- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Would you support an Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that ...
Posted on 5/23/23 at 11:45 am to Marcus Aurelius
Posted on 5/23/23 at 11:45 am to Marcus Aurelius
I'd raise the age to vote past 25 when the brain matures and require a mental competency test too.
1
Posted on 5/23/23 at 11:46 am to Marcus Aurelius
The only Amendment I would support is one banning Marcus Aurelius from posting on these boards
Posted on 5/23/23 at 11:47 am to Marcus Aurelius
If we are not smart enough to not elect 80 year olds we are lost and an amendment can't save us
Posted on 5/23/23 at 11:49 am to Auburn1968
I'd support raising the age. Maybe they'd have to be able to pass a basic high school government and economics course too.
"I'd raise the age to vote past 25 when the brain matures and require a mental competency test too."
"I'd raise the age to vote past 25 when the brain matures and require a mental competency test too."
Posted on 5/23/23 at 11:53 am to Marcus Aurelius
No, but I would support one that prevents retards from posting every thought that emanates from their tard brain on a message board.
Posted on 5/23/23 at 11:55 am to Marcus Aurelius
No. If anything we need LESS laws not MORE.
Posted on 5/23/23 at 11:56 am to Marcus Aurelius
No because that’s too old,
Lower it to like 65
Lower it to like 65
Posted on 5/23/23 at 11:58 am to Marcus Aurelius
Term limits for Congress.
Posted on 5/23/23 at 12:01 pm to Marcus Aurelius
No. To both. The President and/or the SC aren't the ones pushing new laws and regulations onto the people.
What I would rather want are term limits for the Senate and House. I'd also love for a 100% open, public, transparent, and accessible method for US taxpayers to see the financial wealth gained by every member of Congress, their spouse, siblings, children, charities, organizations, etc. only during the years of their terms or service. Figure out where their money is coming from and you figure out who they are working for.
What I would rather want are term limits for the Senate and House. I'd also love for a 100% open, public, transparent, and accessible method for US taxpayers to see the financial wealth gained by every member of Congress, their spouse, siblings, children, charities, organizations, etc. only during the years of their terms or service. Figure out where their money is coming from and you figure out who they are working for.
Posted on 5/23/23 at 12:04 pm to Marcus Aurelius
quote:
IF YOU SAY NO ... STATE A REASON.
No.
It should state that anyone 80 or over is ineligible for election or appointment to any federal position.
Posted on 5/23/23 at 12:04 pm to Marcus Aurelius
Term limits for House and Senate (probably 3 terms in house and 2 in Senate) AND a "total time in elected positions" clause... probably 16 years. So no jumping between offices for 28 years to circumvent that term limit rule.
Posted on 5/23/23 at 12:06 pm to PsychTiger
quote:Who will be conducting these assessments?
Cognitive assessments of all members of Congress, POTUS, VP, and Supreme Court.
Posted on 5/23/23 at 12:08 pm to Marcus Aurelius
No
Reason: Amendments take forever and will dominate news coverage for the next 10 years (Do you remember the ERA?). It will give every politician an excuse to not work on issues that make them uncomfortable.
Reason: Amendments take forever and will dominate news coverage for the next 10 years (Do you remember the ERA?). It will give every politician an excuse to not work on issues that make them uncomfortable.
Posted on 5/23/23 at 12:08 pm to Marcus Aurelius
No.
The issues are competency and corruption, not age. The proper thing to do is to not vote for people that are incompetent and to force Congress, via your vote, to not confirm judges that are too dumb or corrupt, and to remove them when they lose their minds or show corruption.
Keep in mind, there are nominees from Biden that are very, very young, and they are just as dumb as he is and just as corrupt. One of them didn't know that the Executive Branch was established by Art II of the Constitution. No one like that has any business being confirmed.
The issues are competency and corruption, not age. The proper thing to do is to not vote for people that are incompetent and to force Congress, via your vote, to not confirm judges that are too dumb or corrupt, and to remove them when they lose their minds or show corruption.
Keep in mind, there are nominees from Biden that are very, very young, and they are just as dumb as he is and just as corrupt. One of them didn't know that the Executive Branch was established by Art II of the Constitution. No one like that has any business being confirmed.
Posted on 5/23/23 at 12:09 pm to Marcus Aurelius
quote:
1) would NOT allow anybody over Age 80 to run for President of the United States? 2) would require anybody on the Supreme Court to retire by their 80th birthday? ... I would support that. IF YOU SAY NO ... STATE A REASON.
Probably not. I would support an amendment to limit the time a person can serve in the US congress…..no more career politicians.
Posted on 5/23/23 at 12:09 pm to meansonny
quote:
Limit all congressmen
Posted on 5/23/23 at 12:16 pm to joshnorris14
quote:
This is retarded. Believing in the original 10 amendments is admitting the Constitution was originally wrong
Say what now? The Bill of Rights put limits on the government, and the Constitution would never have been ratified without them. Without them, the federal government is virtually limitless.
Posted on 5/23/23 at 12:29 pm to Marcus Aurelius
The only amendments I care to see are a balanced budget amendment and term limits for Congress
Posted on 5/23/23 at 12:30 pm to Bass Tiger
quote:
Probably not. I would support an amendment to limit the time a person can serve in the US congress…..no more career politicians.
I completely support term limits, but the same bill must term limit all federal employees outside of the military, otherwise the balance of power simply shifts to the massive, unelected bureaucracy, who knows where the bodies are buried, and can use their knowledge and experience to implement their agenda at will.
Posted on 5/23/23 at 12:40 pm to Marcus Aurelius
More important change would be that in order to vote you had to either have a full time job or own property (house, land etc).
And I would support raising the voting age to 25. I have met plenty of 80 year olds who are still sharp as a tack, but the vast majority of people under 25 are legit retarded.
And I would support raising the voting age to 25. I have met plenty of 80 year olds who are still sharp as a tack, but the vast majority of people under 25 are legit retarded.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News