3 ms·
I'm not quite sure as to what your preferred alternative is. You excoriate Kennedy for not having had a "real job," so the mere fact that he is a Senator, rathe
by akd 17y ago
I'm not quite sure as to what your preferred alternative is. You excoriate Kennedy for not having had a "real job," so the mere fact that he is a Senator, rather than the way he conducts himself as a Senator, is what gets your goat. So you would prefer not to have a Senate?
- lionhearted 17y agoWell, I'm not him, but I'll weigh in - term limits on all civil service would probably be a good thing, and that includes changing roles/branches. Serving the country for a few years with passion and vigor is noble and heroic, but long term civil service risks stagnation, politicking, and corruption. A Senator going out into the world to work on problems without government behind them would bolster their worldview. Perhaps after two terms in the Senate, a mandatory one or two terms off, then the Senator could run again. But definitely, lifetime politicians are a big potential problem. It certainly seems like they become more brazen and aristocratic over time.