or rallies. They refuse to listen to us because we are lairs to them, but mostly because they know we do not believe them or trust them. Harry called us evilmonger and Nancy called us un-American.
But until we lose the secret ballot, as the Unions want, the "Silenced Majority" can clandestinely vote in 2010 against the demonic Whitehouse politics.
I don't know what you people think term-limits will accomplish. Money is the problem. Even if term-limits exist, the money will just seek someone cut from the same bolt of cloth. We have term-limits for the President and look at Future's opinion of Obama. Proof of term-limits failure. If politics are to be cleaned up we need to remove money from the equation.
By limiting what a candidate can spend, it forces them visit their state and/or district and mingle with the voters. Now they can be in DC and campaigning at the same time through TV adds. Stop this and they will return home to campaign.
I think term-limits will help some.
I think that at the beginning there is percentage of the elected offical that are not corrupt but over time almost every single one become corrupt to a certain degree.
I think term-limits will reduce corruption some but not a whole lot.
Future:
I've noticed that you have used "until we lose the secret ballot, as the Unions want" when referring to voting for our politicians. Where in the world does that come from?
Term limits are a bad idea. Term limits are why Bruce Woodbury is no longer part of our Clark County government.
Term limits are an admission on the part of us voters that WE are incapable of doing our jobs, not the politicians. We are the ones who continue to reward their bad behavior. How much you want to bet that John Ensign gets re-elected?
As long as fewer than half of us vote, as long as even fewer still take the time or make the effort to learn about politics, as long as we remain undereducated and easily swayed by propoganda, we will continue to have the best government money can buy.
TePee is correct: term limits simply mean that the money flows to a different swatch from the same bolt of cloth. The outcomes will still be the same.
When it comes to term limits i have always felt that it was the only choice left when the incumbent politicians are a guaranteed lock to win there primary again and to vote for the other guy in the other party was the only solution.
TePee:
The "until we lose the secret ballot, as the unions want" is referring to the Employee Free Choice Act. Part of that bill wants to allow the unions to organize from signature cards instead of secret ballot elections.
If politicians want more than two terms let them do the 3rd , 4th, and 5th terms without pay.
(E)cm:
Your are absolutely correct. Now tell me what Future meant when he used "until we lose the secret ballot, as the Unions want" in referring to the "Silenced Majority" winning an election in 2010?
TePee:
I take it to mean (as I also believe) that once you take away the secret ballot you open up the process for making a private selection public.
TePee:
The purpose of removing the secret ballot is to
prevent employers from intimadating their workers
for joining a union.
Future:
Thank God right-wingers like you will never be
the majority. Your vote won't count.
Teamster:
Not all employers intimidate their workers. The same as not every union goes to the prospective union workers private home. The secret ballot is about letting the workers make a private choice, with neither the employer nor union having the knowledge of that choice. What better way to protect the worker?
Personally I believe voting for union representation should be by secret ballot. By the way I support unions. What I wanted to know was what Future meant by connecting union, secret ballots and the 2010 election. I see no connection there.
emc:
Walmart itimidates their workers. That's why
their workers make 50% less than union workers
doing the same job.
Walmart is the biggest and worst offender.
Watch the anti-union Republicans respond.
(E)mc:
What does Walmart have to do with the secret ballot? I agree they itimidate their workers, but a secret ballot protects the workers from both the union and the employer.
TePee:
Open card sign-ups, in front of their fellow
workers, tends to get encouragement from their
co-workers to join the union.