Democratic Gov. Purdue - Scary !

Democratic NC Governor Purdue said she would like to see Congressional elections suspended....just like Adolpf Hitler proposed........

Purdue knows the Democratic day of electoral collapse is coming in 2012, and she wants her party to maintain power by suspending congressional elections.




http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/28/ne...nal-elections/

Damn I love those Democrats they will do what ever it takes to stay in power. I look forward to election day when every car with a Repub. sticker will have a flat tire.

Yep; and more voter intimidation tactics....

Damn I love those Democrats they will do what ever it takes to stay in power. I look forward to election day when every car with a Repub. sticker will have a flat tire. Originally Posted by tucson

Think I see a 2nd term nominee for Secretary of Homeland Security.

Democratic NC Governor Purdue said she would like to see Congressional elections suspended....just like Adolpf Hitler proposed........

Purdue knows the Democratic day of electoral collapse is coming in 2012, and she wants her party to maintain power by suspending congressional elections.




http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/28/ne...nal-elections/ Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Whirlway you quote one person as if he speaks for the entire Democratic population- is that scarier than Rick Perry wanting Texas to secede from the union????

Foolish statement and a horrible idea.

regardless of Her "staff" trying to explain away this gaffe, the stupid bitch is probably serious.

I do favor making the terms of both Congressmen and Senators longer, thereby insulating them somewhat from the vicissitudes of constant fundraising and elections. I think four and eight year terms each is more reasonable these days. But that is much more sensible solution to the problem that she is talking about and one that can only be accomplished by Constitutional amendment.

Before changing their terms, let's repeal the 17th Amendment.

I do favor making the terms of both Congressmen and Senators longer, thereby insulating them somewhat from the vicissitudes of constant fundraising and elections. I think four and eight year terms each is more reasonable these days. But that is much more sensible solution to the problem that she is talking about and one that can only be accomplished by Constitutional amendment. Originally Posted by TexTushHog

Sure insulate them from the consequences of their votes.
If we followed that cockamamie idea,
sheik hussein wouldn't need a second term to doom
the fate of the Republic.
The Founding Fathers were wise in their decisions.
You didn't think of anything they haven't and
subsequently rejected. If anything Senators
have terms a wee bit too long. If term limits
are good enough for potus then congress
should have them too.

The flaw in the system is that they started
letting non-business, non- landholding
ill educated nobodies vote also.
One man one vote is not an American ideal.
People with no personal stake in the future
of this nation have no right directing said
future. Those who make no money should
have no say in how it is spent.

Not that either (suspension or succesion) will happen; but yes, suspending national elections is much more scarier than a single state succeeding from the Union....

It is confounding that you would think otherwise.

Whirlway you quote one person as if he speaks for the entire Democratic population- is that scarier than Rick Perry wanting Texas to secede from the union???? Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

Not that either (suspension or succesion) will happen; but yes, suspending national elections is much more scarier than a single state succeeding from the Union....

It is confounding that you would think otherwise. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Hmmm- a person running for POTUS that wants his state to secede from the Union is a far more radical idea IMHO- what's next he wants the USA to secede from the planet earth- a person who wants his state to secede from the Union is downright walking the line of treason.

Article IV, Section 3, Clause 1 of The Constituion actually allows states to succeed; but with the consent of the states invovled and the US Congress...no such language exists in the Constituion that would allow suspenion of elections.

It is settled law that the Constitution does not permit unilateral secession: A state or group of states cannot simply leave the Union over the objections of the national government. However, the arguments that led to this settled understanding are hardly unassailable, and the Constitution is probably best read as permitting the mutually agreed upon departure of one or more states.

So my position is constitutinally more correct than your own un-informed opinion of "treason".

The constituinal arguements aside; I find it interesting that you are of the opinion that suspending national elections is less of a threat to democracy than say North Dakota leaving the Union and becoming part of Canada (unilateral or otherwise).

Even the dopey Gov. Purdue didn't go so far as to say suspending elections was constitutional. In fact, she is trying to distance herself from her own statement; while you are walking deeper and deeper into her "suspend elections" sinkhole.

Article IV, Section 3, Clause 1 of The Constituion actually allows states to succeed; but with the consent of the states invovled and the US Congress...... Originally Posted by Whirlaway

"Article IV, Section. 3.

Clause 1: New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union;

no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State;

nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States,

without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress."

I don't see leaving the Union, with or without Congressional consent!

Secession is treason? Like when we seceded from Britain? Yeah, it is always treason to the oppressors, but freedom for the rebels.