REMOVING CORRUPT POLITICIANS

P

Paul Revere

New member
Has anyone researched the idea of a civilian ("we the people") filing some sort of civil action to remove one or more of our corrupt politicians? Since so many elected civil servants in Washington D.C. seem to be turning their respective heads to treasonous acts, usurpation, and blatant violations of oaths of office, there has to be something we can do to stop it, more swiftly and effectively than by voting.

What ever happened to our intended government "for the people, by the people"? The actions of these corrupt politicians have caused our once great Nation to look pathetic. They have eroded so many of our rights and regulated and legislated so many restrictions against the American way of life. And it seems everyone knows that a few bad seeds at the top of U.S. politics create and perpetuate this socialist evolution, but no one seems to be doing anything about it.

By sitting idly by, aren't we all guilty of contributing to the socialist's intended outcome? Wouldn't it be a surprise if we the people got off our respective asses and did something constructive for a change? Like, force the removal from office, any elected official that violates his/her oath of office? Starting with the top and working down the Congressional ladder. We can do that, there has to be a way short of voting. Suggestions welcome.
 
1) Thanks to the good people of TFL, I have come to believe, "...that that government of the people, by the people, and for the people..." died with the unfavorable outcome of the Northern War of Aggression.
smile.gif

2) More to the point, I do not have the resources to fight such a battle and withstand the baseless attacks of every conceivable department of a tyrannical government - Dept of Treasury coming to mind first. ((Heck! I can't even take on Ford Motor Co. successfully - let alone the biggest bureaucracy in the world!))
3) Not only could I not do it, I don't think there are enough Americans, REAL Americans, left to band together to get the job done. I truly believe our government is out of control - it can not even control itself. Whether the government is smart enough not to transgress to the point of uniting the citizens or not will have to be seen.
4) Personally, I think the government can boil the water slowly enough, generation by generation, that we are doomed to losing our status as citizens - becoming mere "subjects".
5) To prove my point, ask Rob to tell us how many TFLers supported FOUP.

Pessimistic Grump
 
In order for that to work, one assumes the Courts are honest.....Personally, I don't as they are part of the corrupt system.

I've written attorneys about the US Code title 18 (Conspiracy to deny rights...use the search function)...even with follow up letters I have yet to receive a single reply. Even the pro-gun organizations (NRA, GOA) won't start legal proceedings unless they are positive they will win...

Note that any type of gov't reform has withered...what about taxes and the IRS? Really big last year....what happened? Nada.


I personally believe there are but a handful of honest politicos and judges...all others have vested interest in the current system and on going trends and are as corrupt as a septic tank.

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"
 
This isnt quite in the same vein.....
Ive often thought that part of the problem we have with federal politicians is there ability to tap the federal treausry for there operating expenses....here is what i would like to change on that subject....
1. The complete office expensenses for a congressman should be paid by the state that is sending him this includes what ever staff he thinks he needs, the fed should continue to provide office space etc....paper pens all that the state should supply-----I think that if a congressman has to go back to the state govenor and say heh I need 5 million dollars to fun my office this year(real example of cost, Al Gore spent that much), most govenors would be cautious because the electorate would most want an accounting....at least that is how it should work.
2. I would like to see each congressman provided a state paid for residence, to include the amenities for such a position.
Driveer/car, maid, butler,,,,,etc...and once again in order to renovate said residence the govenor of the state would have to approve...this would cut out there whining about needing raises ad nauseum, in order to keep two residences....etcetc..--in my opinion this would reenforce the point that they are not there for ever, and they are represent the people of there districts as well as the country.

any comments....besides hang em from the nearest tree?....fubsy.

What do ya think about taking laws off the books that arent enforced and how would that work....fubsy.

[This message has been edited by fubsy (edited June 07, 1999).]
 
dennis,
I doubt if reconstruction, which had the effect of destruction of states rights and the consolidation of federal power would have been so complete if President Abraham Lincoln had not been assasinated, while he believed that the states of the United States once formed did not have the option of succession. He did believe in states rights, that assasination killed more than a great man. Much like the anti-onstitutionalist's of today have used guns and tragedys such as columbine to further there views and power, President Lincolns' death allowed his political enemies to consolidate there power and to construct the events of reconstruction to suit there ends.
If we had a man of his caliber in office today, we would not have to worry about our constitutional rights...jmo....fubsy.
 
Fubsy,
Rather than a tree, let's run your ideas up a flagpole (see who salutes, etc.).
At first glance, I LIKE IT!

Then again, would that make our Senators stooges for the Governors? And would that necessarily be a bad thing?

Hmm. I guess I'd rather have a Lincoln than a Ford.
smile.gif
Frankly, I've heard so much about Lincoln's views that I don't know what to believe. He obviously felt the Union must survive and used the Federals to enforce that view. But having the band play Dixie upon the surrender of the South was either a heck of a sham or a gesture which supports your view.
As proven by Clinton, a person's hidden agenda and stated agenda seldom coincide.

[This message has been edited by Dennis (edited June 07, 1999).]
 
hey, dennis,, i'd take a ford any day over a clinton. i'm for term limits. we have created a ruling class , by allowing politicians to stay in office so long.i think that there should be a process by which obsolete or grossly unpopular laws could recieve public review and /or removal.
three million statutes seems excessive, even for the US
wink.gif

reform is not impossible, but it is going to take many people who have been sitting on their butts to join in and MAKE the changes.
if we can't get people to the polls, then there is little we can do.

i'm gonna say it again: if washington is so concerned with the nra at3 million members, wht would they think about 30 million? it's what makes labor unions politically powerful, they can create block votes.

get everybody you can signed up-- you dont have to like the nra , but just like america, if you vote, you can change it.
 
Being from Missouri, the ballot tampering state, I am, understandably, cynical about the *voters* being able to ever again be affective in making the much needed changes. However I have "preached" for years that we need term limitations and a maximum ceiling plassed on the amount of money that a politician can use to campaign. I also feel that we need a system to allow voters to easily access proposed new statutes worded in LAYMANS terms and our elcted officials vote for each issue be published. And yes, to stream line the entire affair we need a "council" to review existing statutes in an effort to eliminate those that need be.

As of now though we (the voters) are all being played as fools by the powers that be. Gun control issues serve as the perfect example of this. The politicians don't give a damn about the people or their rights. I, and many of us here, have been attempting to educate non gun owners regarding the laws by explaining that we, gun owners and all but the most ardant antis, are all on the same side. However as long as we can be divided on issues such as gun control, abortion, etc., we will never be able to collectively focus on the real problems that face our nation. Namely the damn politicians. Granted I see a conspiracy behind *every* bush on the preverbail "grassy knoll" but I often wonder if some our nations more "heated" issues are no more then a ruse to devert attention from them.

And if we had the power to trade in Clinton for a past (dead) president I'd like to nominate Jefferson Davis.
biggrin.gif


(Now I wonder how many times I'm going to have to edit this to correct all the typos.
smile.gif
)

------------------
Gunslinger

We live in a time in which attitudes and deeds once respected as courageous and honorable are now scorned as being antiquated and subversive.
 
P.S.
Fusby I not disagreeing that making certain politicians accountable to their respective governors is a good idea but...................
They're already supposed to be accountable to a higher authority than the governors. They are supposed to be accontable to we, the people. Some where over the last 223 years they have forgotten that.


------------------
Gunslinger

We live in a time in which attitudes and deeds once respected as courageous and honorable are now scorned as being antiquated and subversive.
 
gunslinger,
Im just putting out idea's and will be willing to concede that they need further work.....lol.....
I dont know if the politicians do this already, but does a law have the intent published with it?....Lets use motorcycle helmets.....law1..all motorcyclists must wear helmets.....the intent of this law is to....the use of the helmet is necessary for the protection of the riders head and to help reduce the damage to the rider.
It just seems to me that so many laws are miscontrued because the lawyers can argue over there intent...if the person drafting the law would state the intent of the law perhaps it would eliminate so of these silly decisions......fubsy.
 
Intent of the proposed law??????? I like it! But we know they'd rather sell their mothers into slavery. Then they would have to explain HOW the new law would accomplish that intent. We could take a deep breath of much over due fresh air regarding new gun laws.
You may have hit the nail on the head with that one Fusby. Now the question is how do we get them to do this. Suggestions, thoughts.......................................

------------------
Gunslinger

We live in a time in which attitudes and deeds once respected as courageous and honorable are now scorned as being antiquated and subversive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top