Let's ditch term limits for Presidents

[red states rule]

I agree with Nuc that bush lover is suggesting a third term not because the idea is good for all of the future generation to come, the idea was suggested only for Junior.

If Junior is so great to all of you Bushbots why bother with suggesting only a third term, why not make him dictator for life, since this is where your true heart lies.

So when others and myself don't like the idea of Junior being dictator for life we are called Another Bush Basher.

We can forgive the Italians for the Mussolini because there was nothing in the past for them to learn from. We can forgive the Germans because there was nothing in the past for them to learn from. But there is no excuse for Americans because we have a history to learn from, which is Mussolini and Hitler.

This not to flatter Junior by saying he is even close to Mussolini or Hitler, Junior is more like Howdy Doody and Cheney as the puppet master. No, this is to point the finger at Bushbots, they should know better that you don't give a clown power without tempting him to abuse it.

The voters know the modern Democrat party has no desire to stand up to evil.

To the kook left, 9-11 never happened, and they want the rest of us to forget about it

 

[CockySOB]

If it wasn't for term limits, President Slick would have run again...and almost certainly won. Think how close the 2000 election was, and remember that Clinton is basically the same as Gore only with charisma. I'd even venture to say that he would have won the 2004 elections, since 9/11 would have happened all the same, and people rally behind war presidents.

Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it!

Ehhhh... WJC played the polls more than Gore would I expect.

And I agree, wishing for an end to term limits for POTUS is foolhardy and reckless. Personally, I'd like to see term limits placed on ALL elected officials.

 

[Gunny]

This is too weird. Junior hasn't even won an election. The first one was handed to him via Scalia, the second one is riddled with dubious counts in Ohio.

A better idea would be to sent Junior and all his follwers to Iraq. Think of it as a place where all of you can smell the flowers together.

I'm thinking of it as a place where you and your delusional idealism wouldn't last past 10 minutes.

 

[pegwinn]

If 'the people' were to vote for 3rd or 4th party, it might shake things up. Truth is, only a few vote in the primaries. Those few are the ones that determine who will be running, from those that have the $$$ to run.

May be imperfect, but I don't think term limits are the answer.

What really, really, really, sucks is that a third or fourth party candidate isn't viable. If say you or I run as a 3rd/4th party and get elected, what will we be able to accomplish? Nada, because we won't have the backing of the big two. If I introduce a bill that outlaws idiots posting on message boards (thereby relegating geewhiz to the funny pages), no one will support it since I am not in the party.

I am not a traditional term limit guy. I think that you should have a limit imposed on how long you can be a federal elected official, say thirty years total.

So if you serve 20 years in Congress, you could theoretically serve 10 as the President (of which only eight would work due to election cycles).

I'm not real hung up on the mechanism for limiting. I want to allow people to serve, but I don't want them entrenched to the point they are non removeable.

Another mechanism would be to require breaks in service. Say a two for one deal.

Example is that you serve two senate terms (twelve years), you are required to take a break for six years. Then you can run again. I would apply this to all federal elected positions. Under this scenario, Bill could run again now (oh gawd) and GW could run again after a four year break. Then we could have a tie breaker of Bill v George. Imagine the violence

That would be great TV.

Finally, you know that to impose a limit on Congress that will take an Amendment right? The USSC already stated that a state cannot impose a limit on FEDERAL service.

 

[Annie]

What really, really, really, sucks is that a third or fourth party candidate isn't viable. If say you or I run as a 3rd/4th party and get elected, what will we be able to accomplish? Nada, because we won't have the backing of the big two. If I introduce a bill that outlaws idiots posting on message boards (thereby relegating geewhiz to the funny pages), no one will support it since I am not in the party.

I am not a traditional term limit guy. I think that you should have a limit imposed on how long you can be a federal elected official, say thirty years total.

So if you serve 20 years in Congress, you could theoretically serve 10 as the President (of which only eight would work due to election cycles).

I'm not real hung up on the mechanism for limiting. I want to allow people to serve, but I don't want them entrenched to the point they are non removeable.

Another mechanism would be to require breaks in service. Say a two for one deal.

Example is that you serve two senate terms (twelve years), you are required to take a break for six years. Then you can run again. I would apply this to all federal elected positions. Under this scenario, Bill could run again now (oh gawd) and GW could run again after a four year break. Then we could have a tie breaker of Bill v George. Imagine the violence

That would be great TV.

Finally, you know that to impose a limit on Congress that will take an Amendment right? The USSC already stated that a state cannot impose a limit on FEDERAL service.

3rd and 4th parties elected reps could accomplish something, IF they could get elected. That in and of itself would send tidal waves of fear through the big 2. But it's not a goer, no good candidates have emerged, the Libertarians had the best shot, they've failed on the national level, putting forth dogs.

The idea of breaks though, that's not a bad idea. States could not determine that either, but the feds could.

 

[pegwinn]

3rd and 4th parties elected reps could accomplish something, IF they could get elected. That in and of itself would send tidal waves of fear through the big 2. But it's not a goer, no good candidates have emerged, the Libertarians had the best shot, they've failed on the national level, putting forth dogs.

The idea of breaks though, that's not a bad idea. States could not determine that either, but the feds could.

Great minds can think alike and even disagree

I honestly doubt the viability of third and fourth parties, but I really wish I was wrong.

But, as a genuine radical, somewhere on my message board is a thread on what I would do to the senate........ heh

 

[Jimmyeatworld]

Instead of repealing the presidential term limits, we should enact them on all federal elected officials.

I disagree, reluctantly. See, I really think 'the people' should be able to elect whomever they wish, yes even Teddy, term after term, after term.

On the presidency, I have to agree with post FDR, 3 terms was one too many. 4 was stupid. The job is too demanding and George Washington was right, even when great, 8 years is enough.

I agree with pegwinn... reluctantly. lol

The way things should be, a person serves and then moves on. Unfortunately, somewhere along the way that got lost and there are too many career politicians. It's one of those things I don't really like, but see it as a "necessary evil", if you will.

 

[Annie]

I agree with pegwinn... reluctantly. lol

The way things should be, a person serves and then moves on. Unfortunately, somewhere along the way that got lost and there are too many career politicians. It's one of those things I don't really like, but see it as a "necessary evil", if you will.

I agree with the, should serve and move on. Spoken like Cinncinatus, a true hero. Yet, times are what they are and the Senate was always different than the executive, save FDR.