Term Limit Promise
I've heard a lot of people say that Souder is going to be hurt by the term limit promise he had made several years ago. For the record it won't hurt him.
When I look at who is saying the promise is an issue I see a group of voters who who are already not voting for Souder. There are not a lot of undecideds or members of Souder's base who feel this is a an issue. It has hardly made a dent in the last 8 years. I don't see it making a significant jump in importance now.
When I look at who is saying the promise is an issue I see a group of voters who who are already not voting for Souder. There are not a lot of undecideds or members of Souder's base who feel this is a an issue. It has hardly made a dent in the last 8 years. I don't see it making a significant jump in importance now.
posted by Indiana Pundit at 10:28 AM
14 Comments:
I think there are a lot of things that are going to hurt Souder...
His term limit promise I think will hurt him somewhat...
I think Souder is going to lose this election.
Mike Sylvester
Sadly, I agree with you, IP. It's too bad, but it's true.
Mike, I know you don't like Souder. But I don't see him losing.
Of course the term limit pledge hasn't made a dent in the last 8 years - the pledge was for 12 years and was made in 1994.
The 12 years are up and he's still running; even worse he's insulted everyone's intelligence by suggesting the original pledge doesn't count because he changed districts (only because the district lines were redrawn).
A concientious objecter who's now a chickenhawk.
A supporter of term limits who has now ignored his original pledge.
A fiscal conservative whose votes have led to the largest spending increases in history.
What's the term I'm looking for?
Flip-flop - that's it...
This is the first election that would impact his initial promise.
He originally said that he would serve no more than 6 terms.
hmmmm...that is 12 years.....I believe that is the amount of time you have to serve to GUARANTEE free benefits for life.
I say vote him in again.. there are "no" other alternatives and Souder's got this one in the bag.
Mark Souder made a promise to voters and broke it. Since he is of the party that allegedly values integrity and believes they have a moral superiority makes his betrayal to the voters even more obvious.
This is only one in a series of actions that signifies his transition from hometown boy to beltway boy. He originally believed that Washington DC needs a little Grabill, insinuating that hometown values should be adopted in washington. Now, he has become a lying chickenhawk hack void of the moral integrity he still believes he has. He doesnt even live in Grabill anymore - He lives in Aboite, the seat of the Rich Suburbanite Conservative, the only true constituency he still serves.
His term limit flip flop is only a small portion of his lies and deceptions. It gives voters an idea of what type of man is representing the third district in congress, and I think the sheer myraid of facts such as the aforementioned will be his undoing.
Actually the term limit pledge was addressed at the Lagrange County Forum that Mark Souder attended. The first in three campaigns I saw him ever attend one of these. He was asked about his term limit pledge and he replied with the following:
He made the promise to support term limit legislation. Since term limit legislation was not passed by congress there was no commitment to hold himself to term limits when others did not.
I am not sure Souder will loose this time. However, I do think it will be closer than many think. So if he does win in 2006, he will most likely loose in 2008
If Souder did say that then that is just a flat out lie. Why would he feel it necessary to have said the following leading up to the 2002 race:
"I have a different district. Whether or not people want to buy that explanation, it's their choice. But the fact is, it's a different district"
Why didn't he trumpet the "I only supported the legislation" argument then? The reason - because it was only 2002 and he had more time.
I believe everyone should keep the following quote Souder made about his term limit pledge in mind:
"Whatever I said before is no longer beholden"
This is what the voters of the state can continue to expect from him...
Jeff, I think there are bigger fish to fry than the term limit pledge. The term limit pledge does not balance the budget, develop an energy policy that is functional and decreases foreign dependency, solve social security's or Medicare’s problems, illegal immigration or anything else.
You can see exactly what he said on the Allen County Democratic Party website, www.allencountydemocrats.org. Read what he signed, and decide for yourself.
acdp thanks for the link to the Contract With America. Sounds good, but nothing was ever done except increased deficits, increased national debt, larger problems for Social Security and Medicare, Passage of a Rx drug bill for seniors that we cannot afford, an energy bill that does not lead to energy independence, more ear marks and the same crooked politicians.
Uh, I believe that Congress did vote on all the items that the Contract with America specifies. There was no promise to pass these things--it was simply to bring them to a vote. Previously, when votes were sought on these issues, the Democratic leadership refused to hold a vote. The Republican leadership allowed the votes.
I think that it's wrong to say, "Well, I voted for limits but it didn't pass....so now I'm exceeding the limits that I voted for." At least that's the excuse that he's giving out this year.
An honorable man would lead by example. If he isn't willing to abide by his original pledge, how can we believe that he is a man of his word?
My biggest problem with Souder is he's consumed by power and party politics.
Post a Comment
<< Home