Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Will Bush Revoke/Re-Write The 22nd Amendment, To Hold A 3rd Term In Office?

page: 7
4
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 


i mean no offence by this.

but use your reason. how do you suppose a president with a sub 20% approval rating is going to manage to force himself into office for a 3rd term? we haven't lost all of our rights (yet.) and we are still a democratic country.

you have to remember the president doesn't make the laws, he just signs off on them, AFTER they go to vote.

in other words, there is no way in hell that he would be able to modify the constitution like that. it would never happen. not without the approval of congress, and that isn't SUPPOSED to happen without the approval of their constituents (the american people)

you see, a lot of you Bush haters would like to think that he is some evil demon that has absolute power to do whatever he wants.... he prolly wants to get out of office more than anthing. this man has been in a costant Shizz storm since the beginning of his time in office. he has dealt with the entire country blaming EVERY LITTLE THING, that goes even slightly wrong on him. I think it's pathetic really, that man didn't do anything that the people who are REALLY in power didn't want him to.

i think 20 years from now, his true legacy will be written in history books, that is saving an entire country half way across the world from a crazed dictator, and helping them rebuild and set up to run their own country, the way they want it ran.

whatever reason we go into this war, and however long we are there.... doesn't matter to me, we are there, we went there to do something, and we have an obligation to the Iraqi people to do what we went their to do.




posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 12:15 PM
link   
I'm not even going to begin entertaining this non sense or the responses thus far. It's real simple. Everyone who isn't the same party as the president cries and whines and screams of the current president turning into an Emperor at the end of his run as President, and then it ends and everyone wonders why the dark lord of the sith that the president was didn't take advantage of the power he had. He should have. He was true evil. /rolleyes after 60 years of this non sense from both sides.

I'll tell you exactly why Bush won't take a third term by any means. He's tired of bull# politics like every president is after 8 years of being demonized by the opposing party. It's all about power in the end, and that is that.

[edit on 16-8-2008 by botiemaster]



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 


its funny how im reading my thoughts exactly come from someone else. a couple years back when i was realizing the true extent of the 9/11 hoax, the war into afganistan that changed to iraq, it started to down on me that if this president and his party can get away with that much #, then pulling off a 3rd term in office will be a breeze. he has everything in place ready for it.
1. hes put america into a bloody mess, not just in one country but in a whole region,
2. this bloody mess is in his parties plan for a future in that region that extend for a long time coming.
3. how can his party hand the ropes over to someone else now that there in this far deep. bush has done so much and can still progress his # moves so far more, because hes the idiot of america and cant be expected to actually make a right move. once in office for his 3rd term he can keep acting the stupid role and dig the whole deeper.
5. time and history as we know it has been building up for this stretch of time from 1999-2012 and maybe more.
6. 1999 was the first big hoax where we though we were all gone and pur power grids shot and internet #ed up.
it didnt happen. 13 years later is 2012, and this time, it may happen or they may choose to make it happen.

most will blow this 2012 crap off as a hoax. because they will remember the 1999 and how if at anytime switching from 1999 to 2000 years must be a logical time for # to hit the fan. but it didnt. we were scammed. so when 2012 comes around and people are forced to either belive or not what is coming, they will choose not to partly based on there previous hoax experience of 1999

[edit on 16-8-2008 by yaasun]



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by yaasun
 


so the 2008 is the yea for re election of bush via amendment 22, and 4 years later is days away from dec 21 2012. big picture



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sir Solomon
Am I worried? Sure I'll go with that, but I'm not going to go stocking up on the 3-month supply of emergency rations people have been talking about on ATS.


Having lived in Northwest Florida for over 10 years, I can vouch for the wisdom of having a good supply of canned food and bottled water. Hurricanes are no joke, and inland you still have flooding, tornadoes, and earthquakes.

$200 in canned goods and bottled water is some pretty cheap insurance. If you hit up Big Lots during a sale, you could stock up with enough to keep your whole neighborhood in eats for a month on that $200.

If you do it, spend twice as much on water as you do on food. Think 1 can of food and 1 gallon of water per person, per day. A can of soup should run you about 50 cents per can if you find a sale, same with veggies. A gallon of bottled water runs about $1 at Wal-Mart or Big Lots.

Also if you are feeling energetic, get 5 gallon buckets with lids from wherever they are cheapest and fill them with tapwater, then throw an iodine tablet in each. Use it to wash your nasty # while the water and power are off.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

It seems unlikely. As it would take the support of Congress, and the people who, contrary to popular belief, aren't quite the "sheep" that some think. To legally overturn the 22nd amendment requires the approval of 2/3 of the states, or is it a simple majority? That takes forever, witness the ERA amendment...

So that leaves illegally...he can't do it by himself. Who's going to help him? Me? Not likely. You? Obviously not, since you started this conversation
. If he wants to start the third American revolution, that'd be the way to do it...

Honestly, I think you're worried about nothing. I'd be more concerned with the elections up coming, and who we're putting into office.




As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 


It seems unlikely. As it would take the support of Congress, and the people who, contrary to popular belief, aren't quite the "sheep" that some think. To legally overturn the 22nd amendment requires the approval of 2/3 of the states, or is it a simple majority? That takes forever, witness the ERA amendment...

So that leaves illegally...he can't do it by himself. Who's going to help him? Me? Not likely. You? Obviously not, since you started this conversation
. If he wants to start the third American revolution, that'd be the way to do it...

Honestly, I think you're worried about nothing. I'd be more concerned with the elections up coming, and who we're putting into office.




Well, the point of the original post as well as the rest of this, is that he's not done anything the American people wanted so far as evidenced by his 20% approval rating.

We're tied up in the Iraq War, we have the impending Iran War we've been sitting close to having boil over, now we're mixed up in assisting Georgia against Russia.

We technically still have the War on Drugs ongoing.

We have the War on Terror ongoing.

We technically still have the Korean War ongoing, we've been at a state of truce since 1953 with them, which is still a state of war, since there was no Peace Treaty.

A President's war-time powers, especially having been put into office via the Supreme Court, changes a lot of rules, as well as the way things are done.

All it would truly take would be a major incident right before the election, to enable him via law, to declare a state of Martial Law right now, and the election would be null and void.

Under National Emergency, it used to be that F.E.M.A. kicked in, and the F.E.M.A. Administration took over, making it more powerful than the President, if the correct set of parameters were fullfilled, but since the inception of Homeland Security, all of those laws have shifted around since F.E.M.A. now reports directly under D.H.S.

Think about it for just a moment, as much controversy as September 11th has been on ATS alone, where so many people are divided about whether it was an "Inside Job" or terrorists were truly to blame, the fact that our entire Government was in essence made inept due to 19 men on 4 planes with box-cutters, how absurd that sounds that a trillion dollar defense budget was unable to stop those men from changing our world so much, and this might be a little on the possible side.

Again, I'm not saying I want it to happen, in the least. It's the last thing I want.

But, also, usually by now we would have the election process a lot closer with who had been selected as to who was representing which Political Party.

That it has been under such scrutiny, and we're only three months away, isn't that a bit odd?

All I'm saying, is the the proverbial "what if" here, in that Bush and Cheney have been extremely closed-mouthed, like the cat that caught the canary.

"If we keep quiet long enough, no one will catch on."

Believe me, I never wanted to be more wrong about something in all of my life.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin
 


Text

My understand is that Bush can continue being President if there is a National Emergeny while he is still President. His would have to declare the National Emergency in order for there to be an election.

If anyone knows more about this, please post it.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 08:50 PM
link   
You do not need to go back only eight years to uncover the crimes of Bush and his family, go back thirty to fifty years.
George W. expertise is insurance fraud, Prescott is oil and gas leases, Jeb is expert in savings and loans fraud, and real estate is handled by the rest.
Iran-Contra was not fully investigated to the end, it continues today. It preceeded Iran-Contra.
Drug money profits for black operations budgets, Govt. impoting drugs and exporting guns, fraud in real estate, banking, oil and gas, insurance, including the Clintons, judges sympathetic to the cause, friendly insurnce companies, and banks. I just read Al Martin book. Read Compromised by Terry Reed, Read Levines book on Drugs and DEA, BATF, FBI.
In 1980 a kilo of coc aine was $60,000.00 dollars. Reagan sent Bush Sr. to Florida to head a consortium on coc aine and six months later via Oliver North, and Mena, the price was $20,000.00 a kilo. Says a lot.
It will take a revolution in America, or an invasion by a super power to right the injustice both here and in the world.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 09:23 PM
link   



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 12:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Symbiote
 


I'm sorry if my comment was misleading. I agree that having some extra supplies in case the weather hits you with something and you have to survive for a week or so. That is just common sense for any part of the nation. Here in the Midwest its especially true during the winter, when just about anything can hit.

What I meant by that was that a week or two of supplies is just standard, but I'm not going to go out and get an even larger buffer in my food/water supplies because Bush may do something crazy...er...(dangit...can't think of another way to up that...).



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 02:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
hmm

without congressional approval....he can't, can he?





edit to add:

Even if he could - it'd be immediate grounds for impeachment?

Or....even beside that....who, in their right mind, would vote to re-elect him


[edit on 8/14/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]



hehehhee, guess ou guys didn't know about Directive 51:

www.youtube.com...

Good Luck to all those ppl that think all the FEMA
directives Bush has passed is to help ppl.

The plans are not in your best interest.

Enjoy the video guys, ROFL !



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 04:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpartanKingLeonidas
This is of course the law which was put into place because of F.D.R. holding four terms in office due to WWII. What are other ATS'ers views on this?



This is historically incorrect. There was no law regarding two terms in office as a limit at that time.

In fact, when FDR ran for his third term, WWII was over a year away for the USA and there was no law enacted to allow him to do it as none was needed. Any former President could have elected to run for a third term in ofice. It was George Washington who said as his second term was winding down that two terms was enough for any President of the country. It was more of a gentleman's understanding for nearly 150 years and that's all it was. However, FDR was no gentleman.

BTW, one of the first things that Congress did after FDR's death was to enact a law to restrict a president to no more than two terms, or less than 10 years should a Vice-President take office upon the untimely death of a sitting president. They couldn't pass that law fast enough.

Now to get back to reading the thread, hopefully it will be more informative and factual than the OP's initial installment.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 05:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Q Level
 


I believe your reading comprehension is off, as I believe you quoted exactly what I said, the law was put into place, after F.D.R. was in office.

Carefully reading what someone posts, doesn't take away from your perspective.



[edit on 17-8-2008 by SpartanKingLeonidas]



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 06:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpartanKingLeonidas
reply to post by Q Level
 


I believe your reading comprehension is off, as I believe you quoted exactly what I said, the law was put into place, after F.D.R. was in office.

Carefully reading what someone posts, doesn't take away from your perspective.


As I read it, it seemed clear to me that you were referring to his third and fourth terms as being due to WWII.

The fourth term I could agree with, but not at all in regards to the third.

Actually, the law was put into place upon FDR's death, almost immediatly.

Feel free to be condescending, I've noticed that from you quite a bit so far.

As far as being some sort of Blackwater expert, hmm. Don't think so. Maybe a distant observer, but little else. Thanks for the smile, though.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 06:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Q Level
 


What I stated was not condescending in the least.

I was stating you misinterpreted what I said in the original post, since your tone was condescending, I was merely replying to that.

As far as Blackwater Expert, that's not up to debate, and it's from ATS Administration, not something I took upon myself. I highly suggest if you're going to begin picking apart someone, you do it elsewhere as it's not going to be tolerated here.

You haven't been on ATS long, so I suggest you read the Terms and Conditions, unless you're a former member come back a different way.



[edit on 17-8-2008 by SpartanKingLeonidas]



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpartanKingLeonidas
reply to post by Q Level
 


What I stated was not condescending in the least.

I was stating you misinterpreted what I said in the original post, since your tone was condescending, I was merely replying to that.

As far as Blackwater Expert, that's not up to debate, and it's from ATS Administration, not something I took upon myself. I highly suggest if you're going to begin picking apart someone, you do it elsewhere as it's not going to be tolerated here.

You haven't been on ATS long, so I suggest you read the Terms and Conditions, unless you're a former member come back a different way.


Your original post was somewhat misleading. Perhaps we can just agree to disagree on that?

Debate you on Blackwater? Hardly. You can just be the expert.

However, you should know that there is always someone around somewhere who knows certain things from a much closer perspective and it doesn't matter what the subject is.

Much about BW is publicly known, and that's for a reason, while so little will never be compromised. I'm sure you are aware of this.

FWIW, I've been a lurker for a long, long time and even since joining I rarely post, but you brought me out of that for a brief time. Particularly the BW "expert" label. I'm not often in a position to read/post to the internet, though I'd love to have more time there. UFOs are what initially brought me to ATS.

I will say this, BW is one of the most misunderstood groups in operation today. Not your enemy at all. Nor the enemy of the American public. Sure, we have enemies, but BW isn't one of them.

During a crisis, you'd do better to stand with BW than FEMA, I know I will if it comes to that.

FEMA is populated with souless power craving morons. 99% of them would never be considered for BW in any position.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 07:34 AM
link   
With the ability to pull off 911 successfully, the powers assisting and behind the presidency can and will keep George W. in office if that is what they so desire and it furthers their agenda. The agenda on a world wide concern.
The US needs to fight and win several simultaneous wars to continue to be viewed as the world superpower. Iraq, Afghanastan, ??Georgia/Russia, Iran, Korea??
I percieve there has been a slow motion coup since Nov. 22, 1963.
Lots if not mostly all of Congress is or has been compromised, through sex scandals, finances, frauds, threats on family, threats of exposure, and subsequently congress has a ring in the end of their noses collectively. Look how fast they passed the PATRIOT Act.
If the powers in the world want Bush to remain in office it will be done.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 07:35 AM
link   
Back on track, the subject of the thread.

No, I can't see GW attmpting to stay in power. He's had enough and frankly I have too. Biggest disappoinment in American politics in my life, and I'm no youngster. I was around at the Chicago riots in '68. Daley's thugs were lucky they were facing spineless hippies.

McCain will win by a large amount, I'm hesitant to say landslide. The major media will be going nuts like Dan Rather was back in '04. I still remember him ignoring the computers and using a #2 lead pencil and a yellow legal pad. He was beside himself.

It will be an entertaining evening. Not a big McCain fan here at all, but it's the lesser of evils, ya know?

McCain will continue the plans already set in action. Not good for the American people, but better than Obama. Bad/tough times are coming and the politicos we have elected to Congress are at fault. They aren't telling the American public the truth about how bad it is, because, for the most part, they are the cause of it.

We'll all know in early 2009 if not before.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 07:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by fmcanarney
With the ability to pull off 911 successfully, the powers assisting and behind the presidency can and will keep George W. in office if that is what they so desire and it furthers their agenda. The agenda on a world wide concern.
The US needs to fight and win several simultaneous wars to continue to be viewed as the world superpower. Iraq, Afghanastan, ??Georgia/Russia, Iran, Korea??
I percieve there has been a slow motion coup since Nov. 22, 1963.
Lots if not mostly all of Congress is or has been compromised, through sex scandals, finances, frauds, threats on family, threats of exposure, and subsequently congress has a ring in the end of their noses collectively. Look how fast they passed the PATRIOT Act.
If the powers in the world want Bush to remain in office it will be done.


Just wait till you see Patriot Act Three. I'd suggest you remove anything of value you may have in a safe deposit box now.





new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join