General Categories > Laws and Legislation

I have a dumb question

(1/2) > >>

Beagle:
I have always wondered why there are no legal repercussions for politicians who obviously lie when taking an oath... for instance if Clinton had won the election (thank God ) she would have taken the oath to defend and support the constitution knowing she is going to do her best to undermine e it and especially the 2nd amendment.  NOW CLINTON is probably a bad example as she is obviously above the law anyway... but I  think there sould be a  way to hang a politician for that.

CustomSatellite:

--- Quote from: Beagle on May 19, 2017, 08:28:06 PM ---I have always wondered why there are no legal repercussions for politicians who obviously lie when taking an oath... for instance if Clinton had won the election (thank God ) she would have taken the oath to defend and support the constitution knowing she is going to do her best to undermine e it and especially the 2nd amendment.  NOW CLINTON is probably a bad example as she is obviously above the law anyway... but I  think there sould be a  way to hang a politician for that.

--- End quote ---

There is..

Unfortunately for us lay people, it requires action from her peers and you'd be hard pressed to find one with no ethical secrets of their own. They all have closets full of bones.

CC:
A large part of the problem is the American people allow them to get away with it by not voicing their dissatisfaction verbally and at the ballot box.

Many times I've heard, what's the big deal, all politicians lie?

Beagle:
Yes I was thinking last night how much of an improvement we could get if we could send people to civics class based on who they voted for... Clinton voters would go to class in Damascus and Berne voters in Caracas.   No grades strictly pass fail.

Kendahl:

--- Quote from: CC on May 20, 2017, 07:54:11 AM ---A large part of the problem is the American people allow them to get away with it by not voicing their dissatisfaction verbally and at the ballot box.
--- End quote ---
Unfortunately, the political parties pretty much control which candidates are offered for the American people's consideration. Without party support, it's pretty hard to get elected and that support is contingent on sticking to the party line. Trump was a rare exception.

I don't know enough American history to say what politics were like prior to the 20th century. (From what little I have heard and read, they were pretty rough.) For most of the 20th century, the Republican and Democratic parties weren't that far apart. More importantly, members of each party usually respected, and often liked, each other. Beginning at the 1968 national convention, the extreme left wing took over the Democratic Party. The extreme right wing did the same to the Republican Party in the early 1980s. They no longer disagree about the best policy for the country; they hate each other's guts. As a result, neither party represents the majority and it shows in the candidates that make it to the ballot.

I didn't vote for Trump last fall because I like him or consider his policies, whatever they really are, to be wise. I ranked the four candidates and he came in fourth from the bottom.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page