WaPost: End presidential term limits

damwel
Nancy Pelosi is an idiot. Harry Reid invoked the nuclear option because the republicans will not let the government function. There have been more republican filibusters in the Senate in Obamas term then in the entire history of the United States. The obstruction has to be stopped somehow.

You can't fault Obama when he can't do anything. The ACA was handcrafted by the heritage foundation. It didn't have the most important thing which was a 1 payer system. How can the republicans be so against it when the democrats let them fashion the thing? The ACA is the only thing Obama has been able to pass in 5 years in office.

edit on Fri November 29th, 2013 by damwel because: (no reason given)

really, you are telling me the heritage foundation designed obamacare? where in the heck did you hear that? proof please cause I do not buy it at all...

Bassago
In a previous thread I wondered how long it was going to take before the progressive left would start proselytizing the idea of removing presidential term limits. Many of the responses were basically "That would never happen" but I remain unconvinced.

Now it's the Washington Post suggesting this may be a good idea. Of course they would never suggest such a thing if a conservative president was in office. One has to wonder if they think Obama would have a chance at a third or maybe even a fourth term considering his current lack of popularity in the polls.

Personally I don't think it really matters much anymore considering the sham two party system we have. The choice between democrat and republican candidates pretty much just gives us the choice in the manner of our destruction. That's if you believe the voting results at all.

End presidential term limits

Regardless of his political approval ratings, Obama could expect Republican senators such as Lindsey Graham (S.C.) and John McCain (Ariz.) to attack the agreement (to repeal term limits.) But if Obama could run again, would he be facing such fervent objections from Sens. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Robert Menendez (D-N.J.)?

Probably not. Democratic lawmakers would worry about provoking the wrath of a president who could be reelected. Thanks to term limits, though, they’ve got little to fear.

Nor does Obama have to fear the voters, which might be the scariest problem of all. If he chooses, he could simply ignore their will. And if the people wanted him to serve another term, why shouldn’t they be allowed to award him one?

What they appear to be suggesting is that the democrat party nominate Obama for a third term regardless and hope he wins again. I can't imagine there would be any chance of repealing on constitutional amendment.

It’s time to put that power back where it belongs. Barack Obama should be allowed to stand for re election just as citizens should be allowed to vote for — or against — him. Anything less diminishes our leaders and ourselves.

So ATS is the propaganda push on for Obama's third term?

holy moly! i think i puked a little.

that would be a disaster! POTUS must not have unlimited terms.

no one should, senate and house,

even the SCOTUS.

Hillary will be the next President.

Now, the Washington Post bringing up a 3, 4, 5 term President is just being the Propaganda arm of Obama. Obama is young enough to go 3 terms, probably the youngest who has had a chance. Bush would never have gotten three terms, even the two terms were laughable.

Bill could of gotten three terms, even with the scandal.

Either way, there all BS.

Bush1 4 years, Clinton 8 Years, Bush 8 Years, Obama 8 years, ??Clinton 8 Years??. The pattern is Obvious.
Not sure if Term Limits actually work according to this list. They all stand for the same thing.

Thank God everyone will see this pattern before Hillary is elected. LOL!!!

Our Country is Doomed or has been Doomed from the very beginning.

James1982
Personally I feel term limits have ruined the office of president.

The first term is spent looking for ways to get re-elected, the second term is spent robbing, wheeling, and dealing hard as possible to secure post presidency connection. Neither is in the best interest of this country.

Even if a president broke this mold, which they don't, there is still the issue of short term planning vs long term planning. How does a country expect to prosper and continue to exist when everything it does is 8 years at a time? 8 years is nothing for most countries, and every time we get a new prez we get a new policy.

Try building a community when every 8 years you burn it to the ground and start over. You get nowhere.

That being said, we are at a point in politics where getting rid of term limits isn't going to solve any problems, but instead cause many more problems. The whole political machine is so putrid and festering with disease getting rid of term limits at this stage would only hasten our demise.

The opposite direction really needs to be taken, yearly votes where it's incredibly easy to recall a president. If they want to stay in office longer than a year, they better make some real and obvious changes to their behavior. But then again America elected Bush twice, and elected Obama twice, it's pretty obvious the criminals are excellent at swaying votes of ignorant majority.

oh yeah, 35yrs in the senate, ya think that's enough? life long gov office, is a travesty.

why don't we just elect a pharaoh?

lol, lifetime, like the mullahs or castro, maybe instead of elections, we have them fight it out. mano e mano.

look how well unlimited terms, worked out for others.

chaves wanted to do that, right? prez for life?

damwel
Nancy Pelosi is an idiot. Harry Reid invoked the nuclear option because the republicans will not let the government function. There have been more republican filibusters in the Senate in Obamas term then in the entire history of the United States. The obstruction has to be stopped somehow.

You can't fault Obama when he can't do anything. The ACA was handcrafted by the heritage foundation. It didn't have the most important thing which was a 1 payer system. How can the republicans be so against it when the democrats let them fashion the thing? The ACA is the only thing Obama has been able to pass in 5 years in office.

edit on Fri November 29th, 2013 by damwel because: (no reason given)

yeah, working out great, ain't it?

gee, maybe the repubs knew it sucked?

reid invoked the nuke op, to bypass any dissent. convenient, right?

Very interesting!

I was wondering how Obama was going to try and make a play to remain in office post 2016.. i guess this is the answer..

i know the article has nothing to do with the Prez, it's just i'm pretty sure this is something Obama would most likely be looking at if he is indeed looking for a way to remain in office and I'm pretty sure that he is....

the fact is nobody likes to give up what power they have be they the average police officer, The doorman at your local nightclub or the president of the united states...

I honestly feel that it doesn't matter anyway, i believe that almost everything we are spoon fed by the Media is a Lie or a Lie coated in the truth either way it's all a racket... All the worlds a stage!

I like Obama a lot more than many posters here (though I still rate him a pretty bad president) and all I have to say to this is absolutely not. In my mind the only valid way for someone to get a third term is to not run, not seek office, and still win a write in campaign. And even then I would expect the person to simply refuse the job after winning. The very act of seeking a third term is proof they're not qualified to get it.

What we need is more term limits in government, not less. Even the Supreme Court I'm starting to believe should have a term limit, albeit a fairly long one because the concept of life term has changed so drastically between 1790 and now due to advances in medicine.

In my opinion 2 4 year terms for President, 2 6 year terms for Senate, 6 2 year terms for Representative, 1 20 year term for Supreme Court.

reply to post by Ph03n1x

the fact is nobody likes to give up what power they have be they the average police officer, The doorman at your local nightclub or the president of the united states...

There's some truth to that though we haven't really had any presidents pushing for a 3rd term yet (at least publicly.) However considering the truly elitist and narcissistic personality of our current POTUS I don't really believe he's hindered in the least by the prior restraints of our previous presidents.

As said in the original post I believe we'll continue to see a concerted increase in the lefts push for a 3rd Obama term. Still I doubt they can pull it off but then they've pulled off a lot of other really bad stuff so who knows.

reply to post by Bassago
Either way Hillary and the PTB will not let it happen. There are points where the person "chosen" thinks they are over and above the Office they were chosen and buck the trend. Either way the choice will be made.

Bassago
In a previous thread I wondered how long it was going to take before the progressive left would start proselytizing the idea of removing presidential term limits. Many of the responses were basically "That would never happen" but I remain unconvinced.

Now it's the Washington Post suggesting this may be a good idea.

What they appear to be suggesting is that the democrat party nominate Obama for a third term regardless and hope he wins again. I can't imagine there would be any chance of repealing on constitutional amendment.

First off, this is not the progressive left suggesting the revoking of this Amendment. It isn't even the WaPost suggesting it. It is but one professor suggesting it and writing an editorial about it, so why do you use the word "they" to say who is suggesting this? You're attempting to put words into a lot of people's mouths, and it ain't flying. A lot of the actual progressive left has already disowned Obama. All he is in most of his policies is Republican lite; his signature legislation is based on a program instigated in Massachusetts by Mitt Romney, that great socialist who ran again Obama last time around.

And as you say, what are the chances of amending the Constitution on this matter? About zero percent.

reply to post by Bassago


Here's what could happen. You know that the NWO has been planning for asteroid threats for a long time.
If there happened to be a near-catastrophic asteroid event taking place in the near future it could result in the wildest scenario an Obama third term. It's a great scenario. J.J. Abrams is probably writing it as I type.

reply to post by MrInquisitive

First off, this is not the progressive left suggesting the revoking of this Amendment. It isn't even the WaPost suggesting it. It is but one professor suggesting it and writing an editorial about it, so why do you use the word "they" to say who is suggesting this? You're attempting to put words into a lot of people's mouths, and it ain't flying.

I'm quite aware of the author who penned this propaganda piece just as I'm aware the Washington Post gave him the platform and published it. To say "they" are not responsible and supportive for what "they" publish because it was written by the professor is disingenuous at best. AFAIK they printed it, they own it.

Sure the progressives are running from BHO now because of obamacare but in the political arena that's simply a self preservation tactic. Also sure, some of MSM is putting heat on him for this reason but only because that mess can't be glossed over anymore. By publishing the article /op-ed whatever you want to call it the Post, it's editors and owners are supporting it. If they didn't it would have never seen print. IMO.

intrepid
reply to post by BrianFlanders

 

Ted Kennedy must have been the exception that proved the rule.

Yeah. I always wondered about that. Best I can figure is that he was a Kennedy and if nothing else, that seems to keep the public off one's back. The left takes care of it's heroes, I guess. Ted wasn't anything special but he was related to Jack and Bobby. "Camelot" (Religious music playing in the background with Chris Matthews telling us more about the special sensations he often gets in his legs).

Bassago
reply to post by MrInquisitive

 

First off, this is not the progressive left suggesting the revoking of this Amendment. It isn't even the WaPost suggesting it. It is but one professor suggesting it and writing an editorial about it, so why do you use the word "they" to say who is suggesting this? You're attempting to put words into a lot of people's mouths, and it ain't flying.

I'm quite aware of the author who penned this propaganda piece just as I'm aware the Washington Post gave him the platform and published it. To say "they" are not responsible and supportive for what "they" publish because it was written by the professor is disingenuous at best. AFAIK they printed it, they own it.

Perfect post! Loved it! I was hoping someone would catch that.

Seeing that the elites control whoever is selected to be president, do term limits matter one way or another? It doesn't matter if its a democrat or republican, a puppet will still be controlled by the man holding its strings.

The OP and others would be wise to stop feeding into the left/right paradigm. By doing so, you are being played for fools. Wake up.

supremecommander
Seeing that the elites control whoever is selected to be president, do term limits matter one way or another? It doesn't matter if its a democrat or republican, a puppet will still be controlled by the man holding its strings.

Yes. It matters because if a guy comes in and stays for 30 years, he will never be anyone else. He will have the same face for 30 years. Every time he does something that pisses people off, that will be a big stain on his record that he will never completely get rid of.

For example. When Obama came in, he came in riding the wave of unpopularity that Bush created over the course of his 8 years. Everyone knows it. Bush elected Obama more than anything else. Those 8 years of Bush destroyed the Republicans.

Anyway, Obama got himself elected pretending he was nothing like Bush. And a lot of people bought it (and are still buying it). Now imagine if Obamacare was Bushcare. Imagine if Bush had tried to pass a healthcare law that orders everyone to buy health insurance and let the government take over the entire healthcare industry. The first thing most people would have thought was that this was the guy who was responsible for The Patriot Act and all the lies and fact twisting and spying and torturing.

He could have probably still rammed some kind of Big Brother "healthcare" through (because Bush and his people would never take no for an answer just like Obama and his people don't) but it would have been substantially more difficult and significantly more people would have raised a fuss about it in the voting public.

So, what I'm getting at is that Obamacare was just another piece of the police state they started erecting with Bush right after 9/11 and Obama had the perfect opportunity to do it because.....he wasn't Bush.

So. Term limits actually work for these people. In truth, it doesn't matter. They'll get what they want regardless. But I'd have really liked to see them try to pass "Bushcare" in 2010.

Obama may be a rare ex-president who stays in Washington

www.washingtonpost.com... html

reply to post by Bassago


This is absurd.. we need more term limits. We need all politicians subject to them.

Just this morning I was thinking this country needs to be more like Nazi Germany.

If O' is elected again. this WILL be our Red October; our Reichstag fire!!