Hail to the Cult of Personality:
Quote
End presidential term limits
By Jonathan Zimmerman, Published: November 28
Jonathan Zimmerman is a professor of history and education at New York University. His books include "Small Wonder: The Little Red Schoolhouse in History and Memory."
In 1947, Sen. Harley Kilgore (D-W.Va.) condemned a proposed constitutional amendment that would restrict presidents to two terms. "The executive's effectiveness will be seriously impaired," Kilgore argued on the Senate floor, " as no one will obey and respect him if he knows that the executive cannot run again."
I've been thinking about Kilgore's comments as I watch President Obama, whose approval rating has dipped to 37 percent in CBS News polling — the lowest ever for him — during the troubled rollout of his health-care reform. Many of Obama's fellow Democrats have distanced themselves from the reform and from the president. Even former president Bill Clinton has said that Americans should be allowed to keep the health insurance they have.
Or consider the reaction to the Iran nuclear deal. 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. 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?
That was the argument of our first president, who is often held up as the father of term limits. In fact, George Washington opposed them. "I can see no propriety in precluding ourselves from the service of any man who, in some great emergency, shall be deemed universally most capable of serving the public," Washington wrote in a much-quoted letter to the Marquis de Lafayette.
Washington stepped down after two terms, establishing a pattern that would stand for more than a century. But he made clear that he was doing so because the young republic was on solid footing, not because his service should be limited in any way.
The first president to openly challenge the two-term tradition was Theodore Roosevelt, who ran for a third term as president in 1912 on the Bull Moose ticket. When he stepped down in 1908, Roosevelt pledged not to seek a third term; reminded of this promise in 1912, he said that he had meant he would not seek a "third consecutive term." The New York Times called Roosevelt's explanation a "pitiful sophistication," and the voters sent Woodrow Wilson to the White House.
Only in 1940, amid what George Washington might have called a "great emergency," did a president successfully stand for a third term. Citing the outbreak of war overseas and the Depression at home, Democrats renominated Franklin D. Roosevelt. They pegged him for a fourth time in 1944 despite his health problems, which were serious enough to send him to his grave the following year.
To Republicans, these developments echoed the fascist trends enveloping Europe. "You will be serving under an American totalitarian government before the long third term is finished," warned Wendell Wilkie, Roosevelt's opponent in 1940. Once the two-term tradition was broken, Wilkie added, nobody could put it back together. "If this principle dies, it will be dead forever," he said.
That's why the GOP moved to codify it in the Constitution in 1947, when a large Republican majority took over Congress. Ratified by the states in 1951, the 22nd Amendment was an "undisguised slap at the memory of Franklin D. Roosevelt," wrote Clinton Rossiter, one of the era's leading political scientists. It also reflected "a shocking lack of faith in the common sense and good judgment of the people," Rossiter said.
He was right. Every Republican in Congress voted for the amendment, while its handful of Democratic supporters were mostly legislators who had broken with FDR and his New Deal. When they succeeded in limiting the presidency to two terms, they limited democracy itself.
"I think our people are to be safely trusted with their own destiny," Sen. Claude Pepper (D-Fla.) argued in 1947. "We do not need to protect the American people with a prohibition against a president whom they do not wish to elect; and if they wanted to elect him, have we the right to deny them the power?"
It's time to put that power back where it belongs. When Ronald Reagan was serving his second term, some Republicans briefly floated the idea of removing term limits so he could run again. The effort went nowhere, but it was right on principle. 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.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/end-presidential-term-limits/2013/11/28/50876456-561e-11e3-ba82-16ed03681809_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/end-presidential-term-limits/2013/11/28/50876456-561e-11e3-ba82-16ed03681809_story.html)
Three more TeaPartyists/extreme GOPtards just had an aneurysm.
Quote from: citizen k on November 29, 2013, 04:12:17 PM
Hail to the Cult of Personality:
Like Mussolini and Kennedy?
Or CHuck NOrris.
The only president since that time that would have even considered running for three terms is Clinton and I doubt he would have, dude seemed burnt out by the end.
Obama 2008/2013
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fassets.nydailynews.com%2Fpolopoly_fs%2F1.1273638.1361890248%21%2Fimg%2FhttpImage%2Fimage.jpg_gen%2Fderivatives%2Flandscape_635%2Fflotus27n-1-web.jpg&hash=20e39b39813cba54109d02d4f877802aa8554e92)
Bush 2000/2008
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsophismata.files.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F01%2Fbush_in_2000_vs_bush_in_2008.jpg&hash=e2cd5901c3857feb7bd501ae004dc26be53898e0)
You be the judge. Two terms is plenty.
I miss W.
Quote from: 11B4V on November 29, 2013, 07:05:17 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 29, 2013, 06:50:40 PM
I miss W.
Fun guy. :(
Yep. He was better than Biden, because Biden knows when he is saying goofy shit. Dubya seemed to buy that stuff hook, line, and sinker.
He's been a model ex-president, though. I think it was a mistake not to promote him to that job as early as possible.
Quote from: grumbler on November 29, 2013, 07:09:04 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on November 29, 2013, 07:05:17 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 29, 2013, 06:50:40 PM
I miss W.
Fun guy. :(
Yep. He was better than Biden, because Biden knows when he is saying goofy shit. Dubya seemed to buy that stuff hook, line, and sinker.
He's been a model ex-president, though. I think it was a mistake not to promote him to that job as early as possible.
Americans
Term limits are a dumb idea.
The arguments in favor of term limits essentially boil down to the belief that the electorate is too stupid and keep voting for the same guy...thus they use be saved from themselves.
Quote from: Tonitrus on November 29, 2013, 08:25:34 PM
The arguments in favor of term limits essentially boil down to the belief that the electorate is too stupid and keep voting for the same guy...thus they use be saved from themselves.
But the electorate
is too stupid.
Quote from: Tonitrus on November 29, 2013, 08:25:34 PM
The arguments in favor of term limits essentially boil down to the belief that the electorate is too stupid and keep voting for the same guy...thus they use be saved from themselves.
Example number one - Berlusconi
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 29, 2013, 08:53:15 PM
Quote from: Tonitrus on November 29, 2013, 08:25:34 PM
The arguments in favor of term limits essentially boil down to the belief that the electorate is too stupid and keep voting for the same guy...thus they use be saved from themselves.
Example number one - Berlusconi
That's really a failure of the justice system in Italy. Or perhaps more accurately the justice system of Italy working the way it's suppose to.
Quote from: 11B4V on November 29, 2013, 06:45:23 PM
Obama 2008/2013
Told you he's going to look like Morgan Freeman by the time it's all over.
Quote from: Tonitrus on November 29, 2013, 08:25:34 PM
The arguments in favor of term limits essentially boil down to the belief that the electorate is too stupid and keep voting for the same guy...thus they use be saved from themselves.
I know they are pretty convincing arguments. I am not really sure how to counter them.
Well people do age over 8 years.
Quote from: Valmy on November 29, 2013, 11:05:24 PM
Quote from: Tonitrus on November 29, 2013, 08:25:34 PM
The arguments in favor of term limits essentially boil down to the belief that the electorate is too stupid and keep voting for the same guy...thus they use be saved from themselves.
I know they are pretty convincing arguments. I am not really sure how to counter them.
Well it's the same arguments that dictators use. Counter them the same way.
Quote from: Tonitrus on November 29, 2013, 08:25:34 PM
The arguments in favor of term limits essentially boil down to the belief that the electorate is too stupid and keep voting for the same guy...thus they use be saved from themselves.
Yeah. I don't understand term limits. If the people want to elect the guy 3 times, why shouldn't they?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 29, 2013, 10:51:48 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on November 29, 2013, 06:45:23 PM
Obama 2008/2013
Told you he's going to look like Morgan Freeman by the time it's all over.
:)
Still, no job is worth that. It should remain a temp gig so to speak.
Shocking that the LanguishLeft would be against presidential term limits around this time.
Not so shocking that you're a douchebag.
I think we should have term limits until such time that we decide to elect God King Bloomberg for all time.
Quote from: derspiess on November 30, 2013, 01:42:29 PM
Shocking that the LanguishLeft would be against presidential term limits around this time.
I've always been against term limits.
FDR had four terms, then he died, and HST had two. It was the best America has ever been. Sort of, anyway. Certainly the most most asymmetrically nuclearly-powered.
FDR thought the people was too stupid to decide if they wanted a cripple or not.
Quote from: The Brain on November 30, 2013, 07:20:28 PM
FDR thought the people was too stupid to decide if they wanted a cripple or not.
Brain makes a comment relevant to the discussion! :o
It would be wonderful if they were to get rid of term limits now. Just for the glorious frothy evil dictator obama rage.
Its not going to happen....but it would be nice.
Quote from: derspiess on November 30, 2013, 01:42:29 PM
Shocking that the LanguishLeft would be against presidential term limits around this time.
As Obama's more unpopular than ever before? :mellow:
I've never been a fan. The people always get it right, more or less.
Quote from: Sheilbh on December 01, 2013, 02:08:16 PM
I've never been a fan. The people always get it right, more or less.
Usually a bit more less than more, though.
Quote from: derspiess on November 30, 2013, 01:42:29 PM
Shocking that the LanguishLeft would be against presidential term limits around this time.
I've always thought that term limits are both unnecessary and insulting to the electorate as well; have I suddenly moved to the LanguishLeft as well... :ph34r:
I sort of agree with term limits in certain systems, particularly the American: if you can't be reelected you can't prioritize your reelection when enacting policy.
Quote from: Agelastus on December 01, 2013, 02:26:47 PM
Quote from: derspiess on November 30, 2013, 01:42:29 PM
Shocking that the LanguishLeft would be against presidential term limits around this time.
I've always thought that term limits are both unnecessary and insulting to the electorate as well; have I suddenly moved to the LanguishLeft as well... :ph34r:
Yes. Derspiess has moved right and anyone left back is well... left.
The People elected Carter over Ford. Fuck them.
Actually, I like term limits just fine; in fact I am happy with two terms.
But they should each be ten years long.
Quote from: Neil on December 01, 2013, 03:38:24 PM
The People elected Carter over Ford. Fuck them.
To be fair to the people, they were given a terrible choice that year.
Quote from: Agelastus on December 01, 2013, 06:12:36 PM
Quote from: Neil on December 01, 2013, 03:38:24 PM
The People elected Carter over Ford. Fuck them.
To be fair to the people, they were given a terrible choice that year.
And they voted for him. :(
The idea that checks and balances are 'insulting to the electorate' is inherently foolish.
I find those before/after Presidential pics to be the worst kind of nonsense. For one, they most likely carefully select the picture that looks the "youngest" for the beginning of their term--which is subjective and will certainly be based on the lighting, angle, even how good the make up job they have on was. Then of course they look for the most hagard/old looking picture for the end of their term.
Most Presidents we've had in the 20th century start out either in their 40s or their early/mid 50s and obviously end their terms 4/8 years later. Ask anyone who has aged from their 40s to their 50s or early 60s (aside from grumbler who went through this so long ago that he's long since forgotten) what happens and how uncommon it is to see gray hair and wrinkles. Graying in particular is something a lot of people go through relatively rapidly, and it's one of those things where once a critical mass of gray hair is present it can start to seem like the person has gone from being young to old overnight, but in reality they've probably been graying at a perfectly average speed for a man.
Two terms is plenty for a President, IMO. Even if it's a President that I really like I still say two terms, eight years is long enough. I think it's politically healthy to have new ideas and a new administration rather than dragging on with a President that becomes stagnant, and could also become too powerful. I also feel that term limits for Congress could be considered. Incumbents become too powerful, hard to unseat, plus too connected to business and other interests, and then they're doing policy for their interests more than for the country.
Quote from: KRonn on December 01, 2013, 08:31:13 PM
Two terms is plenty for a President, IMO. Even if it's a President that I really like I still say two terms, eight years is long enough. I think it's politically healthy to have new ideas and a new administration rather than dragging on with a President that becomes stagnant, and could also become too powerful. I also feel that term limits for Congress could be considered. Incumbents become too powerful, hard to unseat, plus too connected to business and other interests, and then they're doing policy for their interests more than for the country.
Well sure, I think it's prudent to limit the presidential candidates
you can vote for, but not for the public at large.
Quote from: Razgovory on December 01, 2013, 09:04:32 PM
Quote from: KRonn on December 01, 2013, 08:31:13 PM
Two terms is plenty for a President, IMO. Even if it's a President that I really like I still say two terms, eight years is long enough. I think it's politically healthy to have new ideas and a new administration rather than dragging on with a President that becomes stagnant, and could also become too powerful. I also feel that term limits for Congress could be considered. Incumbents become too powerful, hard to unseat, plus too connected to business and other interests, and then they're doing policy for their interests more than for the country.
Well sure, I think it's prudent to limit the presidential candidates you can vote for, but not for the public at large.
;)
Quote from: Neil on December 01, 2013, 08:06:20 PM
The idea that checks and balances are 'insulting to the electorate' is inherently foolish.
Really? I never realised you were as inherently foolish as to make such a comment; since when is a sign of unearned distrust not an insult?
A "check and balance" is a constitution, or a supreme court, or a division of powers. Not a "this was the best man for the job the last time you voted for him, there's no better candidate this time, but you still can't vote for the best man anyway."
Quote from: Agelastus on December 02, 2013, 10:03:19 AM
Not a "this was the best man for the job the last time you voted for him, there's no better candidate this time, but you still can't vote for the best man anyway."
I doubt that hypothetical applies to most elections.
Quote from: Agelastus on December 02, 2013, 10:03:19 AM
A "check and balance" is a constitution, or a supreme court, or a division of powers. Not a "this was the best man for the job the last time you voted for him, there's no better candidate this time, but you still can't vote for the best man anyway."
I guess I would just feel fortunate that there was one time in my life I actually got to vote for the very best person for an elected office.
Well, I could have made the phrase longer by making it "the person that you, the voter, perceive as being the best choice among the pool of potentially available candidates should term limits not apply."
But then I didn't think that was as catchy.
Or that I had to be that specific.
:P
Quote from: Agelastus on December 02, 2013, 05:38:42 PM
Well, I could have made the phrase longer by making it "the person that you, the voter, perceive as being the best choice among the pool of potentially available candidates should term limits not apply."
Heck when I vote for my Congressional Representatives I am lucky if I get a pool of two potentially available candidates. It is usually just the incumbent and the libertarian guy. If we had term limits maybe the corrupt power of incumbency would be lessened and I would actually get a pool of candidates to choose from. Whenever we do get an actual pool people get excited about it, it is pretty sad.
That is the reason people consider term-limits because our system has built into it massive amounts of advantages to incumbents, not because we all love dictators and think people are stupid or whatever. I do not think term limits are the answer but I sure see why people are in favor of them.
:yes:
Think what a term limit would have done to Pelosi. :pray:
If I could rewrite the constitution as I wish I'd give term limits to everyone.
A max of 12 years in the House, 18 in the Senate and 12 in the White House.
Amendment 28 - The terms of office of members of the House Repsentative will last four years. Elections will be staggered with half of the House going up for election every two years.
No person shall be elected to a position as a member of the House of Representatives more than thrice, and no person who has held a position as a member of the House of a Representatives for more than two years of a term, to which some other person was elected as a Representative, shall be elected to the position of Representative more than twice.
Amendment 29 - No person shall be elected to the position of Senator more than thrice, and no person who has held the position of Senator for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected Senator, shall be elected to the position of Senator more than twice.
Amendment 30 - No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than thrice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice.
If could rewrite the Constitution, it would skip having an Article I.
I would make Obama President for Life. :)
Quote from: DGuller on December 02, 2013, 11:51:31 PM
I would make Obama President for Life. :)
Yay for mediocrity?
Quote from: DGuller on December 02, 2013, 11:51:31 PM
I would make Obama President for Life. :)
It shouldn't take that long to fix the Obamacare exchanges.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 02, 2013, 11:46:39 PM
If could rewrite the Constitution, it would skip having an Article I.
All legislative power to the Soviets?