Republicans want to change constitution to allow Bush to run again

[SuckOnThis]

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/06/319395.shtml

Republicans have officially started the the campaign to amend the Constitution by repealing the 22nd Amendment - the one that confines the President to two terms. If the Republicans hold their current strength, or increase it, in the 2006 Congressional elections, expect this measure to pass allowing Bush to remain President...
Republicans have officially started the the campaign to amend the Constitution by repealing the 22nd Amendment - the one that confines the President to two terms. If the Republicans hold their current strength, or increase it, in the 2006 Congressional elections, expect this measure to pass allowing Bush to remain President...

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution. (Introduced in House)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...H.J.RES.24.IH: (Notice this is on the Library of Congress server, where the current Congressional record is maintained)

[bringer]

fuck that shit

[simple simon]

never happen

[munki]

not cool

[CheneyRumsfeld]

if they require an intelligence test he is fucked.

[Rich]

Holy shit, I didn't think they'd actually try that. The Bush monarchy is in full swing.

[RuthB]

Doesn't the general public have a say on whether the constitution gets changed? A public vote or something like that/referendum?

I mean, the US is BUILT on the foundation of the constitution, everyone should have a say on whether they approve/disapprove constitutional changes shouldn't they??

(Of course, I'm a Brit-Canadian, and I have no clue about US Constitutional Law.)

[zzgundamnzz]

Bush is starting to look like Chancellor Palpatine from Star Wars. Were fucked cause we don't have any Jedi

[sextoyking]

2/3's of the states and 2/3's of the congress have to ratify on an ammed. Dems will never go with it...

[The Machine]

Originally Posted by zzgundamnzz

Bush is starting to look like Chancellor Palpatine from Star Wars. Were fucked cause we don't have any Jedi

Obi Bill to the rescue.

[StickyGreen]

Originally Posted by sextoyking

2/3's of the states and 2/3's of the congress have to ratify on an ammed. Dems will never go with it...

they would go for it if a dem was in office...

[After Shock Media]

Originally Posted by StickyGreen

they would go for it if a dem was in office...

There is a dim in the office, ohh wait you said dem. Nevermind.

[StickyGreen]

Originally Posted by After Shock Media

There is a dim in the office, ohh wait you said dem. Nevermind.

if he's such a dim then why didnt someone knock him out of office for this new term?

[sextoyking]

Actually I think it's 3/4 of the states have to ratify....

I wouldn't approve of it if a dem was in office either..

8 years is enough for any president.

[theking]

Originally Posted by WEGRuth

Doesn't the general public have a say on whether the constitution gets changed? A public vote or something like that/referendum?

I mean, the US is BUILT on the foundation of the constitution, everyone should have a say on whether they approve/disapprove constitutional changes shouldn't they??

(Of course, I'm a Brit-Canadian, and I have no clue about US Constitutional Law.)

The Amendment Process

There are essentially two ways spelled out in the Constitution for how it can be amended. One has never been used.

The first method is for a bill to pass both halves of the legislature, by a two-thirds majority in each. Once the bill has passed both houses, it goes on to the states. This is the route taken by all current amendments. Because of some long outstanding amendments, such as the 27th, Congress will normally put a time limit (typically seven years) for the bill to be approved as an amendment (for example, see the 21st and 22nd).

The second method prescribed is for a Constitutional Convention to be called by two-thirds of the legislatures of the States, and for that Convention to propose one or more amendments. These amendments are then sent to the states to be approved by three-fourths of the legislatures or conventions. This route has never been taken, and there is discussion in political science circles about just how such a convention would be convened, and what kind of changes it would bring about.

Regardless of which of the two proposal routes is taken, the amendment must be approved by three-fourths of states. The amendment as passed may specify whether the bill must be passed by the state legislatures or by a state convention. See the Ratification Convention Page for a discussion of the make up of a convention. Amendments are sent to the legislatures of the states by default. Only one amendment, the 21st, specified a convention. In any case, passage by the legislature or convention is by simple majority.

It is interesting to note that at no point does the President have a role in the formal amendment process (though he would be free to make his opinion known). He cannot veto an amendment proposal, nor a ratification.

[After Shock Media]

Originally Posted by StickyGreen

if he's such a dim then why didnt someone knock him out of office for this new term?

Two simple reasons, the democrates do not have balls anymore and then the republicans hedged their bets by making sure it was a win due to some interesting problems come voting day in a few key locations.

Though I will not play sour grapes and all that shit. I am a registered independant.

[DamageX]

Originally Posted by WEGRuth

Doesn't the general public have a say on whether the constitution gets changed? A public vote or something like that/referendum?

WTF do you think this is, democracy?

[VeriSexy]

Does not surprise me........

[jacked]

you realize if something like this happens you can almost garuntee another civil war...

[buck naked]

The problem for Bush is that if they repeal and 22nd amendment and allow him to run, they're also allowing Bill Clinton to run to. Loser douchebags like Gore and Kerry nearly beat bush. Against Bubba, he's toast.

[Alex]

Let them waste their time. IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

Unless they want a sure fire civil war. They wont ratify

[69pornlinks]

Originally Posted by simple simon

never happen

wanna bet..i told someone bush is the LAST u.s. president..nothing to see here...go back to thinking bout M.jackson...

Originally Posted by sextoyking

2/3's of the states and 2/3's of the congress have to ratify on an ammed. Dems will never go with it...

to you thinking there's a difference in this two parties

[BukkakeBrown]

aint gonna happen....

[smack]

oh jesus titty fucking christ.

[nyc-212]

Originally Posted by The Machine

Obi Bill to the rescue.

LOL

That's right -- Dems get to run the better Clinton if this happens. I think Bill could take him down.

[Thurbs]

rofl .. that would never work

[TheSaint]

Lol, I don't know the percentage of states that have republican contolled legistlatures, but its not 3/4 so this is doomed to failure. In fact, it would be so unpopular that one has to almost believe this is a dem plot to undermine Bush, not a legitimate effort. That aside, getting a constitutional ammendment is almost impossible - the last sucessful one was 30 years ago, half you guys were not born.

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by simple simon

never happen

LOL ... your world is really closed up ...

That is what you said this morning about the " Utah porn law" : FYI, that law passed.


Hitler did the same .... we know what happened.

[GatorB]

Considering it take YEARS for changes to the constitution to happen Bush would be out of office before the new rule went into effect. Anways what makes anyone think Bush wouldwina 3rd term if he could run? If American are that stupid I think it would be time to leave this country. Fact is if the election was held TODAY Kerry would win.

[TheSaint]

Originally Posted by directfiesta

LOL ... your world is really closed up ...

Hitler did the same .... we know what happened.

May I quote:

Godwin's law
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Godwin's law (also Godwin's rule of Nazi analogies) is an adage in Internet culture that was originated by Mike Godwin in 1990. The law states that:

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.
There is a tradition in many Usenet newsgroups that once such a comparison is made, the thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress. In addition, it is considered poor form to invoke the law explicitly. Godwin's law thus practically guarantees the existence of an upper bound on thread length in those groups. Many people understand Godwin's law to mean this, although (as is clear from the statement of the law above) this is not the original formulation

[GatorB]

Originally Posted by WEGRuth

Doesn't the general public have a say on whether the constitution gets changed? A public vote or something like that/referendum?

I mean, the US is BUILT on the foundation of the constitution, everyone should have a say on whether they approve/disapprove constitutional changes shouldn't they??

(Of course, I'm a Brit-Canadian, and I have no clue about US Constitutional Law.)

Even if congress passes it, which would have to be by at least 2/3 vote( not going to happen ) then 38 out of the 50 state legislators would also have to pass this for it to be law. I can think of at least 13 states where this won't pass.

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by TheSaint

May I quote:

Godwin's law
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Godwin's law (also Godwin's rule of Nazi analogies) is an adage in Internet culture that was originated by Mike Godwin in 1990. The law states that:

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.
There is a tradition in many Usenet newsgroups that once such a comparison is made, the thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress. In addition, it is considered poor form to invoke the law explicitly. Godwin's law thus practically guarantees the existence of an upper bound on thread length in those groups. Many people understand Godwin's law to mean this, although (as is clear from the statement of the law above) this is not the original formulation

12345678

?I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator,? said Adolf Hitler.



?God told me to strike at Al Qa?ida and I struck them. And then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did. With the might of God on our side we will triumph,? said George Bush. Or was that Hitler talking to Bush?



Hitler?s ghost haunts the United States of America.

John Stanton is a Virginia based writer. He is the author (along with Wayne Madsen) of America?s Nightmare: The Presidency of George Bush II. Reach him at [email protected]

[warlock5]

Assuming it did happen, there are very few people who could even hold 3 terms, almost impossible that they would go for 4.

Just look at Clinton now, he been having health problems. There is no way he would go for a 3rd term, even if he didn't have to campaign for it.

Being President of the US isn't like being a King -- its a lot of work, and that job is made harder because every 4 years you have to campaign again and try to get re-elected. Look at Asscroft & Powell, they couldn't even handle 4 years of their jobs.

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by GatorB

Even if congress passes it, which would have to be by at least 2/3 vote( not going to happen ) then 38 out of the 50 state legislators would also have to pass this for it to be law. I can think of at least 13 states where this won't pass.

Those states would become rogue states, aligned with North Korea, and labelled terrorists : they would be invaded, preventing a ....

[VirtuMike]

Clinton In 2008!!!!

[theking]

Originally Posted by directfiesta

Those states would become rogue states, aligned with North Korea, and labelled terrorists : they would be invaded, preventing a ....

What an ignorant foreign piece of trash you are.

[GatorB]

Originally Posted by directfiesta

Those states would become rogue states, aligned with North Korea, and labelled terrorists : they would be invaded, preventing a ....

Please. On Jan 20 2009 Bush is gone. PERIOD. I'm sure John McCain or some Dem is going to treat those states like rogue states. Anywas they had this talk after Reagan won his 2nd term, nothing came of it.

[SetTheWorldonFire]

somebody shoot president bush please

[SuckOnThis]

Originally Posted by GatorB

Anways what makes anyone think Bush wouldwina 3rd term if he could run? If American are that stupid I think it would be time to leave this country. Fact is if the election was held TODAY Kerry would win.

Two words: Voting Machines

[theking]

Originally Posted by SetTheWorldonFire

somebody shoot president bush please

You have just violated federal law.

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by theking

What an ignorant foreign piece of trash you are.

Better than shit ... tough it has it's uses ... drunkieBoy...



BTW, any news on Bin Laden and the WMD ?????

[Joesho]

I hope it passes, cause then Bill would come back and set the country right again.....

[detoxed]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/06/319395.shtml

Republicans have officially started the the campaign to amend the Constitution by repealing the 22nd Amendment - the one that confines the President to two terms. If the Republicans hold their current strength, or increase it, in the 2006 Congressional elections, expect this measure to pass allowing Bush to remain President...
Republicans have officially started the the campaign to amend the Constitution by repealing the 22nd Amendment - the one that confines the President to two terms. If the Republicans hold their current strength, or increase it, in the 2006 Congressional elections, expect this measure to pass allowing Bush to remain President...

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution. (Introduced in House)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...H.J.RES.24.IH: (Notice this is on the Library of Congress server, where the current Congressional record is maintained)

Evenif they took away the amendment, the american people would not elect him to a third term and most likely the sitting president would not be eligible for any changes made to the laws while he is president.

[kane]

This will never happen. No matter what they want to say or want you to belive there is already starting to be a backlash against the conservative republicans in this country. Only about 30% of the people think congress is doing a good job and bush's ratings are at an all time low. I won't be surprised to see the repubs lose some seats in the upcoming congressional elections next year. Even many repubs ( the more center and left leaning repubs ) are starting to speak out against the conservative movement. This bill and talk of this is just flexing. Even if they could get it through congress it would never pass all the states and even if it did, bush would already be out of office. I doubt he could win another term even he was allowed to run.

I'm not a democrat, nor a republican. I'm a registered independent that is more like a libertarian. I just like politics and seeing how things go.

[Drake]

I'm curious as to why they would start a campaign to amend it if they thought it would be impossible for it to pass. What would be the point or reasoning behind it?

[SuckOnThis]

Originally Posted by Mike33

I'm curious as to why they would start a campaign to amend it if they thought it would be impossible for it to pass. What would be the point or reasoning behind it?

Exactly, maybe they have an ace in the hole or its shortsided and weak but either way it goes to show they will stop at nothing to stay in power. Could you imagine if the dems tried this in Clintons last term? The media would be all over it.

[mardigras]

Do a search on "HJ 24 IH" (with quotes), the official name of this supposed bill. Only about 5 hits each currently in Google Web and Google Groups. Google News however returns nothing...

[Fukeneh]

it wont happen.... if it does, i will give my country back its fucking passport and citizenship.

[Downtime]

i'd proudly vote for him again

[Probono]

Originally Posted by mardigras

Do a search on "HJ 24 IH" (with quotes), the official name of this supposed bill. Only about 5 hits each currently in Google Web and Google Groups. Google News however returns nothing...

The bill is real, this from the Library of Congress, here are the sponsors



http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquer...9:HJ00024:@@@P