A quote from the middle section of the Declaration of Independence, listing the failures of King George:

• He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
  ...
• He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
  
• He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
  
• He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
  

From the beginning of the colonies, the colonists had the ability to elect their own legislatures.  The colonies always had some independence.  The first and primary complaints of the Declaration of Independence are that the King was trying to neuter or dissolve these legislatures.  
The founders viewed the legislative power as primary, as most important.  The legislative branch needed to be the most powerful, as they saw it. Our legislative branch today is still the most powerful of the three branches, in theory, but it is the least effective.  Because it does not do its work, the things it was supposed to do are instead done by the other two branches.  Presidents try to give executive orders to re-animate old statutes, and judges after long consideration either go along with it or turn it down.  It was not supposed to be this way.

I have my own opinions about this, but first I welcome yours.  When did this change?  Why did it change?  Who changed it?  How can we change it back?  Are the members of Congress elected today actually villains, or would they do their jobs more effectively under a different incentive structure?  Would term limits help? Would nonpartisan primaries help? Would ranked choice voting or approval voting help?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Not sure when it officially changed, but the Great Depression did a lot to change people's mind about acceptance of nanny government. Desperate times...

---

"Remember Red, Hope is a good thing. Maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies."  - Andy Dufresne, The Shawshank Redemption

A quote from the middle section of the Declaration of Independence, listing the failures of King George:

• He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
  ...
  
• He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
  
• He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
  
• He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
  

From the beginning of the colonies, the colonists had the ability to elect their own legislatures.  The colonies always had some independence.  The first and primary complaints of the Declaration of Independence are that the King was trying to neuter or dissolve these legislatures.  
The founders viewed the legislative power as primary, as most important.  The legislative branch needed to be the most powerful, as they saw it. Our legislative branch today is still the most powerful of the three branches, in theory, but it is the least effective.  Because it does not do its work, the things it was supposed to do are instead done by the other two branches.  Presidents try to give executive orders to re-animate old statutes, and judges after long consideration either go along with it or turn it down.  It was not supposed to be this way.

I have my own opinions about this, but first I welcome yours.  When did this change?  Why did it change?  Who changed it?  How can we change it back?  Are the members of Congress elected today actually villains, or would they do their jobs more effectively under a different incentive structure?  Would term limits help? Would nonpartisan primaries help? Would ranked choice voting or approval voting help?

Money changed it all.  Our elected representatives sold their souls to the lobbyists and that is who is running the country.  All it would take to change it back is single issue bills.  No riders, no add ons.  Just single issue so the people can see what they are actually voting for.  No more hiding multiple issues and massive pork buried in a 5000 page bill.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

A quote from the middle section of the Declaration of Independence, listing the failures of King George:

• He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
  ...
  
• He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
  
• He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
  
• He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
  

From the beginning of the colonies, the colonists had the ability to elect their own legislatures.  The colonies always had some independence.  The first and primary complaints of the Declaration of Independence are that the King was trying to neuter or dissolve these legislatures.  
The founders viewed the legislative power as primary, as most important.  The legislative branch needed to be the most powerful, as they saw it. Our legislative branch today is still the most powerful of the three branches, in theory, but it is the least effective.  Because it does not do its work, the things it was supposed to do are instead done by the other two branches.  Presidents try to give executive orders to re-animate old statutes, and judges after long consideration either go along with it or turn it down.  It was not supposed to be this way.

I have my own opinions about this, but first I welcome yours.  When did this change?  Why did it change?  Who changed it?  How can we change it back?  Are the members of Congress elected today actually villains, or would they do their jobs more effectively under a different incentive structure?  Would term limits help? Would nonpartisan primaries help? Would ranked choice voting or approval voting help?

Money changed it all.  Our elected representatives sold their souls to the lobbyists and that is who is running the country.  All it would take to change it back is single issue bills.  No riders, no add ons.  Just single issue so the people can see what they are actually voting for.  No more hiding multiple issues and massive pork buried in a 5000 page bill.

I would also love to see single issue bills.  The problem is, it's hard to get single issue bills passed because of the horse-trading that is an inevitable part of politics.  
A congressperson would say, "I'll vote for your thing if you vote for my thing."  Then the other congressperson says, "Let's just put those things together in one bill. That way, if my thing passes, your thing passes."  
That's how you get omnibus spending bills.  If you want money to expand Mayport, for example, the only way to get that passed is to put it into the big omnibus spending bill, because no one is pushing that except our local congresspersons.  Our congresspersons don't represent the whole country; they represent Jacksonville.  If Jacksonville wants something, they need to do some horse-trading.  There's no way around it. 
In a republic, you have politics, and that's how politics works.

---

Money has always been in politics and US congress has always had multi-issue, omnibus bills.
I think we have to look closer at history and find which factors were not there at the beginning.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

I think it's funny you think congress is ineffective. I used to think that, too.

---

I think it's funny you think congress is ineffective. I used to think that, too.

So you think they're effective? Effective at what? Distracting us? From what?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

I think it's funny you think congress is ineffective. I used to think that, too.

So you think they're effective? Effective at what? Distracting us? From what?

Their owners taking over.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

So you think they're effective? Effective at what? Distracting us? From what?

Their owners taking over.

So what do we do? Who are these owners, how are they taking over, and what would a better Congress be doing to stop it?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Their owners taking over.

So what do we do? Who are these owners, how are they taking over, and what would a better Congress be doing to stop it?

There is no "we", there's only some various factions who have different responses to the forfeiture of our Nation; some widely against, many who are just apathetic, and others who cannot wait for it to happen. Many, many are like you, passively accepting the radical transformation of our culture so you can continue to be friends with people who objectively want you dead. Want to stop it? Elect "America First" politicians who will wield American Power in America's best interests...just like that last guy you hate so much did.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

So what do we do? Who are these owners, how are they taking over, and what would a better Congress be doing to stop it?

There is no "we", there's only some various factions who have different responses to the forfeiture of our Nation; some widely against, many who are just apathetic, and others who cannot wait for it to happen. Many, many are like you, passively accepting the radical transformation of our culture so you can continue to be friends with people who objectively want you dead. Want to stop it? Elect "America First" politicians who will wield American Power in America's best interests...just like that last guy you hate so much did.

What is an example of an "America First" bill that Congress could pass? Is there even one member of Congress with enough of a grasp on what you think should be done that they've proposed an appropriate bill?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

There is no "we", there's only some various factions who have different responses to the forfeiture of our Nation; some widely against, many who are just apathetic, and others who cannot wait for it to happen. Many, many are like you, passively accepting the radical transformation of our culture so you can continue to be friends with people who objectively want you dead. Want to stop it? Elect "America First" politicians who will wield American Power in America's best interests...just like that last guy you hate so much did.

What is an example of an "America First" bill that Congress could pass? Is there even one member of Congress with enough of a grasp on what you think should be done that they've proposed an appropriate bill?

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-cong...xt?r=7&s=1

Here you go, have fun with your mental gymnastics.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

What is an example of an "America First" bill that Congress could pass? Is there even one member of Congress with enough of a grasp on what you think should be done that they've proposed an appropriate bill?

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-cong...xt?r=7&s=1

Here you go, have fun with your mental gymnastics.

A moratorium on all immigration? Ending the rights of family members of some current immigrants to immigrate?

Listen, I'm a law and order guy.  If you could get a President and majorities in both houses of Congress to agree to that, I'd go along with it.  But I'm not personally for that.  It seems to me we have a shortage of willing labor around here which is creating both wage growth and inflation, but the inflation is larger than the wage growth.  Seems to me we need more legal immigrants who are able bodied at the moment.  I think we agree about trying to eliminate illegal immigration, at least vastly reduce it and send more people back. I think we agree that welfare should be less accessible for immigrants, but, it's already less accessible.

I don't see why you and Trump also want to reduce legal immigration. I mean, I do see why, you said it, you think that immigrants want to kill you and your culture, but that's utterly delusional and racist. So it's better that I tell you I don't see these points, because I'm sure you didn't enjoy being called a delusional racist there.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

What is an example of an "America First" bill that Congress could pass? Is there even one member of Congress with enough of a grasp on what you think should be done that they've proposed an appropriate bill?

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-cong...xt?r=7&s=1

Here you go, have fun with your mental gymnastics.

The bill says a moratorium on all immigration for a period of four years or until Americans can get back to work.  Is Marjorie Taylor Greene, Who apparently originated this bill, aware that there is a labor shortage in this country right now?

---

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-cong...xt?r=7&s=1

Here you go, have fun with your mental gymnastics.

A moratorium on all immigration? Ending the rights of family members of some current immigrants to immigrate?

Listen, I'm a law and order guy.  If you could get a President and majorities in both houses of Congress to agree to that, I'd go along with it.  But I'm not personally for that.  It seems to me we have a shortage of willing labor around here which is creating both wage growth and inflation, but the inflation is larger than the wage growth.  Seems to me we need more legal immigrants who are able bodied at the moment.  I think we agree about trying to eliminate illegal immigration, at least vastly reduce it and send more people back.  I think we agree that welfare should be less accessible for immigrants, but, its already less accessible. 

I don't see why you and Trump also want to reduce legal immigration.  I mean, I do see why, you said it, you think that immigrants want to kill you and your culture, but that's utterly delusional and racist.  So it's better that I tell you I don't see these points, because I'm sure you didn't enjoy being called a delusional racist there.

You seem to think that I care what you call me. The people that want to kill our culture are already here and mostly rich white people, so I don't think you've really grasped what you think you understand. You also don't seem to understand what happens to labor in a Recession, but that's ok, you'll find out soon enough.

---

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-cong...xt?r=7&s=1

Here you go, have fun with your mental gymnastics.

The bill says a moratorium on all immigration for a period of four years or until Americans can get back to work.  Is Marjorie Taylor Greene, Who apparently originated this bill, aware that there is a labor shortage in this country right now?

The times they are a'changing. Can you tell me how those who participated in the so called Great Resignation and remain unemployed are currently paying their bills? How will those folks continue that behavior in the long term? What happens to people who are continually rejected for positions in their preferred field of employment? What do the answers to these questions tell you about the long term outlook for labor in this Country?

I think both of you would furiously bail water out of your boat without ever thinking to plug the hole in the bow.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

A moratorium on all immigration? Ending the rights of family members of some current immigrants to immigrate?

Listen, I'm a law and order guy.  If you could get a President and majorities in both houses of Congress to agree to that, I'd go along with it.  But I'm not personally for that.  It seems to me we have a shortage of willing labor around here which is creating both wage growth and inflation, but the inflation is larger than the wage growth.  Seems to me we need more legal immigrants who are able bodied at the moment.  I think we agree about trying to eliminate illegal immigration, at least vastly reduce it and send more people back.  I think we agree that welfare should be less accessible for immigrants, but, its already less accessible. 

I don't see why you and Trump also want to reduce legal immigration.  I mean, I do see why, you said it, you think that immigrants want to kill you and your culture, but that's utterly delusional and racist.  So it's better that I tell you I don't see these points, because I'm sure you didn't enjoy being called a delusional racist there.

You seem to think that I care what you call me. The people that want to kill our culture are already here and mostly rich white people, so I don't think you've really grasped what you think you understand. You also don't seem to understand what happens to labor in a Recession, but that's ok, you'll find out soon enough.

If the people who want to kill our culture are rich, white, and already here, how does a moratorium on all immigration stop their plans?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

You seem to think that I care what you call me. The people that want to kill our culture are already here and mostly rich white people, so I don't think you've really grasped what you think you understand. You also don't seem to understand what happens to labor in a Recession, but that's ok, you'll find out soon enough.

If the people who want to kill our culture are rich, white, and already here, how does a moratorium on all immigration stop their plans?

Because border instability and a crushing number of new government dependants achieves the chaos needed to end America.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-cong...xt?r=7&s=1

Here you go, have fun with your mental gymnastics.

The bill says a moratorium on all immigration for a period of four years or until Americans can get back to work.  Is Marjorie Taylor Greene, Who apparently originated this bill, aware that there is a labor shortage in this country right now?

Before accepting new immigrants as a cure for the "labor shortage", wouldn't it first be prudent to understand the problem, the magnitude and why it exists?  Is there a shortage of people, or of people willing to work?  If too many are simply living off the government now, how will an increase in the labor force incentive their return to work?

---

When you get into the endzone, act like you've been there before.

The bill says a moratorium on all immigration for a period of four years or until Americans can get back to work.  Is Marjorie Taylor Greene, Who apparently originated this bill, aware that there is a labor shortage in this country right now?

Before accepting new immigrants as a cure for the "labor shortage", wouldn't it first be prudent to understand the problem, the magnitude and why it exists?  Is there a shortage of people, or of people willing to work?  If too many are simply living off the government now, how will an increase in the labor force incentive their return to work?

If they don't want to work they can go [BLEEP] themselves for all I care.  We need to bring in people to fill these jobs so our economy can grow.

---

If the people who want to kill our culture are rich, white, and already here, how does a moratorium on all immigration stop their plans?

Because border instability and a crushing number of new government dependants achieves the chaos needed to end America.

Why would a rich and privileged person in this country want to end the system that created and sustains his wealth and privilege? Don't they know what happens to the very wealthy when their country participates in wars and revolutions? Regime change is the great leveler.

---

The bill says a moratorium on all immigration for a period of four years or until Americans can get back to work.  Is Marjorie Taylor Greene, Who apparently originated this bill, aware that there is a labor shortage in this country right now?

Before accepting new immigrants as a cure for the "labor shortage", wouldn't it first be prudent to understand the problem, the magnitude and why it exists?  Is there a shortage of people, or of people willing to work?  If too many are simply living off the government now, how will an increase in the labor force incentive their return to work?

The Covid relief stuff is long over.  Anyone who could be working but isn't now is living off of either their savings or their family, and more power to them in both cases.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.