ARE WE ENTITLED TO AN HONORABLE CONGRESS?

Yes, fantasy, wishful thinking. Republicans and Democrats write our election laws. They write them as a mutual protection act. If there’s one thing the two major parties agree on, it’s no viable third party will ever rise.

 

However, the oath of office says it. The fiduciary duty that every member of congress is obligated by says it. And the code of ethics for government service says it. Equally valid, common sense says it.
And yes, the common practice is like the old saying "Let's not and say we did...".

 

So you are saying their bad conduct is our fault, we should all have been clairvoyants, and able to know in advance what their true character is? You're smarter than that.

One is only "playing the victim card" when you aren't actually a victim. When an oath has been broken, a contract of trust breached, deception is intentional and you money taken by those people- you ARE a victim.
IF you fail to do the job you asked for, if you lied to get it, if you use it for personal gain, if you hide the illicit acts- that is not the fault of the people you scammed.

 

I tend to think that in a democracy or a republic with democratic elements, the people get the leaders they deserve.

A dishonourable people deserve a dishonourable leader.

 

I don't recall anybody on the ballot of campaign trail claiming you should vote for them because they were dishonorable. Did you vote for anybody, ever, for that reason?

 

Except there is no code of ethics for justices of the Supreme Court, but for all other federal judiciary office holders.

The oath can be interpreted in many ways. 5 USC 3331 states, "I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” This is for everyone except the President and those who are appointed by the President. That is a somewhat different oath. But notice it does not affirm someone who is honest. And for federal employees, those ethics vary from agency to agency. In the agency where I worked, my position used the circular 230 best practices. We are not to lie when performing our duties, but that does not mean honesty because we can and could manipulate the rules to benefit the agency. Some do that BTW when I worked there and it was hard to prove that they were violating the rules. What most get in trouble are blatantly obvious.

For the judiciary, their oath is as follows: "I, _________, do solemnly swear or affirm that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as _________, according to the best of my abilities and understanding, agreeably to the constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.” The emphasis here is impartiality, not honesty. But even that can be manipulated, right?

And the same can be for the President, members of congress, and even political appointees. That is why Muchin initially refused to turn over the Trump Tax Returns when they were subpoenaed by Congress in a valid, legislative purpose. Was that affirming his oath of office or being loyal to the "big man" upstairs?

 

No, but they did lie, right when they were campaigning? And isn't lying also dishonorable?

 

If we all vote for 1 of the 2 party choices, yes, we are entitled to the dumb and dumb.

Why don't we all vote for term limits?
Why don't we all vote for limited PAC funds to stop the bribery system in place?

We get to vote. We choose the system we get stuck with. Vote 1 of the 2 parties is voting against the OP. IMO.

 

No, we're not. Our representatives are entitled to lie to us. And as terrible as that is, its better than them not being able to speak their mind for fear of being prosecuted for a 'lie' that might result from simply being incorrect. We are however entitled to vote against them for lying and for being incorrect, and we should do that.

 

Yes but Republicans have not woken up to the fact that Democrats are really after one party rule and that they are close to having it. They want to turn the entire United States into California.

 

We are not electing trustworthy people to Congress. For the most part, any way. Too many rich and powerful people are polluting the eelction process at the behest of the American people. Combine that with an FBI openly colluding with one political party to silence the truth and spread lies, what are the people supposed to do? Look at that moron of a President that we currently have. Do you really think people wanted him in office? No, they just voted party over country.

 

We don't get to vote for term limits or about PAC funds. Only those in Congress get to do that.

The only vote we get is from the two parties on who "represents" us. No one else gets the attention required to actually be considered. Partly due to media schlepping for one party or the other. Every election year we're lucky if 1-2 Independents get voted into Congress. And they are generally powerless unless the parties are so evenly matched that nothing can get done without those 1-2 Independents. And the only reason we get those 1-2 Independents is usually due to smaller communities in a district where the person can actually get heard more. Or they caucused with one party or another. Essentially being a part of those parties and not really "Independent".

 

some still want to vote for Trump, honesty doesn't seem to be something some support anymore

 

ranked choice voting would help for sure

 

We're not given only two choices. That's just the illusion that we live under. We can vote for whomever we want.

 

Lol... Exactly the OPPOSITE of what you claimed about reperations.

 

Maybe officials elected to Congress used to be honorable, I don't know.

What we get now as Congress critters is certainly a problem, for three main reasons:

1) The congressional maps have been gerrymandered into oblivion, resulting in more and more safe seats and less competitive seats. Essentially, through those maps, politicians are picking their voters, rather than how it should be, the other way around.
2) In those safe districts, it's the primary voters who pick the eventual representative. Those primary voters tend to pick extremists, in particular when there is no competition from the other side. Therefore, with the increase of safe districts, we get an increase in extremists in Congress.
3) Unlimited influx of money, thank you Citizens United, i.e. GOP-picked Supreme Court. Money is picking representatives, rather than voters. What do you think the outcome would be? We get money whores, rather than principled, honorable people.

Can it be fixed? Not with the present system, since both sides like their safe seats. I'd say give ranked voting a try. It should flush out the extremists, as we have seen in Alaska.

 

And the chance of them making it on all ballots in all States and then elected? Just because you can vote for whoever you want, doesn't mean they have a snowsball chance in hell of being elected.

 

Then it's a good thing your girl lost in 2016.

 

Unfortunately, in our country today, there is no agreement on that which is honorable.

 

Much as it pains me power always corrupts the only way around that in the end is minimal intrusion of the government into economic life and term limits.

 

That's true, but that's all self-imposed. The only thing preventing us from having more than two main choices on the ballot is ourselves. Any and all changes to this pattern will need to be born of us as the electorate deciding we no longer want to be locked into a two party dominant system. We have the system we have simply because not enough people want to change it. It's hurting us, badly at times, but the electorate as a whole is too stubborn to move past binary election choices

 

Demonstrate that three and four are any different? Or for that matter 5 and 6? The problem isn't so much the politicians these days as it is the overweening administrative state.

As long as people believe that government can solve all their problems we are doomed to travel down a very dark road.

 

I agree with Dairyair for once. We aren't entitled to ANYTHING, though it would seem we should be. Given that we are in a state of the "fallen nature of mankind" we deal constantly with men and women of self seeking evil intent. The Founders knew this. As American citizens we have grown complacent. We have given into a modern philosophy that denies the facts. We were warned, it takes constant vilegence if we are to remain free and have anything close to a "just society". You can't take anyone's word for anything!...but you must listen,weigh the past with the future, and seek a Power above yourself in all things. Those are our personal checks, and balances. Reject what is unseemingly evil. We were warned against sloppiness in doing those things and the elite would have us reject the lessons of our forefathers.

 

Thomas Jefferson: “The government you elect is the government you deserve.”