Four States Can Stop Lame Duck Threat
by Phil KerpenIllinois Governor Pat Quinn made it official: Illinois will have a special Senate election just for the lame duck session. Thus Illinois joins Delaware and West Virginia (both having special elections) as the three states whose winners on election day will—barring a disputed election result—be seated for a lame duck session in December. A fourth, Colorado, is less clear but may also be in play.
The lame duck session looks increasingly likely—and increasingly ambitious. Sen. Kerry continues to stress that cap-and-trade will be on the agenda, and Sen. Harry Reid (who may be a lame duck himself after Election Day) confirmed it to the Netroots Nation audience, saying: “We’re going to have to have a lame-duck session, so we’re not giving up.”
Along with cap-and-trade, a lame duck will likely consider the recommendations of Obama’s deficit commission — a package that will include enormous tax hikes and could draw the support of some departing Republicans like Judd Gregg of New Hampshire George Voinovich of Ohio, and Robert Bennett of Utah.
And organized labor, seeing the lame duck as their last chance for a legislative return on their political investments for years, will also demand lame duck action.
While Sen. Tom Harkin is still promising some version of card check, more likely is Sen. Bob Casey’s proposed union pension bailout, S. 3157, which would relieve unions of their pension obligations – with a potential price tag for taxpayers in the hundreds of billions. Democratic Whip Dick Durbin signed on as a co-sponsor yesterday, indicating this bill is a top priority.
The winners in Delaware, Illinois, and West Virginia could be the vital deciding votes on these major policy issues.
In Delaware, Republican Christine O’Donnell has publicly committed to opposing any policy change in a lame duck session, and has been especially vocal about stopping cap-and-trade. Her primary opponent, Mike Castle, voted for cap-and-trade in the House last year and, unless he makes a strong public commitment, is at risk of voting for it again in a lame duck session. Castle must match O’Donnell’s promise to voters and commit to opposing any policy changes in a lame duck session. He must promise voters he will not help Democratic leadership disregard a national election.
In Illinois, Mark Kirk will be the Republican nominee for both the special election to complete President Obama’s term in the lame duck and the new six-year term to start in January. Kirk, like Castle, voted for cap-and-trade in the House last year. Unlike Castle, however, Kirk is now publicly committed to opposing cap-and-trade, and has even put that commitment in writing by signing the www.NoClimateTax.com pledge. He should go further and make a clear public commitment to oppose any policy change in the lame duck.
West Virginia will have a special primary August 28 to determine its candidates, and the frontrunners are Republican businessman John Raese and Democratic Governor Joe Manchin. Manchin is running as a conservative, and the lame duck should be a major issue in the campaign and a test of Manchin’s willingness to buck the national Democratic Party to do what’s right. If Manchin refuses to make a strong commitment to vote no on major policy changes in a lame duck, voters concerned about cap-and-trade and other threats may well consider voting Republican.
There could be a fourth seat in play for the lame duck: Colorado. If appointed Senator Michael Bennet loses his first election bid there, tradition suggests he should resign and allow the winner to be seated for the lame duck.
The last time an appointed senator lost a bid for a full term was in Nebraska in 1988, when David Karnes (R) lost to Bob Kerrey (D). Karnes resigned on Election Day. It happened twice in 1978, in Minnesota where Wendy Anderson (DFL) lost to Rudy Boschwitz (R) and in Montana where Paul Hatfield (D) lost his primary to Max Baucus (D). Both appointed senators resigned in December.
The last time an appointed senator lost a bid for a full term and refused to resign was in 1970, when New York’s Robert Goodell (R) lost to Jim Buckley (C). Goodell remained in office for that year’s lame duck session, an ambitious lame duck driven by President Nixon’s agenda — not a proud model for Bennet to follow. Colorado voters should demand Bennet promise to respect the election results by resigning if he is rejected by voters in his first election to the office of U.S. Senator.
Candidates in the states with an opportunity to derail the lame duck – Delaware, Illinois, West Virginia, and Colorado – would be well-served to make a clear, public commitment to doing so and make it an issue in their campaigns. Voters, in turn, should understand that before we can begin the next Congress can begin the difficult work of undoing this Congress’s big government policies, we need to hold the line against a lame duck session.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
125 Comments
libs will have no shame when the session is lame.
We can't trust anyone anymore. Not even the GOP. It's time to start over and send new people to DC.
I've never understood why people usually think "lame duck" politician is somehow lame? Well, that is what happens when you let others control your language. How about "unaccountable politician"? Would that invoke the same perception?
What is worse is people support "term limits." I guess if you don't recognize the danger of a lame duck, then how are you going to recognize a politician like a HR who will have TWO YEARS as a lame duck? But people just glom on to catchphrases and quick solutions with no real thought put in to it….
Yeah, let's have a Senator who knows going in that he can't be re-elected. That's 6 years. THINK, people, THINK!
Looks like the lame ducks will try to cook our goose!
We have to protest in the streets by the millions or the country is toast.
Based on the actions of democrats over the past year and a half, there is zero reason to believe they will respect the elections. Something needs to be done about it.
You can only expect the worst for our nation, when the liberals/progressives/fools are on their way out in January.
You keep using that term "Lame duck" I do no think it means what you seem to think it means.
…the upside…there should be no doubt in anyones mind during that Lame duck session just how evil these progs are….
If a House Member can't make Senator, Cabinet Member, or Governor after 6 Terms (12 years) in the House, perhaps he or she is just not very good at the job, and someone else should get a crack at it.
If a Senator can't advance to something better after 2 Terms (12 years) then, likewise, someone else should have a shot at the job.
Yep. There is definitely a HUGE negative to term limits. But the positive of electing people who are not career politicians and who are not owned by special interests is valuable too. Lobbyists don't mean nearly as much to someone who can't be re-elected. And don't forget, any politician that intends to retire can become an "unaccountable politician" whenever they feel like. Or one who's poll numbers are so bad they know they can't be re-elected. We've seen a bunch of those over the past year, and in my opinion those career pols heading out the door are scarier than a 1 or 2 term new elected official.
It's a tough subject. You'd certainly get a lot more congressmen voting purely on ideology, but you'd likely have a lot less special interest and lobbying corruption, and less idiotic hidden add-ons to bills. Remember, a huge amount of those hidden provisions in bills are put in so those elected officials will have more power in the future. They wouldn't have reason to do that anymore unless they were hell-bent on handing power to the future "ruling class".
Very tough call, and not likely to happen anyway.
Concur. Term limits are a poor substitute for transparency and disclosure. If EVERYTHING our politicians did had the white hot spotlight on it then that's where you will find a functioning system.
Who knew in 2008 that Goldman Sachs and BP gave more money to Obama than anyone? And now here we have a $20 billion slush fund from BP to the Obama Administration which we have no clue how it will be spent. We have a $550 million "fine" from Goldman Sachs to the SEC which we have no clue how it will be spent.
Transparency and disclosure. Not Buzz Words.
Not one red cent should be appropriated to support any of this criminal legislation by the new congress that is seated in January 2011. If the Dems keep it up, we might even see veto proof majorities. The American people are pissed.
Good point
Well, we have some positive news here. We must find out who the best candidate within these states who are running and push some money into their campaigns.
It has to do with a direct contradiction with an obvious voter message via the electoral process.
Guaranteed if the GOP did in December 2006 what Democrats are planning on doing in December 2010 you'd cry foul and corruption!
A truly frightening thing is politicians with the power and the will to destroy their own country. What are these people gaining by this destruction? Who is paying them to be traitors?
Special interests are involved in selecting the candidates to begin with. Good point about lobbyists, though.
It's like a cowboy movie — the bad guys always make a big mess right before they're thrown out the door.
It was referred to as "lame", because when there was discourse and civility, that congress would not push their agenda. We are now in the age of obama where to rule of law and doing the right thing has been flushed down the toilet along with our constitution.
…Batman!
Tar-n-feathers!
The only thing to do is ensure that real conservatives(no rinos) possible are elected in Nov and again in 2012 to begin the dismantling of what is perceived by many conservatives, independents and some dims to be harmful legislation. It will take years to correct what the progs have done in two years.
However, it can't stop in 2012. We must clean out all the progressives from the DOE, USAID, and all other federal agencies.
My only hope is that CA, Nevada, Illinois, Penn, etc voters can pull it off. We need to make the current president irrelevant. He's already lame. We just need to guarantee that he becomes less harmful to the people and the country..
Special interests have to do with funding for the candidates to get elected yes, but after elected those candidates aren't beholden to them if they're in their last term (unless the plan is to get rich off the special interest after leaving office, but that already happens anyway unfortunately).
Right, but this did not start with Obama…
rarely used before, but WILL be exploited by the anointed one.
The Army regularly gets rid of Officers who cannot – for whatever reason – advance, many times even if they are good at their jobs.
Even those at the very top of the Army food chain only get to stay so long in the job, so room is made for the up-and-coming crop of 4 Star General Candidates just so they can have their crack at the job.
Generals who are leaving do not sit back and say "well, I'll just do whatever the hell I want, and screw over the new guy who is taking my job away".
Rep.Paul Ryan and his plan for US.
http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/P...
As if we didn't notice every lame duck session when the dems were in power before…
It's expected. Just pray they don't get to do what they want.
We will serve tea too all of these malfeasants in Washington come November. The only silver lining will be that they have committed suicide by fraud, their party and any remnants will be squashed by the people of this country. I know they want a revolution to happen, but it will not be the type they want. It will be a Constitutional one. A non violent one.
Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Take the first step in faith. You don't have to see the whole staircase, just take the first step.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Restore the Republic,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AP-IM7maxbI&fe....
"Lame duck" voting is but defination against the will of the people and must be declared unconstitutional.
Right, like that matters the this bunch..
Like trashing your apartment as you're leaving, just to spit the owner…
NO LAME DUCK VOTING BY EITHER PARTY….you've been unelected….
How about we have term limits, and we also allow districts to actually recall congressman back if they are doing a terrible job?
Also, I think that once you start stripping away all of the perks that come with being a congressman, more honest people will seek the office, and we won't have to worry about them being lame ducks.
The best way to do that is to de-fund and dismantle a lot of those agencies.
Right, but this did not start with Obama..
I sure would like to see a list of all previous "lame Duck" generated legislation,…….
that will match up to what is going to be tried after the November 3rd elections.
I know you are not that naive.
Spot on.
They will try the same type "Scorched Earth" policy that Saddam Hussein, and all dictators try.
Or hung.
Before the illustrious Senator John Kerry-Heinz worries about Crap and Trade, he ought to borrow Timmy Geitners book, "Taxes for Idiots" and worry about paying his half million dollars in taxes on his new friggen playtoy-sailboat-yachty-thingey.
Hypocritic asshole.
I suggest they be very careful and know that we will demand pounds of flesh for all evil actions.
Talk about the elephant in the room. I hope everyone here knows what's coming after the election, regardless of who holds the next majority. It's not a hard thing to figure out. If you want to know, on any point, exactly what the "progressive" destroyers are going to do next, consider this equation. Whatever action that causes the greatest degree of conflict/division/hatred/distrust in the country, THAT is what they are going to do. "Conflict" is their key to power. Anarchy is their plan. Lame duck travesty? Of course. More fights. More hatred. AND, they still get to steal the silverware on their way out.
The other side of that equation also applies. If conflict is the linchpin of their actions, then the one thing they must fear the most, is a POLITICAL AWAKENING. I've seen video of the "internationalist socialists" saying exactly that, that a mass political awakening is the only thing that would stop their particular plans. So they will do everything that creates the most conflict, so we KNOW what their every next move will be. They want us to join the "fight." Whatever fight they create. Even the trolls here are trying to do that every day.
But what we need is a massive political awakening. I don't know if we're going to get it. But I know that at least among the People here, we can start to change the narrative from one of conflict to one of unity. A unified voice that refuses to enter the bitter, bogus war. Instead, we look at our opponents and calmly explain to them that we're not going to spend our time fighting other citizens over created issues. We're coming after the "leadership." We're going to vote you out of the majority, and we're going roll back funding to EVERY new piece of legislation you've passed until we can vote on and pass a SURPLUS budget that doesn't raise taxes. And for any wet dreams you may be having over a lame duck session, know that we will investigate every back room deal and instance of collusion both in Congress as well as the White House. There will be no more political golden parachutes.
In a real political awakening, THIS is how our conversations would sound most of the time. Simple. Calm. Resolute. So whenever you see a troll, from the cheap trolls we get around here, all the way to TrOTUS, keep in mind that their prime motivation is to keep "hatred" alive. Don't give it to them. Just explain to them that We the People have decided to Just Say No—-to communist takeover. And those "leaders" who have tried to help facilitate that takeover are going to prison. No fight. No anger. That's just the way it's going to be.
Agree. Danger though. Any D is a threat. No matter how conservative, moral or upstanding they are, they are a D and they are a threat. As repulsive as RINOs are, they are better than letting a D get elected by pushing an independent, more conservative challenger. Right now, the way to knock off the RINOs is through the primary process. We are huntin' D's not RINO's. RINO's are in season during primaries. We will hunt them then.
Stay focused. Be strong.
E.Goldstein, 'who is paying them to be traitors?'
Uh…..Communists? Marxists? Unions? Progressives? Dictators? Big Biz? Dictators? Terrorist Leaders?Coalitions & Partnerships? Special Interest Groups? etc. etc. fill in your own favorite__________.
Power of the purse will be a beautiful thing. Hope someone finds the cajoles to use it.
The lesson here is, if you don't want lame duck democrats, NEVER elect one again now that you know who they really are.
They can still be shunned and harassed after leaving office if they go against the people's wishes.
Never bring a lame duck to a duck hunt.
well get the links and post them here for the candidates who can stop this….
IF YOU POST THEM, THEY WILL DONATE!
))))))))))))))))
Such touching – and completely misplaced – faith in the
Democrats'Regressive Socialists' sense of fair play! You think mere tradition is going to stand in the way of their wet dreams of a last-ditch Socialist cram-down? Mr. Kerpen, these people don't let the Constitution stand in the way of their ambitions!Between now and then, I'd like to see every
DemocratRegressive Socialist candidate for re-election get heckled with flying slices of toast at every campaign appearance. It would remind all of them what's about to happen to their careers.The Libs have a track record of trashing things before leaving; the Clintonistas did a number on the White House as they vacated and the aftermath of any large gathering of Libs and/or Progressives is an environmental disaster area.
Lame democrats are 'lame asses', not ducks.
"…don't let the constitution stand in the way…"
Or the courts
"then how are you going to recognize a politician like a HR who will have TWO YEARS as a lame duck?"
It's you who don't understand that there are solutions to every problem. As for this little problem, the imposition of congressional term limits in the House can simply be staggered among the members over six congressional terms. In the first term, 1/6th of the members begin their term limit countdown. In the next Congress, another 1/6th. Until after 12 years, every member is term limited, BUT, by average each of the two parties will only have about 1 in 6 members facing a "lame duck two years." Five out of six will always be facing reelection, and it will be up to that 5 in 6 of each party to keep their term limited members in line.
As for what order to impose term limits, that should be determined by population densities at the time of the law's enactment; members representing the highest populations first. The reason for that is higher population density presumes greater diversity in that population, thus a more immediate need for offering diversity in representation.
In the Senate, you begin term limits in the first Congress to all senior Senators from each State. Six years later begins the term limit of all remaining Senators. So again, on average, each party will always have about half of their members facing reelection, and half facing term limits. The parties will keep their term limited members in line, or face continual defeat.
So just to recap, only 1 in six House members will be facing term limits at any given time. Five in six will be looking toward reelection. In the Senate, the senior senator will be facing term limits at the same time the junior Senator will be running to BECOME the next senior Senator. One will always try to keep the other in line.
There. Problem solved.
The Army regularly gets rid of Officers who cannot – for whatever reason – advance, many times even if they are good at their jobs.
I was amazed when I first heard this – sounds stupid to me.
Even those at the very top of the Army food chain only get to stay so long in the job, so room is made for the up-and-coming crop of 4 Star General Candidates just so they can have their crack at the job.
Generals who are leaving do not sit back and say "well, I'll just do whatever the hell I want, and screw over the new guy who is taking my job away".
So, the military IS like serving in Congress? I guess the breitbart crew needs to apologize for making such a big deal out of Boxer's statement.
Why "fund candidates"? That is expensive and ineffective. They CHOSE the candidates. Look at the last Republican presidential primary!
on it….
Sure in some cases in the past, but I don't think primaries will ever be looked at the same after 2008.
And I can tell you quite surely that the Republican that won the primary in my district this year did so because of money and little else.
How about a constitutional amendment to end "lame duck-ism" all together.You are elected Tues, the loser has from Wed to Fri to vacate the office(and can not do any 'business' because the Capital Buildings meeting rooms are locked shut-maybe their official phones should be shut off too), and the winner takes office the very next Monday!! But that's too much common sense….
Re-elect BOXER? No Mam!
Sorry TZT Boxer is even a bigger idiot than you. We don't apologize to idiots. Whats the point–you apologize and the idiot is still an idiot.
I bet you thought that your comment was clever.
Boring.
sure would be tough to have a lame duck session if they couldn't produce a qourum.
and at the same time end collective bargaining for federal employees. bust all federal labor unions.
sell the post office to the highest bidder. FEdex or UPS can deliver parcels. First class mail is a loser and will soon be obsolete. The tipping point for ending paper mail is already here. In ten years paper letters and stamps will be for legal documents only.
I suppose we could have a sit-in in both houses of congress for 8 weeks or so until the time runs out on the lame duck session? Let the Country Class sit in their seats of power for a few weeks. The Ruling Class will go berzerk.
That protest needs to occur at their homes. Let their families get a whiff of their futures.
Cadwh, That is what I was going to type! Yes! Eliminate the "Lame Duck" time period altogether! GOP, where are you with action? Anyway, I think the Lame Duck session was from horse&buggie days when it took forever to tie up loose ends, and forever to vacate & go home. But with emails, texts, tweets, cell phones, AND the TOXIC SOCIALIST TACTICS in Politics today, they can "wrap it up" in 2 days and get out! NO business should be conducted.
Look at what they're doing with Az. today: postponing sending border police until November! "Dirty Politics" is in high gear. Beat them at their own game! Shut them down!
I agree. This is not the 18th centruty–we aren't traveling by stage coach or sailing around Tierra Del Fuego anymore. It doesn't take 49 days to cross the country anymore. The Constitution clearly has flaws that need careful, skillful, limited ammending.
Great addendum, agreed! And absolute right-to-work, prohibiting mandatory union membership.
You betcha the Left doesn't respect the elections, what with Black Panthers intimidating people at polling places and multiple "recounts" to get the desired outcome. The military vote will be especially important come November and in 2012. The Dems know this and are hard at work trying to "conveniently" prevent their ballots from being cast and counted in a timely manner. Something needs to be done about that quick, fast, and in a hurry.
Me too, Tramp,
Even just a Fed Law prohibiting a lame duck congress from anything but actions necessary to run gov't, no new bills, programs, or gov't agencies…..and no spending other than necessary to meet minimum needs except in the case of an act of war on US soil.
I could SOOOOOOOO live with that. Why not have your Tea Parties ALL CANDIDATES sign such a pledge….there is one on the internet, BEFORE Nov.
No signature, no donations, no support, no vote…..no explanation needed.
I suspect that the reason there was even the time gap between the election and the swearing in was due to the long and difficult journey many had to make back in the day.
It's a whole new age and every new congress could be sworn in by Nov. 15, and if any vote is needed, new guys could do it. Military families do it all the time. Officer goes to new duty station, family clears up and out and follows when it's done.
It ain't rocket science.
Not even the GOP can clean up this colossal Demonkraut mess..it will take a higher power..much higher than Lord and Master Obama (if there is such a thing)
One only needs to ask Pelosi and Ried one question.That is WHY??WHY?? WHY?? They are/were Americans.
Obama is too much of an alien to understand the question.
How are Kerry's actions any LESS ethical than poor Charlie's. Charlie was just messy, Kerry knew full well what he was doing.
Obama should be tried for treason.
Sounds good to me ! I'd like to hear from our GOP about some kind of motion to eliminate the Lame Duck Session, right away. I mean we know that Dems are going to try to ram Cap n Tax through and other damaging legislation. So I think it's urgent that we focus on eliminating Lame Duck.
The GOP need to eliminate the Lame Duck period. We know that the Dems are going to RAM more damaging legislation through against our will. So, GOP, can we have some action?
These are not LAME DUCKS..They are HUNGRY VULTURES
If we elect the right people in November, can they just UN do what the lame duck session has voted in ?
Kirk, like Castle, voted for cap-and-trade in the House last year. Unlike Castle, however, Kirk is now publicly committed to opposing cap-and-trade………
Kirk, a dimwitted RINO to the core, is one of the reasons that the GOP needs re-built from the ground up. It's the local committees that serve up these duds. His weasely reversal on Cap and Trade isn't much comfort because if he didn't see it as a huge economy killer he's an idiot. I've attended my local county GOP meetings and have been appalled at their self-congratulatory hubris and cluelessness. They have no clue. I'm not saying don't hold your nose and not vote for Kirk, the alternative is worse. We can do better than this.
Oooo…..I say how about twenty…most of them are fat cats anyway!
Sure enough.
Senator Boxer is Anti-Military.
I do not fault her, she just cannot help herself. I fault the Citizens of the State of California.
The One Star dealing with the Senator was correct in addressing her as Ma'am.
Senator Boxer holds no Military Rank and is not in the Generals chain of command.
And besides, Troops only address Military Officers by their title when the Officer is respected. In all other cases it is merely "Ma'am" or "Sir"…. which is the only thing required in such cases, the bare minimum.
There are only so many Officer slots. If the Army held onto a Captain too long, waiting for the young Captain to prove himself better than all the other Captains waiting in line for Major, well, that would back up the Lieutenants looking to make Captain.
Captain gets 3 cracks at making Major, and then is tossed out, unless the Captain is Prior Enlisted.
If the Captain is Prior Enlisted then the Captain can retire at that rank, after 20 years of service.
There are a lot more Captain slots than there are Major slots. So, not all Captains make the cut, even if they are good at their jobs.
As for Flag Officers, well, the Military is not a popularity contest (unlike the Congress).
Troops do not get to Vote for Generals. If such were the case then General McChrystal would still have his job, and, General Petraeus would not have gotten demoted.
Not to sound like a birther, but could we pass a law that requires a president to file his birth certificate. If Obama refuses or can't supply the certificate, everything he has signed could be declared null and void.
I'm not a birther either, but you bring up a good point.
Imagine if his signature was invalid?
Haven't we already done that? All they have to do is ignore us. They have, and they will.
No, we won't have big enough majorities (it's not even mathematically possible in the Senate, even if we won every race), and Obama will still have veto power. And that's assuming the GOP would have a spine, which they never do when it comes to undoing anything.
Two terms for a Senator (12 years) and six terms for a Representative (12 years) is plenty.
People from all over the country need to do what we can to support the candidates can help us avoid the lame duck situation – with our time, efforts, and money. It is our future and that of our children and our country at stake. And Republicans shuld be airing commercials on the networks getting the word out about lobbyists giving millions to Dems as Obama is smearing special interests. They need to telling those of us who aren't political junkies and who listen and watch only the lamestream media what is going on. Michael Steel is doing a terrible job of getting the message out.
It is up to freedom loving Americans to MAKE sure the remaining Democratic Congressmen understand that a paradigm shift has occurred…WE, unlike their sheeple, have VERY L-O-N-G memories! There will be consequences in 2012 and 2014.
Johnnie would be proud of your rhetoric!
Are we there yet? How long before we have armed insurrection?
If the Dems pass this cap-and-trade nonsense, which is based on a blatant lie, I might lose my cool.
Yep, I'm pretty much scared s**tless about the lame duck session. The dim's will stop at nothing to move their agenda forward.
Or over 2/3 of the electorate. Shameless.
Yep, you and me (the "country" class) will end up paying taxes because we don't have access to loopholes or full knowledge of what those loopholes are. The left will raise taxes, but refuse to pay them. Hypocrites much?
It's so frustrating because I've NEVER voted straight R in my life because I don't want any party to become too comfortable with my vote, but that is going to change until a better option comes up. I will NOT vote for a lib or progressive. And, don't be fooled into thinking they are "moderate". Hillary Clinton is held up as a "moderate" by teh MSM, but do you think that she (or any other "moderate") wouldn't vote for the big progressive agenda being put Iin place? Ask yourself how you think they would REALLY vote and stop focusing on titles.
LOL too true!
*snerk* Yeah, what you said!
Wow, ITA. No major sweeping legislation . . . just the basics (budgetary issues, etc)
Too risky and should be unnecessary! Politicians should have the people's interest at heart
Kick out the RINOs
Excellent idea. That would really drive them crazy. But we have been driving them crazy for almost 2 years now. Peaceful, calm demonstrations of patriots just saying NO. We the People do NOT want this bill, that bill, NO to the spending, NO, NO, NO. That is what is driving them so crazy. I love how upset they get and how exorbitant their lies grow.
You must be logged in to post a comment.