Presidential Third Terms?

Discussion in 'World Events' started by goofyfish, Apr 18, 2003.

  1. goofyfish Analog By Birth, Digital By Design Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,331
    My brother predicted last year that if George W. Bush was reelected, the GOP would immediately start pushing for repeal of the 22nd amendment — the one limiting presidents to two terms.

    I scoffed, but it turns out the effort has already begun. On January 7, Congressman Jose E. Sarrano introduced a House Joint Resolution to do that very thing. But Mr. Serrano is no Bush supporter. He’s a liberal Democrat born in Puerto Rico who represents the Bronx. All I can figure is that he’s setting up Bill Clinton for a third term. Then maybe a fourth, a fifth?

    The 22nd amendment was the work of Republicans terrified that another FDR would come along. But they stepped on their own, uh, shoestrings. Except for that amendment, the GOP probably could have stuffed Eisenhower and kept him in office till the moths got him — same thing with Reagan.

    Peace.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. heflores Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,103
    To the naked eye, people might say, there is nothing wrong with a third term election, afterall, it is still an election and people have a say on who to put in office.

    The real problem lies in the fact that a sitting president enjoys much more insight and benefits and power than other candidates, so with time, he'll eventually monopolize everything and will weaken all resistance....much like what happened in the middleeast.....limiting the terms to maximum two is an extremely important rule for democracy and for making sure that presidents don't invest a lot in the white house, like their kids for instance.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. hotsexyangelprincess WMD Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    716
    Do you actually think that the GOP will ever be able repeal the 22nd Amendment? :m:
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    i really dont understand that

    here the paten goes (genrally) BIG shift to one side, gradual erosen of that, big swing the OTHER way

    we have no limits

    edit: GOD i need to work on my spelling
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2003
  8. Don Hakman Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    619
    A family of Kings named Bush
    play with armies like toys
    they invade foreign lands
    and as they expand
    they appoint a ruling Viceroy.
     
  9. Coldrake Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    808
    It will be very difficult. It requires either a 2/3 vote in both houses of Congress, or a proposal from 2/3 of the states (34), to get the proposal for an amendment to repeal brought up for ratification. It would then require a 3/4 vote of the states (38) for ratification. It is not likely to happen. Only the 18th Amendment (prohibition) has ever been repealed (by the 21st amendment). As many times as people in the states have brought up repeal of the 16th Amendment (taxation), it has never been seriously brought up for vote in COngress.
     
  10. goofyfish Analog By Birth, Digital By Design Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,331
    Please note: It is a Democrat, not a Republican.

    :m: Peace.
     
  11. Joeman Eviiiiiiiil Clown Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,448
    Career politicians suck.
     
  12. heflores Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,103
    You know Goofy, I'm a democrate, but the day that the US is so desperate to bring one of it's presidents from the shelf after they have served two terms, is "The day the music died". For god sake, there are millions of fine youth who make great politicians....let's pick one....I pick you goofy, if you're above 30 you'll qualify.
     
  13. Jerrek Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,548
    It has been tried before, several times. I don't think it would succeed. And I hope not.
     
  14. Clockwood You Forgot Poland Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,467
    No third terms unless you skip 4 years after the second. If anyone tried to make a direct 3rd term leagal he would be laughed out of washington. Plus nobody would vote for him again out of fear of the consequences.
     
  15. Salty Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    667
    The problem is incumbrance term limit limits this so thats why it needs to be in place.
     
  16. Clockwood You Forgot Poland Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,467
    I myself think a president should only have one term but that's me.
     
  17. Hannibal Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    128
    If the 22nd Amendment is repealed, it’s no longer a republic but a friendly dictatorship.
     
  18. Jerrek Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,548
    How do you figure that? I think the 22nd Amendment is an improvement over having no limit at all, but hardly necessary. Our founding fathers sure didn't think so. Do you call the United States before 1964 or whenever it was created a dictatorship?
     
  19. Coldrake Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    808
    I don't think so. The way the 22nd reads 2 terms is it, unless you finished out the term of a president who left office less than 2 years into his term. Then you could only be elected to 1 more term. But I don't read the Constitution as allowing a gap between terms to break up the 2 terms rule.
     

Share This Page