term limits

do you want to become a senator or elected politican and stay in the position unrestricted to term limits? america is not a representivie democracy and this isnt a democracy. america is sapose to be a constituional republic, that is you cant legally remove term limits w/o 75% of the country wanting to do so. the majority almost never like their politicians, they stay in office because of corruption, not beacuse the people want them there. "w/o term limits, people like obama will be in ruleing positions for a long time and its hard to get them out w/o term limits." Is that necessarily a bad thing? I mean, I already made the experience argument. IS THAT REALLY A BAD THING? YOU JUST SAID YOU DONT WANT OBAMA TO BE SENATOR FOR 70YEARS YES IT IS A BAD THING. "do you work for or are you a member of, or did you get paid by, gov or do your friends of family work for or are members of, or got paid by gov?" I ASSUME THAT IS A YES SINCE YOU DIDNT ANSWER. do you agree that most politicians are corrupt and dont represent the public anyways? it takes no training or expirenence, and you dont need to be a policy expert to be a representive by defitinion, all it takes is a majority vote. policy expert is an individual opinion, and doesnt nessicarily mean the policies they want to impose are good or the public's wants. the majority of the the public prefer term limits rather than no term limits, banning term limits wont happen unless the country throws the consitution and the public's wishes down the drain and turns into martial law authoritarian totalitarian hypocrities. the majority of the public want choice in is congress. dont you want to be able to choose who is in congress? dont you want a chance at being able to be in congress? banning Term limits violate the congressional qualifications area of the Constitution. have you read the constituion? i had to check your profile to see if you were from us, because you lieing about the consitition made me think maybe you were talking about a different countries consitution. you are from us. read the entire us constitution. art I sec 2. the house of representives shall be composed of members choosen every second year by the people of the several states... art I sec 3. the senate of the united states shall be composed of two senators from each state, chosen by the legislature thereof, for six years; and each senator shall have one vote. art II sec 1. the executive power shall be vested in a president of the united states of america. he shall hold his office during the term of four years, and, together with the vice-president, chosen for the same term, be elected as follows. consitutional term limits are 2yrs for house of representivie. 6years for senator. 4years for president + 2nd term if reelected. term limits doesnt= term limit initive. the "term limit initive" they were talking about is proably a specific proposal, or proposed bill/legislation, to add more requirements that go beyond the consitutional requirements, in order to be a congress member. ex: requireing someone be white, would go beyond the consitution's requirments to be a congress member sometimes politicians lie, use code words in public that the public doesnt understand, use deceptive language, and use oposite speak. this quote doesnt say that term limits are unconstitional: "Arkansas' constitutional amendment, Section 3 of Amendment 73, providing for limitations on congressional terms of office was unconstitutional in that it established an additional qualification for congressional office" there is the us consitution, then each state has their own consitution. the us consitution is supreme law. they are saying that an amendment in the arkansas consitution didnt comply with the us constitution because it established additional qualifications for congressional office. they were probaly refering to the section titled under the table of contents "providing for limitations on congressional terms of office". in the table of context, it titles sections, and the sections often include more than just what is in the title. if it wasnt the title, they might have been refering the the section that included limitations, tho were refering to the part of the section that included additional requirements. "Term limits is and always has been a bad idea. The reason it's a bad idea is because it limits the choices of people the public has to vote for." this statement is contradictory. 90%+of politicans are bad. "when a Congressman is on his last term, he's not going to listen to the people he is representing because he doesn't have to. He's going to go out next term anyway." when a congressman has no term limits, he's not going to listen to the people becacuse he's never going out unless recalled. congressmen are still sapose to represent the people or else their sapose to be recalled. with such a corrupt government term limits are a much easier way to get corrupt politicans out than recalling them. their most often replaced with equally corrupt politicans. congressmen go to buracrates and lobbiests, not to help them do their job, to get bribed and paid off, regardless of how long they stay in office. where are you getting these loony ideas? each time their is a campaign, people get paid off, after elected and in office, they often continue to get paid off and fund raise even on their last term. their not sapose to. about 15% of the country voted in obama, most r low info voters voteing based on lesser of 2 evils admitting they dislike both, or based on looks. canidates sometimes lie, make false promosies, bate and switch, 2faced, flip flop, and dont mention true wants during campaign then surprize reveal true wants after elected, resulting in voters not getting what they voted for. canidates become rich partially because they represent or do favors for rich people to get campaign contributions. richest canidates become primarys because they can afford the most ads, so their most well known and popular w the public, resulting in richest canidates and campaign contributers being represented instead of the people. gov-benifits are given to companies that contribute to the politician's campaign, or secret pay offs or corosion. resulting in companies buying themself to big to fail to big to jail status, law exemption, tax exemption, subsidies, and bailouts. next time i'd prefer if you put your source right under your quotes or set of quotes that came from that source.