Even Bill Clinton wants the 22nd Admendment repealed...

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » March 5, 2005, 6:12 pm

Forget my sig...

[glow=red]GW Bush '08[/glow]

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/Ubb/ulti ... 001113;p=1

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » March 5, 2005, 6:18 pm

So uhm how about that Freedom of Speech?

No but I agree it's a bad idea...Even though I like Clinton a lot.

Kaldaur · Post by **Kaldaur** » March 5, 2005, 7:37 pm

Ehh, I myself think it's quite a dumb amendment. It was a result of lawmakers in the 40's and 50's hating Roosevelt and so they delivered a post-mortem slap in the face. This amendment basically says that the American people can't be trusted to vote for the candidate that they want. Franklin Roosevelt was elected to four terms, and was the lead man in the fight against the Great Depression and World War 2. His political legacy is defined by the fact that he was not restrained to only two terms. If the American voters decided to once again vote for Bill Clinton or George W. Bush, that would be the will of the American people, and that will for the same candidate would not be held back by the political backlash of a few jealous politicians in Washington.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » March 5, 2005, 8:04 pm

I'm against it. You need to have fresh ideas coming into the office. 8 years is more than enough for anyone. I also want term limits for Congress. Reduce the Senate to a 4 year term and cap them all at 2 terms.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » March 5, 2005, 8:06 pm

For example, I think 2 years of Dubya was more than enough.

Niffoni · Post by **Niffoni** » March 5, 2005, 8:45 pm

The last thing any western country needs is MORE entrenchment in their already bloated, back-slapping government offices. I can't imagine how anyone could support such an obvious leap backwards in the development of civilization.

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » March 5, 2005, 9:24 pm

We had 12 years of a Prime Minister up here. Having someone in power too long is inviting corruption.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » March 5, 2005, 11:32 pm

I was for this before I was against it.

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » March 6, 2005, 4:36 am

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:I'm against it. You need to have fresh ideas coming into the office. 8 years is more than enough for anyone. I also want term limits for Congress. Reduce the Senate to a 4 year term and cap them all at 2 terms.

wow I agree with Mid.

Rekaar. · Post by **Rekaar.** » March 6, 2005, 7:01 am

If this wasn't such a pure democracy (where anyone that can breathe can vote) I'd advocate as many terms as you can win. With the ignorance that abounds in the voting population I'm definitely in favor of term limits.

Realistically if your resume is impressive enough to keep warranting a reelection that generally means you're qualified for the job.

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » March 6, 2005, 12:19 pm

very bad idea, such measures were taken to prevent an imperalistic image...personally i think the executive branch's powers need to be weakened about 150%-250%...in the bush admin alone we have seen a disgusting growth of power and influence in the executive branch, mainly that used be in the senate... and the terms should be reduced to 3, 2 year terms

i understand with diplomacy we need some sort of a "figurehead" to stand out as our nations "leader" but in eutopia, we would have no president, the nations laws would be controlled by the senate, the house, and the supreme court.

Drasta · Post by **Drasta** » March 11, 2005, 2:30 pm

omg .... i couldn't stand having bush more then twice

cid · Post by **cid** » March 11, 2005, 2:56 pm

Drasta wrote:omg .... i couldn't stand having bush more then twice

Priceless

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 11, 2005, 3:53 pm

i think 8 years of one guy is enough. the amount of special interest hold on a government would be unbelievable if one administration was around for 12-16 years.

clinton wants it repealed so he can be president again

he would destroy Bush in an election. (obviously it inst going to happen though).

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » March 11, 2005, 4:34 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:I'm against it. You need to have fresh ideas coming into the office. 8 years is more than enough for anyone. I also want term limits for Congress. Reduce the Senate to a 4 year term and cap them all at 2 terms.

Apply this across the board and I think things would change quite a bit in the next 10 years or so.

Elected positions in our govt shouldn't be careers.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » March 11, 2005, 4:41 pm

Aabidano wrote:
Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:I'm against it. You need to have fresh ideas coming into the office. 8 years is more than enough for anyone. I also want term limits for Congress. Reduce the Senate to a 4 year term and cap them all at 2 terms.
Apply this across the board and I think things would change quite a bit in the next 10 years or so.

Elected positions in our govt shouldn't be careers.

Couldn't agree more. Civil service like this was supposed to be a sacrifice to serve society. It has become an open invitation to upper class riches and life long support. I want people who really want to serve the greater good of the country in office. I fear we may never see that ever again.

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » March 14, 2005, 8:05 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:
Aabidano wrote:
Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:I'm against it. You need to have fresh ideas coming into the office. 8 years is more than enough for anyone. I also want term limits for Congress. Reduce the Senate to a 4 year term and cap them all at 2 terms.
Apply this across the board and I think things would change quite a bit in the next 10 years or so.

Elected positions in our govt shouldn't be careers.
Couldn't agree more. Civil service like this was supposed to be a sacrifice to serve society. It has become an open invitation to upper class riches and life long support. I want people who really want to serve the greater good of the country in office. I fear we may never see that ever again.

one of the main causes of that mid is the actual formation of political partys...2 major political partys does nothing for our society except for polarize the country, feed special interest, and ultimately produce corruption...canidates of ALL offices need to run as independents and more importantly as individuals, not democrates or republicans

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » March 14, 2005, 8:22 pm

Realistically if your resume is impressive enough to keep warranting a reelection that generally means you're qualified for the job.

Please define "qualified."

One interpretation is that you mean the term in the sense that the person is able to be a "good" leader, in that their regime tends to increase what we perceive as basic goods. They uphold and expand democracy and human rights, create a steadily rising standard of living, enforce justice, and so on. If this is your meaning, then I think you're totally wrong, and I think even a cursory historical overview would confirm that sentiment. This is ably demonstrated by the enormous member of politicians who were not "good" by this standard and either repeatedly won reelection (in a democracy) or maintained vast popular support (in an autocracy or an anocracy).

You could mean the term in a more political sense, where political objectives are seen as part of the job, along with humanitarian objectives. Of course, the most basic political objective is to get elected, so if this is what you mean by "qualified," then you've basically said that those who are most qualified are qualified, which is of course meaningless.

Am I missing an interpretation, or would you care to challenge one of those that I've set forth?

Realize that your argument has some key implications:
1. It is an argument in favor of entrenchment and status quo.
2. It implies that longstanding politicians are "qualified" by virtue of their tenure alone.
3. It implies that it is both difficult and rare for politicians to manipulate a population.

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » March 15, 2005, 11:45 am

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:Couldn't agree more. Civil service like this was supposed to be a sacrifice to serve society. It has become an open invitation to upper class riches and life long support. I want people who really want to serve the greater good of the country in office. I fear we may never see that ever again.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 15, 2005, 12:26 pm

who says we ever saw it =).

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » March 15, 2005, 1:48 pm

Xzion wrote:
Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:
Aabidano wrote:
Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:I'm against it. You need to have fresh ideas coming into the office. 8 years is more than enough for anyone. I also want term limits for Congress. Reduce the Senate to a 4 year term and cap them all at 2 terms.
Apply this across the board and I think things would change quite a bit in the next 10 years or so.

Elected positions in our govt shouldn't be careers.
Couldn't agree more. Civil service like this was supposed to be a sacrifice to serve society. It has become an open invitation to upper class riches and life long support. I want people who really want to serve the greater good of the country in office. I fear we may never see that ever again.
one of the main causes of that mid is the actual formation of political partys...2 major political partys does nothing for our society except for polarize the country, feed special interest, and ultimately produce corruption...canidates of ALL offices need to run as independents and more importantly as individuals, not democrates or republicans

You are exactly correct. It served its purpose back when information couldn't be as easily accesible as it is today. Back then it was important to have to different parties so voters could easily see the differences. Nowadays, with the internet, cable, satellite, radio, etc. we don't need that polarization anymore. We can go back to voting for a candidate based on the issues and the person, instead of a platform predestined by the secret power structure behind both parties.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 15, 2005, 2:39 pm

thats a good point. unfortunately these guys have a tight grasp on power, and they won't be turning it loose =)

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » March 15, 2005, 2:47 pm

Voronwë wrote:thats a good point. unfortunately these guys have a tight grasp on power, and they won't be turning it loose =)

Nope.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » March 15, 2005, 3:07 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:Civil service like this was supposed to be a sacrifice to serve society. It has become an open invitation to upper class riches and life long support.

I've no numbers to back it up, but "non-wealthy" people have never made up a large part of our elected officials. Especially on a national level.

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:I want people who really want to serve the greater good of the country in office.

That's where the breakdown is, our entrenched plutocracy is primarily interested in serving themselves.

Seebs · Post by **Seebs** » March 16, 2005, 12:49 am

I thought receiving the most votes in an election was a form of term limitation.

Work harder to defeat a boob or elect your savior.