Author Topic: Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?  (Read 720 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 17,565
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?
« on: December 16, 2013, 11:19:40 AM »
Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?

http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2013/12/did_rush_limbaugh_just_endorse_icongress.html

By C. Edmund Wright

Last Thursday, Rush Limbaugh gave tacit approval of a stunning idea: a virtual Congress. http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2013/12/12/gold_rush_dc_leads_in_super_zips

To start, Rush spent the better part of two hours brilliantly explaining why even the best people we send to Washington will never rein in the federal government.  Simply put, once in Washington, the vast majority of our elected officials become of Washington, and their limited-government instincts die.  There are many reasons for this, but all fall under the general heading of irresistible human nature.

As economist Jerry Bowyer says, Washington is a company town, and the company is government.  I love Jim DeMint, but if he owns a house in greater D.C., he too will benefit from a town that grows in size and power through his home equity.  Even the Ted Cruzes have their lifestyles enhanced when surrounded by ever-increasing money and power.  Rush called it the new gold rush.

Company town, indeed, and there's not a damned thing we can do about it, as long as everybody in the company is located near HQ.

With this realization, the only solution is to take the pols out of Washington.  Yes, this would be hard, but we either move them geographically or change human nature -- and the latter is impossible.

It is worth noting that the virtual Congress exists in the same realm as the idea of term limits.  In fact, having members serve from their districts is actually a superior solution to the same problems the term-limits people aim to address.  To wit: without a doubt, career politicians are a blight on our Republic.  But why is that?  It's because they get too entrenched in Washington and too isolated from reality.  John Boehner's problem is not so much that he's been in Congress too long (although that is a problem); it's more that he's been in Washington too long.

If Coppertone John still spent most of his time in Ohio, he'd be more like the contractor who helped author the Contract With America and less like the bronzed one who helped Ted Kennedy write No Child Left Behind ten years later.  Geography matters, because it dictates who your sphere of influence is 24/7/365.

Besides -- and this is important -- since we could never term-limit lobbyists and congressional staffers, limiting the members of Congress would only direct even more power into the hands of unelected and unaccountable lobbyists, staffers, and consultants.  These people already have too much influence, and they are all career creatures of Washington.  In this way, term limits would make the Beltway influence situation even worse.

However, if we simply purchased a few smartphones and a "Go To Meeting" account, we could have Congress work from the real world by next week.  Then all the staffers and lobbyists would also have to work in the real world.  Moreover, this would completely change the type of person who would even seek these jobs, as this one revision would totally alter, and significantly reduce, the power-grab incentives.  Today, the way to be successful in politics is to join the Washington career machine.  There is no reason not to use what is now very pedestrian technology to flip this reality overnight.

Changing location changes everything, and today, it's easy to do.

For crying out loud, if a tiny low-tech business owner can use "Go To Meeting," then our government can, too.  If Anthony Weiner can destroy a political career in his spare time, then why can't all our politicians use the same technology to do their jobs instantly, from locations across the country?

As we know now from research on so-called Super Zip Codes, many of the richest counties anywhere are in northern Virginia and Maryland.  Inside this bubble, nothing is produced but regulation, lobbying, and taxation -- and consulting about all of the above.  This part of the country is living off the backs of the rest of the nation.  This is obscene, unjust, and devastating.  We are paying people handsomely to destroy us.  And those we send up there to correct it actually benefit greatly by their failure to do so.

Human nature is what it is.  Why do we insist on swimming against the tide?

Now, I'm sure some are saying that there is value in face-to-face dealings, and I agree.  Those vital personal meetings should happen more often -- with constituents inside the district.  They should happen less often with lobbyists and staffers who know and care nothing about those constituents and those districts.  If a newly elected conservative congressman would run into normal people at every sushi bar, PTA meeting, health club, and cocktail party -- instead of the glitterati he bumps into inside the Beltway -- the chances of that representative staying committed to limited government would increase exponentially.  That's before you factor in other tangibles like home values and junkets and so on.

As Rush said, "[t]rillions of dollars every year are concentrated in that tiny geographic area.  It makes perfect sense that human beings would gravitate there trying to get their share.  And make no mistake: everybody in life is pursuing money -- left, right, charity, nonprofits.  Everybody's pursuing money.  Everybody wants a raise. Everybody wants to improve their standard of living.  Everybody wants to be rich, and especially those that go to Washington. ... I'm expressing all this within the context of I think everybody in that town has a vested interest in that town growing, not shrinking." 

They do.

Rush is famous for saying that "words mean things," and he's right.  The words he just uttered mean that as long as everyone with power is concentrated in Washington, there is no chance that Washington's influence in our lives will be rolled back.  We have an opportunity to address everything about human nature that makes this so: a virtual Congress that keeps members out of that tiny geographic area.

We have no excuse not to do it.  All of the tools necessary can be purchased at a single Walmart today.  We wouldn't even need Amazon to deliver them with drones, and the only downside is that finally, Washington real estate values would feel the reality we've all felt for five years.

“It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.” —Voltaire

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 17,565
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?
« Reply #1 on: December 16, 2013, 11:20:18 AM »
I think Rush may well be on to something here!

What say you?
“It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.” —Voltaire

Offline GourmetDan

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,090
Re: Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?
« Reply #2 on: December 16, 2013, 11:22:01 AM »

If you think the current Congress is susceptible to fraud and manipulation, just wait until it's virtual...


"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left." - Ecclesiastes 10:2

"April Fools Day is the one day of the year that people critically evaluate news articles before accepting them as true." - Unknown

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 17,565
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?
« Reply #3 on: December 16, 2013, 11:25:57 AM »
If you think the current Congress is susceptible to fraud and manipulation, just wait until it's virtual...

I beg to differ but am willing to listen to why you think this is so.
“It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.” —Voltaire

Offline GourmetDan

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,090
Re: Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?
« Reply #4 on: December 16, 2013, 11:30:51 AM »
I beg to differ but am willing to listen to why you think this is so.

How's that electronic voting working out for ya?


"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left." - Ecclesiastes 10:2

"April Fools Day is the one day of the year that people critically evaluate news articles before accepting them as true." - Unknown

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 17,565
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?
« Reply #5 on: December 16, 2013, 11:34:54 AM »
How's that electronic voting working out for ya?

What electronic voting? I've been an election judge for 30 years and am unaware of any voting that is not done in person or by mail under VERY strict control.
“It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.” —Voltaire

Offline GourmetDan

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,090
Re: Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?
« Reply #6 on: December 16, 2013, 11:36:48 AM »
What electronic voting? I've been an election judge for 30 years and am unaware of any voting that is not done in person or by mail under VERY strict control.

Well then I guess you would be in favor of a virtual Congress...


"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left." - Ecclesiastes 10:2

"April Fools Day is the one day of the year that people critically evaluate news articles before accepting them as true." - Unknown

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 17,565
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?
« Reply #7 on: December 16, 2013, 11:40:25 AM »
Well then I guess you would be in favor of a virtual Congress...

I'm definitely  in favor of having a serious discussion about the idea instead of just throwing rocks at it without even knowing what is being proposed.

We would still have elected representatives just as we do now but the difference would be that their offices would be in their districts and they would have need to go to Washington only VERY rarely!
« Last Edit: December 16, 2013, 11:42:43 AM by Bigun »
“It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.” —Voltaire

Online truth_seeker

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 15,544
  • Common sense results oriented conservatism
Re: Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?
« Reply #8 on: December 16, 2013, 12:22:00 PM »
Probability near to zero. First of all, while elected reps may come and go, the staffers and lobbyists remain. There is an overwhelming sized permanent infrastructure in place in DC, and nearby Maryland, Virginia etc.

What could happen is to give lip service to this idea, i.e.. remote voting, but everything else remains precisely as it is.

DC remains the new Gold Rush.
#NeverHillary

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 17,565
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?
« Reply #9 on: December 16, 2013, 12:44:21 PM »
Probability near to zero. First of all, while elected reps may come and go, the staffers and lobbyists remain. There is an overwhelming sized permanent infrastructure in place in DC, and nearby Maryland, Virginia etc.

What could happen is to give lip service to this idea, i.e.. remote voting, but everything else remains precisely as it is.

DC remains the new Gold Rush.

So, if I interpret this correctly, you are saying that the ENORMOUS Washington bureaucracy is much more of a problem than who the currently elected officials are.  If so, I agree with you.

The question them becomes can that problem be more readily addressed with elected officials actually there or somewhere else? I think the answer is somewhere else! 
“It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.” —Voltaire

Offline jmyrlefuller

  • J. Myrle Fuller
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 11,463
  • ^^ Actual picture of me.
    • Fullervision
Re: Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?
« Reply #10 on: December 16, 2013, 12:48:59 PM »
Probability near to zero. First of all, while elected reps may come and go, the staffers and lobbyists remain. There is an overwhelming sized permanent infrastructure in place in DC, and nearby Maryland, Virginia etc.

What could happen is to give lip service to this idea, i.e.. remote voting, but everything else remains precisely as it is.

DC remains the new Gold Rush.
The problem with gold rushes, however, is that they eventually go bust.

Decentralizing Congress won't shut down the lobbyists, but it will cause them to scatter.

It would probably best be tried in some of the states first, many of which have lobbying juggernauts of their own. If such a process helps break up the machines in Frankfort or Charleston, it will go a long way in determining if it would work on Washington.
Proud supporter of the Free Conservative Resistance

"Just because people in positions of authority are stupid, it doesn’t mean you have to go along with it." —Arlo Guthrie

The enemy of my enemies may not be my friend, but it's still fun watching him make my enemies squirm.

Offline Rapunzel

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 71,719
Re: Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?
« Reply #11 on: December 16, 2013, 12:52:07 PM »
So, if I interpret this correctly, you are saying that the ENORMOUS Washington bureaucracy is much more of a problem than who the currently elected officials are.  If so, I agree with you.

The question them becomes can that problem be more readily addressed with elected officials actually there or somewhere else? I think the answer is somewhere else!

Absolutely somewhere else.  Anyone think lobbyists would fly all over the country to twist arms?  The biggest obstacle to saving this nation is K Street where a majority of congresses family is employed... we have incest at its worst in DC.
“The time is now near at hand which must probably determine, whether Americans are to be, Freemen, or Slaves.” G Washington July 2, 1776

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 17,565
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?
« Reply #12 on: December 16, 2013, 12:55:26 PM »
Absolutely somewhere else.  Anyone think lobbyists would fly all over the country to twist arms?  The biggest obstacle to saving this nation is K Street where a majority of congresses family is employed... we have incest at its worst in DC.

Absolutely true! It is the current ambition of every one of those 535 price and princesses to grow up and become a million dollar a year K Street lobbyist!
“It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.” —Voltaire

Online EC

  • Shanghaied Editor
  • Member
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 17,656
  • Conspiracy engineer. Low rates.
Re: Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?
« Reply #13 on: December 16, 2013, 02:02:34 PM »
I think Rush may well be on to something here!

What say you?

I don't know if you remember Libby (may she rest in peace). Californian Liberal, knee jerk on most things, but scathing on the idea of term limits.

Quote
Besides -- and this is important -- since we could never term-limit lobbyists and congressional staffers, limiting the members of Congress would only direct even more power into the hands of unelected and unaccountable lobbyists, staffers, and consultants.  These people already have too much influence, and they are all career creatures of Washington.  In this way, term limits would make the Beltway influence situation even worse.

Almost word for word what she said to me during a discussion.
The fastest way to a man's heart? Inch to the right of the breastbone, between the fourth and fifth rib.

Every time I start to feel boring, I remember there is a monthly magazine devoted to elevators.

Avatar from Mythtickle

I've got a website now: Smoke and Ink

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 17,565
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?
« Reply #14 on: December 16, 2013, 02:12:19 PM »
I don't know if you remember Libby (may she rest in peace). Californian Liberal, knee jerk on most things, but scathing on the idea of term limits.

Almost word for word what she said to me during a discussion.

Sadly I didn't have the pleasure of knowing her but definitely agree with her on this point.
“It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.” —Voltaire

Online EC

  • Shanghaied Editor
  • Member
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 17,656
  • Conspiracy engineer. Low rates.
Re: Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?
« Reply #15 on: December 16, 2013, 02:20:12 PM »
Sadly I didn't have the pleasure of knowing her but definitely agree with her on this point.

You'd have liked her. She wouldn't be all that good for your blood pressure, but she were a nice lass.
The fastest way to a man's heart? Inch to the right of the breastbone, between the fourth and fifth rib.

Every time I start to feel boring, I remember there is a monthly magazine devoted to elevators.

Avatar from Mythtickle

I've got a website now: Smoke and Ink

Offline olde north church

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,136
Re: Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?
« Reply #16 on: December 16, 2013, 03:38:22 PM »
Would be better to have Senate in one city, H of R in another, President in another and Supreme Court in yet another.  Place the various departments in different cities throughout the country.
Why?  Well, because I'm a bastard, that's why.

Offline massadvj

  • Editorial Advisor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,020
    • Auktion Online
Re: Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse iCongress?
« Reply #17 on: December 16, 2013, 03:43:05 PM »
Move the Congress to Detroit so the representatives can see firsthand what their ideology produces.
"She only coughs when she lies."


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf