read this:
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution.
breakin' it down in detail
Unlikely, considering what's required, but just the thought leaves me feeling all sorts of unhappy, as it does every time someone tries this.
Personally I think the 22nd's a damn good idea. George Washington did, too -- in response to the thought that he become ruler-for-life, he is reported to have said: "What astonishing changes a few years are capable of producing! I am told that even respectable characters speak of a monarchical form of government without horror. From thinking proceeds speaking, thence to acting is often but a single step. But how irrevocable and tremendous! What a triumph for the advocates of despotism to find that we are incapable of governing ourselves, and that systems founded on the basis of equal liberty are merely ideal & fallacious!" In other words, 'what are you, nuts?'
(he also said: "If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." Somehow, I get the feeling that Washington would not have liked George W. Bush very much a'tall... but I digress)
Anyway. I think the 22nd's a pretty damn good idea. Did/do even when people I respect are in office. The thing that keeps us stable, government-wise, is the knowledge that no matter how bad it's gotten, the tides of change will come, eventually. Contol comes and goes, the players shuffle and form new alliances, and everyone's kept moderately honest just by having to watch their friends and allies as closely as their enemies..and remember to argue nicely with their enemies. Take that away, and people out of power begin to lose hope. Yes, there's still Congress... but the seed's been sown.
But what do I know? I'm only a citizen-voter.
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution.
breakin' it down in detail
Unlikely, considering what's required, but just the thought leaves me feeling all sorts of unhappy, as it does every time someone tries this.
Personally I think the 22nd's a damn good idea. George Washington did, too -- in response to the thought that he become ruler-for-life, he is reported to have said: "What astonishing changes a few years are capable of producing! I am told that even respectable characters speak of a monarchical form of government without horror. From thinking proceeds speaking, thence to acting is often but a single step. But how irrevocable and tremendous! What a triumph for the advocates of despotism to find that we are incapable of governing ourselves, and that systems founded on the basis of equal liberty are merely ideal & fallacious!" In other words, 'what are you, nuts?'
(he also said: "If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." Somehow, I get the feeling that Washington would not have liked George W. Bush very much a'tall... but I digress)
Anyway. I think the 22nd's a pretty damn good idea. Did/do even when people I respect are in office. The thing that keeps us stable, government-wise, is the knowledge that no matter how bad it's gotten, the tides of change will come, eventually. Contol comes and goes, the players shuffle and form new alliances, and everyone's kept moderately honest just by having to watch their friends and allies as closely as their enemies..and remember to argue nicely with their enemies. Take that away, and people out of power begin to lose hope. Yes, there's still Congress... but the seed's been sown.
But what do I know? I'm only a citizen-voter.
no subject
Date: 2005-06-15 01:27 am (UTC)Sorry, all i know is the 5th which means you don't have to speak at your own trial or something like that.
no subject
Date: 2005-06-15 01:35 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-15 01:39 am (UTC)Although in one way it could be bad, for the second term the pres could basically do whatever s/he desired, knowing he didn't have to play nice to get voted back in.
no subject
Date: 2005-06-15 01:45 am (UTC)...
At least, that's what I thought before the last election, when I thought that Bush didn't have a snowball's chance in Hell of being reelected. Now, I'm not so sure. :-/
But as you said, "What do I know? I'm only a citizen-voter." :)
no subject
Date: 2005-06-15 01:52 am (UTC)It's called being a "lame duck." And yeah, they tend to get a little crazy toward the end of that second term, all of 'em.
no subject
Date: 2005-06-15 02:24 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-15 02:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-15 03:10 am (UTC)Uh-huh.
no subject
Date: 2005-06-15 03:12 am (UTC)(I liked Clinton, too. But no mas!)
no subject
Date: 2005-06-15 04:23 am (UTC)I've never liked the idea of any kind of term limits, because we already have limitations on terms: elections.
no subject
Date: 2005-06-15 02:28 pm (UTC)well doesn't THAT sound fishy now. :(
i personally would rather vote for the ghost of several dead presidents than have ol'Dub back for a 3rd go round. but that's just me and my ultra liberal self. ;) President Ghost doesn't have to waste time with press conferences or even diplomacy, he can just ghost his little way into whoever's office and get the info he needs! teehee. now i'm getting silly. PRESIDENT GHOST IN 08!!
no subject
Date: 2005-06-15 02:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-15 02:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-15 03:27 pm (UTC)/manic editorial mode
no subject
Date: 2005-06-15 04:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-15 08:49 pm (UTC)LOL I'm entitled to even less of an opinion, afterall, i'm only a conditional permanent resident. ;)
no subject
Date: 2005-06-17 03:53 pm (UTC)