Gabby Giffords may lose her seat if she doesn't recover by April - Polidicks

[QUOTE=yawmwen;27495735]She has responsibilities. She is not carrying out those responsibilities. She should not be in office.[/QUOTE] And yet firemen, doctors, and police officers, who also have extremely important jobs, can rest assured that if shot during the execution of their duties, they will still have a job when they return.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;27495735]She has responsibilities. She is not carrying out those responsibilities. She should not be in office.[/QUOTE] "Shoot the politician and they go away" is a bad precedent and one you do NOT want to set in your country given the current political atmosphere. There's an entire [i]party[/i] ready to go off.

[QUOTE=GunFox;27495831]And yet firemen, doctors, and police officers, who also have extremely important jobs, can rest assured that if shot during the execution of their duties, they will still have a job when they return.[/QUOTE] Their job isn't dependent on elections and having terms. They also don't decide policies for the country. [QUOTE=Zeke129;27496012]"Shoot the politician and they go away" is a bad precedent and one you do NOT want to set in your country given the current political atmosphere. There's an entire [i]party[/i] ready to go off.[/QUOTE] Do you really think it's going to encourage more shootings? Really? The Republicans and Tea Partiers aren't that hateful.

Just gotta recover from a headshot wound. No rush or anything, lady.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;27496012]"Shoot the politician and they go away" is a bad precedent and one you do NOT want to set in your country given the current political atmosphere. There's an entire [i]party[/i] ready to go off.[/QUOTE] well if you kill them theyre gonna go away regardless of any precedent, giffords was just extremely lucky.

[QUOTE=HolyCrusade;27492327]300 million people shouldn't have to wait on someone to recover from being [B]shot in the brain[/B]. It's a tragedy, but that's the reality of the world we live in. Someone needs to take her place if she can't recover quickly.[/QUOTE] dont worry guys ill take her seat down with liberal queer NWO reptillian agenda!!!!!

[QUOTE=Biotoxsin;27492312]Shes a fed, the state can't do shit really. If she did lose her seat, I guarantee you a bunch of hick conservatives would shoot up liberal congressional figures en masse to open up seats for their own preferred politicians. (I didn't mean to notion that being a conservative is inclusive to being a hick. There's plenty of extremists out there who are willing to throw away their lives in order to further the political agendas of radio show hosts. Extremist liberals do it too, but given the context (republicans have more to gain from an election right not than their opponents) it's more reasonable to assume that a conservative would be the one to act.) (I've tried to post this 3 times, and it's gotten worse sounding every time, the save button is giving me troubles. Hopefully this will clear up the intentions I had.)[/QUOTE] What the fuck? Political assassination isn't some new concept being ushered forth by this woman's shooting. When you shoot someone up, generally you aim to kill them. There's a pretty good chance they won't return to office when they're [I]dead.[/I]

She has a duty to serve the people at all times. If she cannot do it, she has the duty to resign. If she cannot resign, an election should be called by whoever holds the authority. It's ridiculous that in the US, people hold their seats until they die (excluding being voted out), as they're potentially senile before then. It's also ridiculous that you can have 103 year old judges, making decisions on how long people should spend in jail, what remedies should be issued etc.

[QUOTE=DogGunn;27500011]She has a duty to serve the people at all times. If she cannot do it, she has the duty to resign. If she cannot resign, an election should be called by whoever holds the authority. It's ridiculous that in the US, people hold their seats until they die (excluding being voted out), as they're potentially senile before then. It's also ridiculous that you can have 103 year old judges, making decisions on how long people should spend in jail, what remedies should be issued etc.[/QUOTE] Uh, representatives are elected every two years. Senators are elected every six. You aren't "voted out" you lose an election. It is hard to unseat a sitting member of congress, but it is quite doable. If things are going well for a state, then they don't usually see a reason to do so. And at face value, I'd totally agree that the supreme court justices are a terrible weakness in the US government, but they have actually turned out to be rather decent. While I don't always agree with their decisions, I never feel like they are corrupt or are pursuing a goal that is anything other than an interpretation of the constitution. The fact that they don't have to be re-elected means that they are less vulnerable to bribes. They don't need to run a campaign to get themselves re-elected every few years and spend all that cash.

congress still gets the same done with or without someone in her seat nothing

[QUOTE=GunFox;27500707]Uh, representatives are elected every two years. Senators are elected every six. You aren't "voted out" you lose an election. It is hard to unseat a sitting member of congress, but it is quite doable. If things are going well for a state, then they don't usually see a reason to do so. [/QUOTE] Regardless of how long the terms elected are, 1/8th of the representation of Arizona is missing from the HoR, and unless she makes a recovery soon, it will remain so for a while. How is this a fair situation for the people of AZ? By allowing a "special election", it allows fairness for the people - it shouldn't be about fairness for the sitting member. It also allows the currently voiceless district a voice... It's horrible what has happened to her, but I don't see how she not being able to complete her duties is the right choice for the people. When I said voted out, I thought it was pretty obvious I meant "not voted in".