Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

HOLY SMOKES!! Could There BE A THIRD BUSH TERM???

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
mermaid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 04:38 PM
Original message
HOLY SMOKES!! Could There BE A THIRD BUSH TERM???
Edited on Wed Feb-09-05 04:38 PM by mermaid
Read it and weep!!

5 . Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual... (Introduced in House)

Here's the link to Thomas's...

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:5:./temp/~c109fcECed::
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
andyhappy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 04:39 PM
Response to Original message
1. would that mean that Clinton could run again?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madinmaryland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. That would be funny!
Clinton would kick his ass!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. That could cause some strife in
the Clinton household!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosco T. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 04:39 PM
Response to Original message
2. It also means Clinton could come back.... n/m
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fooj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 04:39 PM
Response to Original message
3. Great...then we'll have Clinton back in no time!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 04:39 PM
Response to Original message
4. Don't count on it
They repeal the 22nd and it also enables the Big Dog to run again!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jojo54 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. Let him try to run again
I agree with the other reply's here, Bill would put the monkey in his place once and or all - doing his little dance next to the accordian, getting paid chump change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justinsb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
5. Problem is that
due to the complexity of amending the constitution, it would be difficult to get it done in 4 years, besides, even if they did get it done, that would mean that Clinton could run against Bush and I don't think they really want that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yinkaafrica Donating Member (535 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #5
17. Bush would win. The system has been gamed.
We could not prevent it the last two times.
The pukes are even more powerful now. I don't expect to see
another Democrat in the whitehouse. Not a true, Dem, at any rate.
They might put ol'lo blow joe in there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClintonTyree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
6. Let 'em try.
I like a good joke now and again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 04:42 PM
Response to Original message
7. This has been tried on other occassions, an overwhelming majority
is needed ... thus it never passes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
borg5575 Donating Member (193 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #7
29. Yes, in fact some Clinton supporters...
thought of trying it prior to the 2000 election so that he could run for a third term.

But the idea I like better is what another poster at DU suggested in another thread.

What about Laura Bush vs Hillary Clinton in 2008?

That would be a very interesting race. But the main problem I would have with it is that Hillary has moved too far to the right for me. So I'd like to see Senator Boxer go up against Laura Bush instead.

If that race happened we could say that two women who are each smarter than their husbands are running.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CoffeeCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 04:44 PM
Response to Original message
9. Why don't these freaks...
...just burn the Constitution and be done with it?

Why go through all of the rigamarole of amending a document that they clearly have no intention of upholding anyway.

Fools.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CoffeeCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 04:49 PM
Response to Original message
11. On another note...
...since these thugs steal elections--all * would need is another chance to run.

They could steal it all over again.

Clearly Bush realizes that.

If the 22nd can be repealed, it makes no difference what * does in his 2nd term, how unpopular he is, how dismal his approval ratings are, or what anyone else thinks.

They can steal another election. They pulled it off before, they can go for a threepeat and do it once again.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kerrytravelers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
12. Everybody, sing with me now...
"Oh Canada, my new home and native land..."

I could get use this this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WI_DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 04:54 PM
Response to Original message
13. If it is like the original 22nd admendment it would only affect
future presidents and not current or former presidents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Technowitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 04:56 PM
Response to Original message
15. In the aftermath of last November's electoral disaster...
...I predicted that this is PRECISELY what they would go for.

Failing passage, my second and even more dire prediction is that the '08 elections will be "suspended for the duration of the current national crisis."

That 'crisis'? A manufactured 'terrorist' incident.

I was right before, too, when I told my partner early last year, "They'll try to steal the election again, only they won't stop at just one state. They'll steal it so bad, most people will assume they won legitimately. And the mainstream media will assure us it is so."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
borg5575 Donating Member (193 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #15
30. No, I don't think they will suspend the election.
They won't have to. They will merely steal it again. It won't be GW running again but it will be someone else just as bad or God forbid worse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beyurslf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 04:58 PM
Response to Original message
16. I would love to have Bill Clinton run against GW. Bring it on
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bleacher Creature Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #16
24. I second that!
I hate listening to people on our side make statements like "The good news is that George Bush can't run again. . ." It makes us sound lame.

It just sickens me that he's going to leave in 2008 --assuming no impeachment -- as "triumphant." I want him to go out in defeat. We beat him once -- and maybe even twice -- and Clinton would clean his clock.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneTwentyoNine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 05:04 PM
Response to Original message
18. 2/3 vote,Not a chance of keeping this maniac in for four more years...
If the Dems want to destroy any remaing part of their party then vote for this. This coupled with rigged up elections would insure a Dem never again step foot in the WH.

David
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
judy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 05:05 PM
Response to Original message
19. I am afraid a lot of us here are still naive...
Edited on Wed Feb-09-05 05:07 PM by judy
If they repealed the 22nd Amendment, the Republican Majority would word it in such a way that only current pResidents can be extended, but past Presidents can't. And it would pass.

On edit: I think a group of Democrats is trying to have their own "repeal the 22nd" action as well, probably in order to make sure that a past Democratic President could run again if he wanted to.

Again, I cannot imagine that the neocons et al. will relinquish power for any reason, when they have profiteering and racketeering and rapturing plans that reach into the next 10 years.

They are working on this, be sure of it.

The only way we can fight this, is work on having non-stealable elections. This means a voter verified, auditable paper trail and outside observers in each precinct, and comparison of tabulated votes with actual hand counted votes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whistle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 05:07 PM
Response to Original message
20. Emperor-Chimp! That would complete the neo-conservative....
...roll-back to pre-FDR days. After that, I suppose the conservatives will repeal the income tax amendment taking the country back to the Harding period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mermaid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #20
27. Don't Worry, There IS An Amendment Filed To Repeal The 16th, Too
I saw it there.

Incidentally, the link failed because it is a temp link and I didn't know it.

Go to http://www.thomas.loc.gov

Look up the bill by it's bill number.

Make sure you switch the radio button to be searching for the bill number...which I provided.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ArtVandaley Donating Member (419 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 05:32 PM
Response to Original message
21. I would actually support this amendment
Edited on Wed Feb-09-05 05:33 PM by ArtVandaley
I don't like the idea of the government restricting who we can vote for. FDR was probably the greatest war time president in American history (with the exception of Lincoln, of course), and WW2 happened in his third term. I think history could have turned out differently if someone else had come after FDR's second term.
What if it had been Charlie L? Read Philip Roth's "The Plot Against America," chilling and amazing book.


On edit: Bush will be lucky to have over a 40% approval rating by 2008. There's no way in hell he could win another term. Social Security will flop, he'll be destroyed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mordarlar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #21
26. He was "destroyed" in 2004 Makes little differance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueInRed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 05:32 PM
Response to Original message
22. Yeah, I'd like to see Clinton vs little Bush
Clinton would clean his clock! Although I'm sure Bill might find it a bit frustrating to have to clean up after a second Bush mess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
23. Link failed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThorsHammer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 05:37 PM
Response to Original message
25. No......as others have said that would let (Bill) Clinton win instead
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 05:46 PM
Response to Original message
28. takes 7/8 years to add or change an ammendment..not enough time
Edited on Wed Feb-09-05 05:46 PM by ElsewheresDaughter
for another bush term in 08
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mermaid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 06:32 PM
Response to Reply #28
31. So What's To Stop The Fucker From Running In 2012??
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. truth exposed
Edited on Wed Feb-09-05 06:34 PM by ElsewheresDaughter
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mermaid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #32
33. Dreamer
No one gives a shit when it's THEM that are at the roots of the scandal.
Note the payola bullshit. How much public outcry has there been?

Note the MSM doing their best to ignore the Gannon thing...

If it was going on during the Clinton Administration, their hair woulda caught on fire!!

See, when it's US...they are all over us like stink on shit. When it's THEM, though...they just bury it and sweep it under the rug, and they get a pass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-05 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. and i'm not the only one...... perhaps someday they will join us and......
Edited on Wed Feb-09-05 08:01 PM by ElsewheresDaughter
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 01:36 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC