The American Cowboy Chronicles

Democrats Are Creating Extremely Dangerous Times For Americans

2026-11-01T23:09:37.378-08:00

Concerns regarding voting for Democrats in the 2026 midterm elections center on the fear of the Democrats implementing policies associated with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). And, as we've all found out over the last few months, the influence and policies of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) within the Democratic Party is huge. The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) steers the Democratic Party's policies further Left than the vast majority of Americans want our country to go.

During the 2026 primary cycle, several DSA-backed or aligned Democrats unseated long-standing establishment Democrats. High-profile examples include primary victories for U.S. House seats by candidates like Melat Kiros in Colorado and Darializa Avila-Chevalier in New York. Nationally, the DSA's U.S. House delegation is projected to expand to at least seven members in the upcoming 120th Congress.

The very anti-American Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is going to have its own Congressional Caucus made up of Democrats. In fact, approximately 10 or more Democrats in Congress who have embraced and are aligned with the radicals in the DSA are expected to form a dedicated caucus in Washington.

It's true. About 10 DSA members or DSA-aligned Democrat legislators are projected to organize a small, coherent caucus in Congress. Their influence will be to make policies that steer our nation closer to full-Communism and the destruction of our form of government.

Let's all keep in mind that Congressional caucuses are informal groups of lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate that work to shape public policy, influence legislation, and build coalitions. While they do not have formal Constitutional or statutory lawmaking power on their own, they exert significant influence over the legislative process.

Democrat Party Caucuses and Conferences include the House Democratic Caucus, House Republican Conference, Senate Democratic Caucus, and Senate Republican Conference. They hold official closed sessions to set legislative agendas, choose party leaders, select committee assignments and chairs, and oversee campaign committees. If voted into office, this will now include a very anti-American Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).

Groups like the House Freedom Caucus, the Republican Study Committee, or the Congressional Progressive Caucus unite lawmakers around a specific political spectrum. Some tight-knit groups such as the Freedom Caucus can leverage bloc voting or withhold support to pressure party leadership and change the outcome of floor votes.

Groups like the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC), and the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) advocate for civil rights, economic equity, and targeted community representation in domestic and international policy.

Caucuses exercise power by setting the agenda. Yes, that's why Americans need to worry about the Democrats' "Americans Last Agenda." Democrats aligned with the DSA will be able to circulate policy proposals, draft legislation, and host shadow hearings or press conferences to draw public and media attention to their goals of tearing apart what Americans have built over the last 250 years.

Since many caucuses vote internally, requiring simple majorities, two-thirds majorities, or 75%–80% thresholds, to establish an official position the DSA is going to have a lot of political power -- and the Democrats are helping them to achieve their goals.

Key figures in the DSA Caucus are the people in Congress who we have all seen come out against traditional American values and our founding principles. Yes, those prominent Democrats associated with the DSA movement include U.S. Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib. If you're saying to yourself, "That figures." I agree. I'm not shocked that the dumbest members in Congress would support the DSA. It just makes sense.

Of course, let's also keep in mind that the DSA has over 120,000 to 130,000 members nationwide as of 2026. So yes, Tlaib and AOC have a lot of company when it comes to being dumb.

The DSA has institutionalized its presence in major metropolitan areas. This includes the election of Zohran Mamdani as mayor of New York City and competitive citywide races in Los Angeles, Seattle, and Washington, D.C.

Honestly though, that's not that hard to believe at all. Let's remember that while the DSA says they focus heavily on urban organizing because they see working-class city residents as "victims" of corporate exploitation who are giving them jobs, I believe the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) sees city residents as people who are too stupid, too willing to drink the Kool Aid, and too willing to think that they're being "exploited" by their employer who is making sure they can afford the life they have.

I firmly believe the DSA sees city folks as people who are way to willing to surrender their personal freedoms -- and give them over to people who in reality want to be their "Slave Masters."

The DSA's power lies in its ability to introduce far-left Communist policy positions into the broader Democratic Party "Americans Last Agenda." This means the DSA entices other Democrats who respond favorably to their proposals to change the government of the United States to suit their needs of supremacy over the stupid and the ungrateful.

I actually see Democrats who get others to want Socialism and Communism is the same way that I see Drug Dealers who sell illegal drugs to people who want it. And really, when you think about it, spreading Socialism is like pushing illegal drugs.

The promise of "Free Stuff" is the hook. Just as Drug Dealers offer a first dose for free to create the desire for more, to create a habit, Socialist politicians offer "free stuff" in the form of "free" public services, like "free healthcare" and "free college educations" to gain the support and create voter dependency on the government. Someone else is paying for that "free stuff" but that doesn't matter to Democrats because selfishness is part of their character.

The long-term harm for those who accept Socialism as their feel-good drug is that Socialist policies might feel beneficial or equitable initially, but they ultimately lead to economic stagnation, loss of personal freedom, and fiscal unsustainability. Yes, similar to the destructive long-term effects of substance abuse.

Socialist policies can create dependency, reduce individual initiative, and distort market incentives. From this perspective, when government subsidies, price controls, or welfare programs face budget constraints and are reduced, the sudden transition can cause economic problems and public distress, similar to a forced withdrawal from a drug dependency.

Ever see a drug user come begging for more when they are cut off? The DSA likes to tell you how wonderful Socialism is for you, but when Socialism can't feed people and the "free stuff" disappears or are cut off, individuals will still need money for food or shelter. When that happens, the Socialist will tell you to find a job.

It's true. When Socialists running a city or state run out of other people's money, and they see that resources are scarce, their inability to provide for people addicted to their Socialist programs is significantly impacted. Of course, that's when everyone in a Socialist government realizes that social programs have to be a balanced between government-provided support and individual employment.

So whether folks at the DSA understand it or not, government programs that create institutional dependencies are financially unsustainable over the long term. That's why state-funded benefits face budget shortfalls and structural failures, the responsibility to secure the necessities that we need to live is, as always, ultimately our responsibility.

That's why individuals hurt by being cut off from social programs need to secure their basic needs, like food and shelter, on their own. They need to get a job. That's the fundamental reality of life that they have to face: We are required to be productive, work for what we need, and earn an income.

As for the drug distribution, its not much different than that of a Socialist government that creates a system where individuals lose their personal autonomy, and have to rely entirely on a centralized all-powerful authority to dictate supply and fulfill their needs.

That's why getting Democrats to want Socialism and Communism is like getting an alcoholic to want a drink. It's easy because Democrats see Socialism and Communism as their drug of choice. It's not good for them, but that doesn't matter to them. They see as the answer to not having to do anything for "free stuff."

The scam is that Socialism is all about "Work, Obey, Serve." If you don't think so, listen to those who escaped from those countries to come to America where our freedoms are still intact.

Is the DSA out of touch and radically far-left? You bet they are. The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) agenda includes:

First and foremost, the DSA agenda that Democrats are supporting wants to terminate our Constitution and Bill of Rights. we would loose our Rights and Freedoms as Citizens. And yes, Democrats supporting the DSA are good with that.

The DSA wants to make Americans subjects to a tyrannical government where we are slaves to the whims of the government. A government that can impose their will upon us, and we would be considered a threat to speak out against them.

Yes, that's why the DSA wants to disarm Americans. An unarmed people are not a threat to a tyrannical government -- even one that labels itself "Democratic."

The DSA wants to replace America's two-party system with a single authoritarian central government like what the former-Soviet Union used. Whether you call it a Congress or a Soviet Politburo, they will be the de facto highest policy-making and executive authority of the Democratic Communist Party of the United States.

The DSA-controlled "Congress" will formulate "state" policy, issued directives, ratified high-level appointments, and wield supreme control over a Soviet-style United States government with the DSA Party apparatus in charge. That's the goal of the DSA.

The DSA wants to abolish the United States Senate and our Electoral College system, and implement a ranked-choice voting to keep in power people of their choosing. This is really Soviet Union stuff here.

The DSA wants to abolish the office of the President.

The DSA wants to abolish the Supreme Court of the United States.

The DSA wants to abolish police departments and prisons.

The DSA wants to expand voting rights to everyone, including people here illegally and Foreigners who want to vote in our election.

The DSA wants American taxpayers to fund the medical needs of everyone, including people here illegally and Foreigners who want free medical treatment in the United States.

The DSA wants to do a Soviet Union style takeover of all businesses in the United States by "Nationalizing" Americans businesses and have the government take ownership of all businesses.

The DSA wants to abolish America's Free-Market Capitalist system. It doesn't matter that Free-Market Capitalism has pulled more people out of poverty than any other system, the anti-Americans who support the DSA goals want it abolished.

The DSA wants to abolish private property. While the DSA's Democratic Socialist platform will "allow" us to keep our clothing and our cars as long as both adhere to DSA regulations, the DSA thinks your private property should belong to the government. Yes, especially if your property is a businesses, a factory, a plant, a farm or a ranch that produces assets and is used to generate profit.

Here's some information that should make you think, recent polling indicates that the DSA's agenda is accepted by younger, urban, "college-educated," Americans who register as Democrats. Yes, the supposed smart kids. In fact, a CNN poll conducted in July 2026 found that approximately one-third of Democrat voters identify as "Democratic Socialists."

Frankly, after looking over the DSA agenda, and how they want to create a caucus in Congress, and promote what they want, the mere idea of having a single DSA Representative in Congress should anger Americans. These vermin are not the sort of people that we need in office.

The Democrats who embrace the DSA platform are a threat to American governance. Let's call a spade a spade here, the DSA platform calling for abolishing the U.S. Senate and the Electoral College, alongside with replacing the Presidency and the Supreme Court with executive institutions controlled entirely by Congress, would dismantle our fundamental system of checks and balances established by the founders.

The DSA agenda that Democrats are supporting advocates for the government taking ownership of American businesses, defunding the military, abolishing prisons, dismantling Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and abolishing our rights to own property.

If the DSA furthers its agenda after getting a foothold in Congress, then Americans would see how their agenda would be violating our foundational American principles of private property, limited government, and individual liberty.

Some Congressional Republicans have explored procedural maneuvers to challenge whether DSA-affiliated members-elect can faithfully uphold their Constitutional oath of office. But frankly, to say that they will not enter office to promote their agenda through a political maneuver is weak assurance that they can be stopped.

I believe, after researching the threat that the DSA poses to our nation, that if elected to Congress, and given the power to steer our government's policy decisions, I see them attempting to enact and mandate policies that violate our Constitution and Founding Principles. Of course, if they get their way and abolish out Constitution, they wouldn't care about any of that.

What the DSA agenda does, and in effect their supports do, is take our nation one step closer to lawlessness and general civil disobedience. Promoting the DSA agenda through laws and mandates will undermine public order and traditional governance. The DSA support for policies like defunding or restructuring law enforcement, eliminating cash bail, and reducing mass incarceration can lead to an increase in crime and a breakdown of public safety. It can encourage lawlessness on the part of usually law abiding citizens.

The DSA's push to replace capitalism with a government-ownership economy is a threat to established legal structures, property rights, and economic stability.

Winston Churchill once said, "If you destroy a free market you create a black market. If you make ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law."

Winston Churchill spoke these words in Great Britain's House of Commons on February 3, 1949. Churchill was criticizing the heavy-handed economic controls and the flood of rules placed on industry and commerce by the post-war Labour Government in office from 1945 to 1951. He argued that over-regulating people and businesses does not create order; instead, it breeds defiance and undermines the authority of the law itself.

If Democrats and the DSA get the foothold that they want in Congress and pass and regulations to abolish parts of our system of government, they will create defiance and undermine the authority of the law itself. And frankly, I don't like where that would lead out nation.

It is a dangerous path that Democrats can stop our nation from taking. All they have to do is disavow their allegiance to the DSA, and refuse to a part of the DSA political agenda.

Do I see Democrats disavowing their support and allegiance to the DSA, and maybe refuse to a part of the DSA's political agenda? Do I see Democrats doing that in the best interest of America? No. No, I don't.

Proof of this took place on September 1, 2026, when the U.S. House of Representatives passed a resolution introduced by Representative Jeff Crank (R-CO) by a vote of 220–192.

The resolution condemned Socialism in all its forms and condemned the DSA agenda. The resolution argued that Socialist policies conflict with American Constitutional values. While it passed with 220 votes, 192 Democrats voted against the resolution, subsequently giving support to the DSA and their Socialist / Communist agenda.

It's a very sad commentary on what motivates Democrats. If you don't think so, look at it this way, it's a fact of life in America today that the DSA's long-term goals, which include abolishing the U.S. Senate, the Office of the President, the Supreme Court, taking away our Rights and Liberties, abolishing our Constitution and Bill of Rights, taking away our rights to own property, and all of the other radical changes that they propose to destabilize American democracy, is all supported by Democrats.

Socialists policies rob people of their individual liberty, foster government dependency, and undermine economic incentives. Individuals who have lived under or escaped authoritarian Communist and Socialist regimes often warn against the expansion of state control, pointing to historical and ongoing examples where command economies led to severe restrictions on personal freedom, political dissent, economic hardship, and slave labor. Sadly, Democrats refuse to accept these facts. And instead, still see Socialism and Communism as their drug of choice.

Tom Correa

What Democrats Want In 2026

2026-10-31T15:14:54.426-07:00

What are the issues that Democrats are concerned with in 2026 -- besides Impeaching President Trump again?

Well, Democrats are focused on bringing back the destruction and authoritarian Biden Administration. Democrats had 4 years to use the Biden Administration's regulatory actions, executive orders, and economic policies to attack the American people through dictatorial overreach. Under the Biden Administration, working-class Americans felt the economic hardship brought on by Biden's policies which resulted in high interest rates, elevated consumer prices, and high housing costs. Now they see their chance to bring it back in 2026.

Under the Biden administration, Democrats made sure our cities felt the pain and so did rural America. Democrats policies across the board, on everything dealing with Americans society, jobs, the economy, crime, quality of life, and more was adversely affected by Democrats who have wanted to destroy our nation in whatever way they can.

And don't fool yourself, Democrats are okay with high inflation, higher taxes, drug cartels shipping drugs into our country, high crime rates, more murder, rioting, anarchy in the streets, Illegal Alien criminal gangs, human trafficking, open borders, attacks on our freedoms, and Americans being unable to afford groceries and gas.

Today, Democrats say they are concerned with affordability and cost of living. But, let's remember that they did nothing but make life unaffordable and the cost of living higher during the Biden years.

Democrats say they can bring down the price of everyday goods. But they raised the price of goods and the store shelves were empty during the Biden Administration because Biden embraced the Green New Deal and targeted American Oil. Gas was almost $6 a gallon under Biden and the Democrats, and it was because of the Climate Change policies.

Those same policies drove businesses out of the country, put millions of Americans out of work, and has had a lasting negative impact on construction jobs, manufacturing, ranching and farming. Negatives that we've spent the last two years coming back from.

Let's remember that the environmental regulations that Democrats forced on American, such as those targeting carbon emissions or traditional energy production, lead to job losses, higher energy costs, and reduced economic growth in industrial and rural communities. Compliance costs to businesses are often passed down to consumers, raising the prices of everyday goods and services and disproportionately impacting low- and middle-income families. But frankly, I don't think Democrats give a shit about any of that.

Take for example how trade tariffs are bringing in a lot of money into the United States. Democrats don't like the sort of success that we're seeing and want to end it. If Democrats get their way, they will try to reverse Trade Tariffs implemented by the Trump administration to be again in favor of other countries instead of ours. If the Democrats get their way, they will put American trade in a dumpster again.

Democrats say they are concerned about Healthcare Costs and want to increase taxes to pay for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) cuts that Republicans brought in stop funding free medical to people here illegally. Democrat-controlled California spends Billions of Taxpayer dollars to provide free medial to illegal aliens, that's one reason why California is broke and things are getting worst.

Democrat immigration policies prioritize the interests of undocumented immigrants over native-born American citizens. And frankly, Democrats like it that way.

Democrats want investigation and Impeachment of President Trump again. This time, they will use his war with Iran and his attacks on Mexican Drug Cartels to try to Impeach him. Democrats have promised to "go after" Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) who they have villainized for the last few years. They want to disband Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, as well as going after Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for his management of vaccine policies and resistance to more LGBTQ gender surgeries of children.

Democrats are all for federal spending to spread their LGBTQ agenda to other countries using USAID as their weapon to make other countries accept the Gay Lifestyle in their countries. And yes, it's true, the Obama and Biden Administrations "Weaponize American Humanitarian Aid" to force culturally unacceptable LGBTQ practices on other nations.

Yes, both the Obama and Biden administrations explicitly directed U.S. agencies to use diplomacy and foreign assistance to advance the human rights of LGBTQ individuals globally. Whether this policy constitutes the "weaponization" of aid to force culturally unacceptable practices depends heavily on your political and cultural perspective. To me, forcing other cultures to accept something that is historically and traditionally unacceptable or get U.S. Humanitarian Aid refused, all so that Democrats can further their Gay Agenda, is criminal.

The implementation of those policies, their underlying intentions, and the use of U.S. Humanitarian Aid to force other nations to accept the Democrat's Gay Agenda is documented. The official policy of the Obama Administration (2011) was set by President Barack Obama when he issued a first-of-its-kind presidential memorandum directing all federal agencies engaged abroad to ensure that U.S. foreign assistance and diplomacy focused on combating the criminalization of LGBT conduct in foreign countries.

While President Donald Trump ended the policy of coercion to force other nations to accept lifestyles and cultural changes they did not want, President Joe Biden restarted the Obama policy in 2021. And yes, the Biden Administration decided to go one step further by explicitly ordering agencies to consider a country's treatment of LGBTQI+ persons when making Humanitarian Aid decisions no matter how bad the crisis. In some cases, Biden actually imposed financial sanctions or scaled back the amount of Foreign aid for countries engaged that did not accept the Democrat's Gay Agenda.

It is a fact that both Obama and Biden used USAID funding to specifically target nations who refused to accept the LGBTQ agenda being promoted by those presidents.

And by the way, Democrats don't like War Secretary Pete Hegseth's handling of the war with Iran. They want to stop it even if it means we surrender and allow Iran to have Nuclear Weapons. Of course, Democrats don't want to address the question of what to do with an Iran that is willing to attack anyone with a Nuclear Weapons?

When pressed on the financial burden that we've feeling in the way of higher gas prices, War Secretary Pete Hegseth has correctly framed the issue by asking Democrats a simple question, "What would you pay to ensure Iran does not get a nuclear bomb?"

The Trump Administration views the high price of military operations as a justified trade-off to neutralize an existential threat to the world. And frankly, for me, since I remember paying as high as $8 for a gallon of gas during a trip to Monterey when Biden was in office, and the average price of gas was almost $6 a gallon under because of Biden's Climate Change policies which were a hoax, I don't mind spending more on gas to stop Iran from having Nuclear Weapons. No, I don't mind at all, especially if it stops those crazy Iranians from starting a Nuclear War.

Of course, that doesn't matter to the Democrats who say that the conflict with Iran is an "unauthorized war" that they want stopped. It's the same with the Drug Cartel drug boat strikes, Democrats want it stopped and they don't care if more killer drugs come into the United States.

Most Americans agree with the Trump administration's view that their strikes against the Mexican Drug Cartel's drug boats has been a major success. Secretary Hegseth has argued that treating these cartels with the same military force applied to FTOs has successfully curtailed the flow of illicit drugs and criminal gangs entering the United States. But that doesn't matter to Democrats.

The same situation took place with Joe Biden's Open Border policy that let in all sorts of criminal gangs. Democrats refused to secure our border. They refused to. Instead, they lied about the negative impact their Open Border policy was having on our country.

Whether Democrats want to admit it or not, the Biden administration systematically dismantled stricter immigration enforcement measures and allowed a massive surge in unauthorized border crossings. This increased crime in America across the board.

The Biden Administration intentionally weakened border security served as an incentive that fueled record-high migrant encounters, which peaked at nearly 2.5 million in fiscal year 2023. Between the Biden Administration allowing what took place on the border and the Biden Administration flying in Illegals, Democrats willingly allowed international criminal organizations and gangs, such as Tren de Aragua, to infiltrate and get a foothold in American communities. Of course, registering Illegal Aliens to vote in our elections for Democrats was one of their schemes.

Democrats lied to Americans, and still do today, when they say they are for protecting Democracy and voting rights and safeguarding election integrity. They look at "Voter Fraud" as an "Election Conspiracy Theory" while at the same time registering Illegal Aliens who are ineligible to vote. Of course, Democrats register dead people and even dead pets to vote. But the curious, unanswered question is, how do they vote when they are dead -- but somehow do?

As for corruption in government? Democrats were missing in action for 4 years when Hunter Biden and the Biden Family as a whole were making all sorts of deals with Foreign governments that paid them very well.

Remember Hunter Biden's Paint by the numbers artwork? A lot of Hunter Biden's artwork sold for a lot of money to people who wanted to do their part for the Biden Family crime syndicate. Democrats were no where to be found for years when they were needed to investigate the Biden Family's international business dealings linked to directly to President Joe Biden -- also known as "The Big Guy."

Of course, now though, Democrats have found the light and have become the self-righteous hypocrites that they have always been. That's why they now want to return to office and go after the Trump Family and their business finances. Democrats want to investigate the Trumps, who are probably the most investigated family in American history. But, where's the shock.

Going after the Trump Family is all Democrats have to do if they return to power and take the House in a few days. Because their donors are no giving as much as they did before the Democrat Party went full-Communist, Democrats think they can make a lot of money by Impeaching President Trump again. That's why they want to return to office. They're all about Impeaching Trump again.

Tom Correa

Why Democrats Are Against Term Limits For Congress

2026-10-27T10:45:27.216-07:00

President Donald Trump has renewed attention around term limits for members of Congress. He is supporting the idea of restricting how long members of Congress can remain in office in Washington. Like many Americans, President Trump believes elected offices should not be in office forever. American should make it so that the Constitution determines when politicians leave office. Not politicians.

Trump originally proposed limiting House members to six years and senators to 12 years during his 2016 presidential campaign, arguing that career politicians and decades of special interest influence had contributed to corruption in Washington.
The idea gained renewed momentum in January 2025 when Senator Ted Cruz and Representative Ralph Norman introduced a Constitutional Amendment proposing those same limits. If approved, House members could serve three (3) terms and Senators just two (2).

Let's make something really clear, this is something that an overwhelming majority of Americans support term limits for Congress. Americans are sick and tired of "Career Politicians." Americans overwhelmingly believe the partisanship is ultimately harmful for our nation. And yes, most Americans see most "Career Politicians" as crooked and serving their political party instead of the American people.

In fact, a Pew Research Center survey shows that 87% of Americans favor term limits for members of Congress, with strong, equal support from both Democrats and Republicans. That's a huge significant majority of Americans across the political spectrum. That's something that Washington should not ignore. The people support establishing term limits for members of Congress.

According to polling data from sources like the Pew Research Center and Gallup, public support for this policy consistently ranges between 80% and 90%.
The debate over congressional term limits involves several key perspectives on how they would impact the federal government:

The Constitutional requirement to make imposing term limits on Congress requires a U.S. Constitutional Amendment. In U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton (1995), the Supreme Court ruled that individual states cannot place term limits on their federal lawmakers.

As for support for Term Limits coming from lawmakers in Congress, while an entrenched power-hungry old Leftist like Bernie Sanders is against it, just as most Democrats are, Republican Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Republican Alabama Sen. Katie Britt (R-AL) have introduced joint resolutions to limit Senators to two terms and Representatives to three terms, though these measures frequently stall in committee.

As for how it benefits Americans, reducing incumbent advantage means long-serving incumbents, those "Career Politicians" who have been in office for decades have a massive fundraising and name-recognition advantage over newcomers. In most cases, that makes elections unfair and uncompetitive.

Americans are well aware that people enter Congress to get rich!

Congressional tenure is all about increasing one's personal wealth. How else can they become Millionaires in a relatively short time while in Congress?

Members of Congress earn a set annual salary, which is currently fixed at $174,000 for rank-and-file members unless adjusted by law. They also participate in the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS), where pension benefits increase based on years of service, though federal law prohibits members from collecting full pensions immediately upon leaving office without meeting age and service requirements.

So how do they become so wealthy? Well, members of Congress hard not afraid to leverage the inside knowledge that comes with their positions. That's why lawmakers frequently trade stocks and options. Because of their positions, they are offered book deals and with royalties that average people would never see. In fact, unlike standard outside employment, book royalties are not subject to the strict statutory income caps imposed on members of Congress. High-profile members frequently secure very lucrative publishing contracts, with some earning hundreds of thousands of dollars annually from book sales. Imagine that, and they get others to write their books.

And no, let's not forget their speaking fees and media events. While outside earned income limits restrict certain types of professional pay, their public appearances are bring in a lot of money. They are highly compensated for their speaking engagements. Many of the members of Congress actually utilize their "Celebrity Status" to boost their personal income.

As for other money that they get? Well, Congressional lawmakers establish "Leadership Political Action Committees" (PACs) to raise money to help elect other members of their party. That's the front in that con game.

Since Federal election laws regarding how Leadership PAC funds can be spent are considered notoriously loose compared to standard campaign accounts, some lawmakers use these PACs to fund lavish lifestyles. In fact, that's partly how some of them afford five-star dinners, luxury resort stays, golf trips, and high-end travel. It's all under the guise of "political fundraising."

Many of us truly believe that Term Limits for Congress would curb corruption. Many of us believe that limiting terms would break up entrenched political networks and diminish the influence of special interest groups and lobbyists.

If we can get those "Career Politicians" out of Congress, the people who own those "Career Politicians," might not be so fortunate to buy the next guy. And please don't fool yourself into thinking there isn't a lot of temptation out there from wealthy Special Interest Groups who donate millions to election campaigns.

From Billionaire Climate Change donors who are trying to destroy America, to the Drug Cartels and the Human Traffickers who some lawmakers in Congress have actually defended when they are killed. Yes, the very people they kept in business by having Open Borders, the people at Big Pharma who pay millions of dollars to Congressmen and women to push harmful medicines on Americans, there is a lot of money out there to corrupt corruptible politicians.

Did Democrat Sen Elizabeth Warren take Big Pharma money? According to sources online, yes. Senator Elizabeth Warren's campaign committees have accepted money tied to the pharmaceutical and health products industry.
She has received corporate Political Action Committees (PACs) donations and contributions from individuals in the industry.

Early in her Senate career, her committee accepted thousands of dollars from three specific pharmaceutical PACs. Later, her campaign accepted thousands more from a family member of the family who owned Purdue Pharma. According to tracking by an organization who tracks political contributions, Warren's 2020 Presidential campaign received over $600,000 from individuals in the "Pharmaceuticals/Health Products" industry. When including the broader health sector that total exceeded $5 Million. Depending on the election cycles pooled together, records indicate she has received between $800,000 and $855,000 from individuals associated with the pharmaceutical industry.

Trump Administration's Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and South Carolina Republican Representative Nancy Mace cite that Democrat Sen Elizabeth Warren received at least $5.2 million total from the Big Pharma. So to answer your question, from what I can figure out, yes, Massachusetts Democrat Sen Elizabeth Warren accepts Big Pharma money.

As for your question, have members of Congress received "under the table" money from the Drug Cartels and Human Traffickers in exchange for keeping the border open during the Obama and Biden Administrations?

Well, besides Democrats fighting very hard to keep the border wide open to allow criminal illegals and Cartel Gangs to get a foothold in the United States during the Biden Administration, we know that Democrat lawmakers raised strong objections to President Trump using military strikes to target and eliminate Drug Cartel smuggling boats in the Caribbean and Pacific.

I remember watching Democrats vehemently arguing to stop President Trump from stopping the Drug Cartels from bringing killer drugs into the United States. As crazy as it sounds. It's a fact that Democrats argued that the strikes are being carried out without proper Congressional authorization or consultation under war powers. Democrats said President Trump did not have legal justifications to stop those drug boats from bring in illegal drugs.

Democrats Senators Adam Schiff and Tim Kaine introduced joint resolutions to restrict President Trump from attacking those drug runners. Schiff and Kaine were suspiciously supported by Republicans Rand Paul and Lisa Murkowski who also seem to have an interest in working for the Drug Cartels who were running illegal drugs into the United States on the boats that President Trump was sinking. Frankly, I remember how it really looked strange because it almost appeared as if there were members of Congress working for the Drug Cartels.

President Trump ended up placing a "Terrorist Designation" on the Drug Cartels to defend his his operations against Democrats who really and truly were looking like they were working for the Drug Cartels. It was a very strange bizarre situation.

On one hand Americans watched as President Trump had Drug Cartel drug boat blown up. On the other were Democrat leaders in Congress angry about it, and demanding that President Trump stop it. It was as if Democrats were angry that something real was being done about Drug Cartels drug runner boat. But they were even angrier that they couldn't help the Drug Cartels by getting President Trump to stop.

When it was going on, I had reader writing to ask me if I thought Democrats were being exposed for being on the payrolls of the Mexican Drug Cartels. It's true. Some of my readers questioned if Democrats Adam Schiff and Tim Kaine, and Republicans Rand Paul and Lisa Murkowski, were getting paid by the Drug Cartels to keep illegal drugs coming into the United States -- while President Trump was trying to stop it.

Democrats tried to say that their opposition to President Trump's attacks on Mexican Drug Cartels and their bringing drugs into the United States was over their concerns regarding "legality, war powers, transparency, and oversight."

The problem that Democrats have with saying that is that they were not concerned at all with "transparency or oversight" when the Biden Administration's Open Border policy allowed Mexican Drug Cartels to get a foothold in many American cities while bringing in historically high amounts of illegal killer drugs. Democrats only seem to care when President Trump decided to stop the Cartels. And yes, that's why Americans were saying that it looked like Democrats worked for the Cartels, were getting paid by the Cartels, were getting paid by the Cartels to stop President Trump. The Democrat's "TDS" hatred for President Trump made them look like they were supporting the Drug Cartels.

Of course, no matter how bad it looked for Democrats attacking President Trump for trying to stop those Drug Cartel drug boats, or how bad it looked for Democrats Adam Schiff and Tim Kaine and Republicans Rand Paul and Lisa Murkowski, no one really knows if members of Congress have received illegal political "contributions" from Drug Cartels.

As for illegal political "contributions" being made by nefarious elements or individuals, there are organizations that actually try to track those sorts of political contributions. Most of those organization argue that large donations from corporations like Planned Parenthood, and industry groups such as pharmaceutical companies, and wealthy individuals like George Soros, lead to a system where members of Congress prioritize the interests of major donors over those of their own constituents. Their reliance on wealthy donors creates a wall for candidates without access to significant financial networks to serve the public. That's one way how the corrupt stay in office.

Congressional term limits restricts the number of terms a lawmaker can serve, and subsequently would reduce the power of entrenched "Career Politicians." So instead of owing their allegiance to whoever offers them more money for them to either push through or stall legislation, members of Congress would owe their allegiance to us the American people as it should be. Sadly, only a few look at it that way now.

By encouraging "Citizen Legislators," something that our Founders envisioned, Americans believe regular turnover prevents entrenched "Career Politicians" and brings fresh perspectives aligned with everyday American citizens. By encouraging the right attitude toward public service through Term Limits, Americans can return to the ideal of a "Citizen Legislature" where individuals serve for a limited time and then return to their communities.

As for reducing partisanship, many Americans, including myself, believe that bringing in new legislators would bring fresh perspectives, potentially reducing the deep partisan gridlock often associated with long-tenured politicians who see their office as a "cash-cow" instead of a place to do "public service."

Opponents to Term Limits for Congress are many of the lawmakers themselves because Term Limits would severely limit their chance, or outright kill, their ability to become wealthy in Congress. The "Career Politicians" that we have in office today fight against Term Limits for themselves by trying to scare the American people into believing that a "forced turnover strips Congress of experienced lawmakers would shift real power to unelected staff members and permanent lobbyists who understand the legislative process."

Democrats go on to say that "Seasoned Legislators" build cross-aisle relationships and have "expertise" that helps them negotiate and pass complex bipartisan legislation, and that constant turnover reduces these personal ties. That should aggravate you to no end.

Politicians say such things thinking the American people is stupid and can't see the collusion, the corruption, and how unelected government bureaucrats in the Federal government are already in control of things behind the scenes. That's not a "conspiracy theory," that information in the news on a daily basis.

Most Americans completely understand the benefit of how mandatory rotation would serve us well by weakening the relationships between long-tenured politicians, and by eliminating such conspiracies between cohorts. And example of that is what we all saw take place when a Democrat-controlled Congress waged its coup to impeach President Trump on charges that we later found out were criminally fabricated.

Mandatory rotation after a few years would lessen the special interest control on Congress and hopefully stop some of the corruption and lack of respect for the American people. And frankly, that's why "Career Politicians" who are completely unwilling to do anything good for America are against term limits.

But they are willing to shield fellow-Democrat politicians under investigation. That's exactly what's taken place today, October 27, 2026, when nearly 200 House Democrats moved to shield fellow-Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., from further investigation after federal investigators raided her Washington, D.C., home earlier this month.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., led 175 members of the House Democratic Caucus in a letter to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Markwayne Mullin and Attorney General Todd Blanche, criticizing the probe into Omar's immigration history as a partisan attack and accusing them of trying to sway her bid for another term in Congress.

Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar, whose name may be an alias and not her real name, is now under Federal investigation over allegations she lied on immigration paperwork to obtain her citizenship when her family fled Somalia in the late 1990s.

Her fellow House Democrats argue that the Department of Justice investigation are not "objective pursuit of justice." Others, however, like Republican House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., have called for Omar to be jailed and deported if the accusations are proven true. And really, since Democrats like to say "No one is above the law," why not allow the administration of justice to run it's course.

It Ilhan Omar, whose name may be an alias and not her real name, is innocent, then the Department of Justice investigation did it's job and conducted oversight into corruption in our government. Of course, if she is found guilty, then the Department of Justice investigation did it's job and conducted oversight into corruption in our government. Either way, it's a win for Americans who are tired of seeing politicians break the law without having to face any consequences.

The point is, corrupt politicians from both sides of the aisle should be held to adhere to the law. And yes, I feel that those Democrats, those 175 House Democrats who came out "to demand" that their fellow-Democrat be exempted from "legality, transparency, and oversight" conducted by the Department of Justice, are using their power as members of Congress to violate the law. And frankly, I'm tired of seeing our laws applying to me and you, but not Democrats in Washington.

In August 2026, President Trump said he was comfortable with Congressional term limits but also warned that forcing experienced lawmakers out could leave Washington with inexperienced replacements.

While I have a huge amount of respect for President Trump, and I fully support him, if what we see coming out of Congress is an example of how good things are with the "experienced" team in there, I say America won't be that bad off if they are replaced with novices. In fact, if it was in my power, I'd fire a bunch of them -- starting with those who are completely unaware of the fact that they really and truly are supposed to be working for Americans. Not globalists or the people of other countries, but for Americans.

Do I think it can happen? Do I think Term Limits for Congress is possible? No. No, I don't.

The proposal for Term Limits for Congress would require approval from two thirds of Congress and ratification by three fourths of the states before becoming law. That means many of the Congressmen and women would want to consciously relinquish the power that they have. And really, would they want to consciously want to give up their ability to accumulate wealth? And frankly, they would never let that happen.

For example, Bernie Sanders was mayor of a Vermont town before entering Congress. He's served in Congress for 35 years both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Can I see that old Leftist Bernie Sanders relinquishing his power and standing in the Democratic Party, or give up the wealth that he has accumulated for himself since entering Congress, just to make way for a new member who might be from Vermont, possibly not a Leftist, and maybe even believe in prioritizing the needs of Americans first before helping the rest of the world? I don't.

Bringing fresh voices into government is not easy because of the power and wealth of "Career Politicians" like Sanders. So no, I don't see such a thing ever happening -- especially if we left it up to Democrat members of Congress to limit their terms for the good of the nation. From what I can see, Democrats in Congress don't care about the good of the nation. In fact, I don't think Democrats like Americans. If they did, they wouldn't treat Americans with the disdain that they show us.

Democrat leadership and their party's policies and legislative priorities are disconnected from the everyday needs of ordinary Americans. That's why the Democratic Party as a whole is more focused on consolidating party power, advancing federal oversight, and catering to specific interest groups rather than serving the public good.

As for answering the question, why are Democrats so against mandatory Term Limits for Congress? They are against it because it would stop them from having power and wealth. And of course, they are against it because President Trump and a huge majority of the American people are for it. That's how Democrats roll.

That's just how I see it.

Tom Correa