Posted on 03/05/2010 3:49:49 AM PST by bjorn14
WASHINGTON - Representative William D. Delahunt will announce today that he will not seek reelection to Congress, ending a nearly 40-year career in elected office and giving Republicans hope of capturing the district, which stretches from Cape Cod to the South Shore.
Discuss COMMENTS (23) “It’s got nothing to do with politics,’’ the seven-term Democrat from Quincy said yesterday. “Life is about change. I think it’s healthy. It’s time.’’
The 68-year-old lawmaker said he has been considering leaving the House for several years, but was talked out of it two years ago by the late senator Edward M. Kennedy, who convinced his friend he should stay and help President Obama with his first-term agenda.
“He said: ‘Come on - this is a new time. It’s a new era. We [will] have a new president. We’re all needed,’ ’’ Delahunt recalled. After Kennedy died last year, Delahunt said, he grappled with whether to stay and work on the issues the senator held dear.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Was he the one implicated in not pursuing the leftist Bio prof when she shot her brother?
As a rule, 70 or so is a good time for politicians to leave office. These guys like Specter who are well into their 80s and still lusting after power give me the creeps.
****Was he the one implicated in not pursuing the leftist Bio prof when she shot her brother?****
Yes.
“It’s got nothing to do with politics,’ Ya right you just want to “spend more time with the family” LOL
He would be the one.
I generally agree but I still believe that Congress should be subject to term limits. It is not fair that the rest of the country suffer under the rule of people over which they have no say in electing.
He’s a longtime member of the Progressive Caucus.
I kind of disagree there. Every district should have a right to elect who it wants. That is the essence of representative democracy. I used to support term limits—now I’m much more ambivalent.
My guess is there will be 40 open democratic seats by November 4th and once the election is over and the GOP is the majority another 10 or so dems retire.
.."after forty years of BS,I dun run outta lies
Then, after Kennedy went to Hell, Mass voters decided to send his agenda with him in the special election.
Goodbye to bad rubbish:
Professor’s Killing of Brother Will Be Focus of an Inquest
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2459712/posts
[Amy Bishop. And remember this?] ...
BILL DELAHUNT: Why Did You Put Amy Bishop Back On The Street?
http://beltwayblips.dailyradar.com/story/rep-bill-delahunt-d-ma-why-did-you-put-amy-bishop-back-1
[Democrat let loose dangerous killer leftist who was hired as professor and killed again.]
‘Oddball’ portrait emerges (Amy Bishop a far-leftist “obsessed” with Obama)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2451541/posts?q=1&;page=51
There needs to be an age limit of 70. These guys become powermad and grasping shortly after that and there is no turning back. If they left at 70 they could still have some kind of productive life instead of being a destructive force.
...and another one bites the dust!
Enlighten me: does the simple majority for passing legislation decrease with these retirements, or does it stay the same? I believe the count is 218 for passage with 435 House members. If there are ten retirements, is the majority then 213? Or is the majority unchanged at 218?
Thanks!
These are announced retirements (not running again), not resignations. They’ll still hold their offices and vote until January.
Still, even more reason for Obama and co. to hurry Obamacare through, lest there be a loss of morale, or a domino effect.
Enlighten me: does the simple majority for passing legislation decrease with these retirements, or does it stay the same? I believe the count is 218 for passage with 435 House members. If there are ten retirements, is the majority then 213? Or is the
The simple majority is who ever is voting...say 36 didn’t vote (for whatever reason) so then a simple majority would be 200-199. Sorry, I don’t know the quorum rules.
Do you think there should be presidential term limits?
The fact is that the very smart folks who drafted our Constitution never conceived that Presidents and Congress critters would be elected to those offices without education and previous business experience. Sitting in the WH today is a man who never held a real job let alone been responsible for a business and its employees. Ditto for the majority of congress criters.
In other words, our Founding Fathers saw public service as just that. Something you did for one or two terms and then you returned to your business or farm. The idea was to keep the fresh ideas coming. A byproduct of this was that individuals could not, by virtue of longevity and seniority evolve themselves into a new ruling elite. If there was anything the Founding Fathers were opposed to was the creation of a new ruling elite.
Our political system is broken precisely because state and federal office holding have evolved into full-time jobs complete with retirement and medical insurance benefits.
Of course, Constitutional Framers also foresaw the need for an educated electorate to make the system work. Their concept of an educated person was one who could read, write and think. The Marxist educational establishment has evolved public education into a dumbed down and politially biased load of crap. This is how miscreants like Ted Kennedy, Sheets Byrd, Strom Thurmond, Dodd, Pelosi, Reid and others were able to stay in office for decades aand build thier kingdoms.
Term limits is the principle deterrant to the tyrants now governing us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.