Repealing The 22nd Amendment

[Milk and Holy Water]

I am interested to know what the opinion of the ATG is concerning this bill.

This is the original text of the bill as it was written by its sponsor and submitted to the House for consideration.

HJ 5 IH

111th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. J. RES. 5

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 6, 2009

Mr. SERRANO introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

‘Article--

‘The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.’


Oh, boy.

Okay. I think we are all pretty sure that something this ridiculous will not pass. But, hypothetically, what impact do you think this will have?

Personally, I think that the federal government in general is a clumsy bureaucratic mess that has proven on multiple occasions that it is either incapable or unwilling to serve the desires of it's citizenry.

King George W., the former Puppet On The Right already made incredible power plays that effectively and greatly extended the range of the powers of the executive branch. Now, with the Puppet On The Left in power (though, I've personally almost always shared the majority of my values with the Illusion of The Left) I can't see this being a win in the name of personal freedom. After having such a terrible eight years, do we really want to risk losing all checks and balances on the gamble that Obama isn't in the pockets of the same rich assholes bent on keeping the proletariat down? Maybe under an leftist administration, our healthcare may get better, and maybe we won't look like monsters to the rest of the world, and maybe the christian right won't be able to made insane demands over individual bodies (I speak, of course, of both the pointless waste of money, resources, and life that is war on drugs and the laughably named 'war for life'), but how sure are we? Do we want to risk it on the long bet that this wealthy, upper-class man will give a s**t about how I am doing, or the needs of my tribe?  

[Thaliat Everwood]

Holy mother freakin'...for anyone who thought it might be a good idea, think of your least favorite head of state (past or present) being able to remain President indefinitely. Majorly bad idea. Think of what you'd have to do to get them out of office...

Yeesh.

Two consecutive terms at 4 years is pretty good I think. The opportunity to get fresh ideas in with a new presidential perspective is a good thing. Plus 8 years does give time for some decent accomplishments, if you are good enough to get that second term.

If any change should be made down the way, perhaps it would be to at an additional year to the term so each term is 5 years rather than 4, but I see no need for more than that.

Also, being President is highly stressful. I think beyond two terms and we are running the risk of some major on the job burnout. Seriously, I do not like the idea of an overly strung out head of state with his finger on the red button. Very bad decisions are made under copious amounts of stress.

I really would not want Yak Orama in office indefinitely. What a headache that would be! I don't believe he will make good on many of his campaign promises, like most politicians. Hopefully he'll do some good in office, but I'm not putting all my eggs in one basket for one man no matter how smooth he may talk. That would be really dumb, especially in this day of scandal and trickery. Give him his 4-8 years, then on to some fresh blood and ideas. For better or for worse...at least we know that if we don't like the guy (or gal) we can eventually vote in someone new and try again!  

[Milk and Holy Water]

Thaliat Everwood

Holy mother freakin'...for anyone who thought it might be a good idea, think of your least favorite head of state (past or present) being able to remain President indefinitely. Majorly bad idea. Think of what you'd have to do to get them out of office...

Yeesh.

Two consecutive terms at 4 years is pretty good I think. The opportunity to get fresh ideas in with a new presidential perspective is a good thing. Plus 8 years does give time for some decent accomplishments, if you are good enough to get that second term.

If any change should be made down the way, perhaps it would be to at an additional year to the term so each term is 5 years rather than 4, but I see no need for more than that.

Also, being President is highly stressful. I think beyond two terms and we are running the risk of some major on the job burnout. Seriously, I do not like the idea of an overly strung out head of state with his finger on the red button. Very bad decisions are made under copious amounts of stress.

I really would not want Yak Orama in office indefinitely. What a headache that would be! I don't believe he will make good on many of his campaign promises, like most politicians. Hopefully he'll do some good in office, but I'm not putting all my eggs in one basket for one man no matter how smooth he may talk. That would be really dumb, especially in this day of scandal and trickery. Give him his 4-8 years, then on to some fresh blood and ideas. For better or for worse...at least we know that if we don't like the guy (or gal) we can eventually vote in someone new and try again!

My thoughts exactly.  

[Duke of Balls]

Okay. I have been saying this for a while now. Who else was popular and then completely killed alot of people to justify his "cause"? Hitler did. I seriously think that Obama has some secrative little plan going on to have something go his way. We are all going down, people. We are now QUADRILLIONS in debt, and our dollar lost half of its value because of ONE speech. This all is not helping the US. It is cousing the US to split apart, and soon the United States mught not be so United anymore.

~Dissy  

[lazycommie]

All I have to say on the subject is "I told you so". If this passes, the big zero will be "prez for life". Think Chavez.


Disturbed: He's closer to Stalin than Hitler, politically, given that he's now nationalizing banks and industry as per marxist-leninist socialism. I agree that eventually he will wind up being responsible for countless deaths(as Stalin was, 25 million minimum in the "great purge" alone), though. Again, the best example of him is Chavez.


Milk: You actually expect good from him? He's no better than(and in many cases much worse than) Bush.  

[Sanzoskitsune]

Lazy do me a favor and shut the hell up. We get it you hate Obama. You are not forced to like him and you can wish him to hell all you want. Fact of the matter is he's not the one pushing this bill. You only see all this bad stuff about him because you hate him. I'm not saying he's perfect he's just not as horrible as you say. I'm getting tired of every time I come in here to read posts you're acting like Obama is the freakin devil or something. If you're going to comment on things at least stick to the subject and don't come in here just to bash on Obama PLEASE!

As for the subject at hand, I honestly think eight years is fine limit for presidents. It's long enough that they can do something yet short enough that hey, if they start to ******** up we always get a fresh slate later.  

[lazycommie]

Sanzoskitsune

Lazy do me a favor and shut the hell up. We get it you hate Obama. You are not forced to like him and you can wish him to hell all you want. Fact of the matter is he's not the one pushing this bill. You only see all this bad stuff about him because you hate him. I'm not saying he's perfect he's just not as horrible as you say. I'm getting tired of every time I come in here to read posts you're acting like Obama is the freakin devil or something. If you're going to comment on things at least stick to the subject and don't come in here just to bash on Obama PLEASE!

As for the subject at hand, I honestly think eight years is fine limit for presidents. It's long enough that they can do something yet short enough that hey, if they start to ******** up we always get a fresh slate later.

Quote:

But, hypothetically, what impact do you think this will have?

The thread asked what one thinks would come if this bill passes. Given that the big zero is president at this time, and how the system is rigged, he would continue to get elected time and time again, or simply not even have to get elected any more. I stated what impact I think this would have. You getting pissed at me for stating it is on you.

He is not pushing this bill, however his supporters are.  

[Sanzoskitsune]

I'm not pissed at your opinion Lazy, I'm pissed that you bash on Obama even when it has NOTHING to do with the conversation at hand. The "I told you so" part makes it sound like it was totally his idea and its all his fault and blah blah blah, no it isn't. This bill has been trying to pass for YEARS, its never passed and never will pass but that's beside the point. Fact is this has nothing to do with Obama and you're making it so just to bash on him and THAT'S what's frustrating.  

[lazycommie]

Sanzoskitsune

I'm not pissed at your opinion Lazy, I'm pissed that you bash on Obama even when it has NOTHING to do with the conversation at hand. The "I told you so" part makes it sound like it was totally his idea and its all his fault and blah blah blah, no it isn't. This bill has been trying to pass for YEARS, its never passed and never will pass but that's beside the point. Fact is this has nothing to do with Obama and you're making it so just to bash on him and THAT'S what's frustrating.

The "I told you so" relates not only to my thread, but to what I literally have been saying since before November. People will try something like this, and it will invariably come from the left(as it almost always does, although Bush sure didn't make the right look spotless either). Do you honestly think the zero actually disapproves of it? Why has it only come to a head now if not for his support of it?

I have a feeling I'll wind up saying "I told you so", continually for as long as the internet stays up in the coming years.

The thread involved what would happen if this passes, which I adressed. Zero is in power, and if this passes he would essentially be president for life in a Chavez-esque style.  

[Sanzoskitsune]

...I'm informing you now that I am ignoring you from now on. I am getting tired of your condescending attitude and the attitude that just because someone is on the left or liberal they MUST be stupid. I'm not saying that either side is perfect but its insulting to read your comments that make anyone that disagrees with you sound like an idiot. If you don't get that that's why I'm pissed off then I'm not going to waste my time.

By the way just because people have recently found out about this bill trying to pass doesn't mean it hasn't been trying to pass for a long time, hell maybe being pushed by the exact same people. I don't know and I'll freely admit that.  

[lazycommie]

Sanzoskitsune

...I'm informing you now that I am ignoring you from now on. I am getting tired of your condescending attitude and the attitude that just because someone is on the left or liberal they MUST be stupid. I'm not saying that either side is perfect but its insulting to read your comments that make anyone that disagrees with you sound like an idiot. If you don't get that that's why I'm pissed off then I'm not going to waste my time.

By the way just because people have recently found out about this bill trying to pass doesn't mean it hasn't been trying to pass for a long time, hell maybe being pushed by the exact same people. I don't know and I'll freely admit that.

I don't intentionally try to make people sound like an idiot. If I did, I'd make a lot more people sound like idiots, because it would be interesting. Something you should keep in mind when reading my posts is to not try and read my "implications". I don't imply, I just say. Unless I'm deliberately being sarcastic, everything said is to be taken at face value. I tend to try and speak the way I do because I'm used to talking to people who have limited English language skills, and also because I hate having to try and explain myself multiple times. It's frustrating as all hell, but I do anyway because I have to try and be clear with people. If you get offended because of how I say things, don't.

As far as the left goes, I wouldn't say "stupid" so much as "lacking in factual grounding for their theories and, in the case of leftist leaders and politicians, unwilling to practice what they preach", which could be summed up as "people who's ideas are good in theory, but not in practice". I'm fine with leftist theories and such, but I'd much rather they stay theories.

As far as "liberals"(speaking of modern liberalism, not classical liberalism which is a vastly different thing) go, it should be no secret that I consider what they push to be a**-backwards. If this offends you, that's fine. I'll gladly discuss with them about things, but they should not expect me to agree with anything they say, and to be quite vocal about my disagreement.

This bill has come up whenever it gains support. When a bill stalls, it's because of lack of support from higherups, or rarely, from massive disagreement and uproar(good example is HR 6257, which was stopped that way). When it's the former, sometimes said bills come back. In this case, it's the left in general who seems to be supporting it. This specific bill is new, and the result of rabid support from a handful of hardcore zero supporters(and most likely himself, but that's idle speculation on my part and shall remain no more than that until confirmed). To deny that a man who has shown complete disregard for the constitution in the past, and has already begun nationalizing things would absolutely love to be able to be in power even longer than otherwise would be to deny the obvious.  

[Sanzoskitsune]

If you don't see how calling something someone believes in a**-backwards would be offensive then you are an idiot. If this offends YOU, that's fine.

By the way, I'm liberal and I don't expect you to agree with me, I DO expect you to respect my right to believe it just as I respect your right to believe what you do. That doesn't mean I want you to drag your beliefs into every ******** conversation if you see even a tiny opening.  

[lazycommie]

Sanzoskitsune

If you don't see how calling something someone believes in a**-backwards would be offensive then you are an idiot. If this offends YOU, that's fine.

By the way, I'm liberal and I don't expect you to agree with me, I DO expect you to respect my right to believe it just as I respect your right to believe what you do. That doesn't mean I want you to drag your beliefs into every ******** conversation if you see even a tiny opening.

Nope, doesn't offend me.

You have a right to believe what you believe, just as much as I have a right to disagree vehemently with it and consider said beliefs a**-backwards. And it reciprocates as well. Feel free to call my beliefs whatever you wish, as it's just as much your right as mine. The person I'm arguing with being a liberal matters to me about as much as the color of the socks I'm wearing. I don't change what I say or believe when talking to different audiences.

"Tiny opening"? Gaping, barn-sized doorway. I wasn't even the first person to mention zero, he was mentioned in the OP and every single post afterwards, by every person. I continued along in the same vein as everyone else.  

[Sanzoskitsune]

If you don't realize that you are being disrespectful by being so offensive and saying opinions not facts (calling something a**-backwards is an opinion not a fact) as if they ARE facts. Then really you are as immature as they come.

Let me give you a quick example, I know Thaliat hates Obama, or well at least dislikes greatly. However, she has never said anything disrespectful to me about my beliefs or that fact that I support him. You have. I may not agree with her but at least she doesn't insult my political beliefs or practically call me an idiot for having them. That's why I respect her and not you.  

[lazycommie]

Sanzoskitsune

If you don't realize that you are being disrespectful by being so offensive and saying opinions not facts (calling something a**-backwards is an opinion not a fact) as if they ARE facts. Then really you are as immature as they come.

Let me give you a quick example, I know Thaliat hates Obama, or well at least dislikes greatly. However, she has never said anything disrespectful to me about my beliefs or that fact that I support him. You have. I may not agree with her but at least she doesn't insult my political beliefs or practically call me an idiot for having them. That's why I respect her and not you.

I don't consider calling someone's beliefs bullshit disrespectful. I don't consider it disrespectful for someone to do the same to me, either. Considering I've been on both ends, I'd consider it rather fair.

My opinions are opinion, my facts are facts, and it should be more than easy to differentiate between the two. When discussing an open-ended political thing, it's always going to be way more opinion than fact, if not entirely opinion. That's the nature of politics.

Whether you respect me or not is on you, because it matters not to me.