FU Bloomberg!!!

LongTimeSloper wrote: [quote=Idlewild][quote=Carnivore][quote=booklaw]Our framers were not omniscient... look at the electoral college.

The framers could not possibly have imagined the size of our population, the power of our media, and the ability of political organizations to deliver votes to incompetent and/or dishonest candidates.

Term limits are a good thing (although admittedly not a cure-all unto themselves).

Term limits are not unequivocally a good thing. They are a bad solution for a problem that is primarily rooted in campaign finance, and they reduce the choices of the people. If someone is doing a good job after two terms and the people would like to see him or her continue in office, it is not a good thing to prevent the people from making that choice.

I did not vote for term limits either, but I don't like the way they were undone.

I would agree with this in general. My problem is the term limits were made law by popular vote but rescinded by political vote.

This!

raw wrote: I don't even like Bloomberg, but wonder why we got to call this thread "FU Bloomberg." Potty mouth insults, as much as I love them, just make us anti-bloombergers look like morons...then again the "FU" did catch my eye....

Your point is well-taken, although Bloomberg apparently really didn't pay attention when we very politely said, "No thank you, we'd actually rather have NYC mayors limited to two terms." His response was "FU voters." So maybe this is warranted.

is it only in new york , where the prisoners have there terms reduced and politicians have theirs extended.