Clinton wants 22nd Amendment change-again

[sbp]

http://www.lemonizer.com/uploads/29clinton6.jpg
Clinton stopped short of saying he wanted to run for a third term

Former US President Bill Clinton has called (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2946802.stm) for a change to the constitution's 22nd Amendment which prevents a person from being elected president more than twice.

"I think since people are living much longer... the 22nd Amendment should probably be modified to say two consecutive terms instead of two terms for a lifetime," he said.

Speaking at the John F Kennedy Library and Museum in Boston, the former president said such a change probably would not apply to him but would benefit future generations.

The amendment was passed after Franklin D Roosevelt was elected to a record fourth presidential term in office.

"There may come a time when we elect a president at age 45 or 50, and then 20 years later the country comes up against the same kind of problems the president faced before," said Mr Clinton.

"People would like to bring that man or woman back but they would have no way to do so."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/29/politics/main556070.shtml
Clinton spoke during an informal discussion with historian Michael Beschloss. Beschloss asked him if historians should concern themselves with the private lives of presidents. Said Clinton: “I think you do have to deal with it to some extent if you're an historian.”

But he said there was “a whole lot of difference between writing a retrospective biography of somebody when all of the records are in ... and just, you know, essentially feasting on them under the guise of trying to enlighten the public. ... It's a grab for power, ratings, or position.”

[sbp]

Yeah sure this is for "future generations". http://home.earthlink.net/~sbp777/smilies/rolleye.gif And this is not the first time he's brought up this idea.

This guy just can't stand being out of the limelight. Clinton is full of it when he believes people want to have him again as President.


"There may come a time when we elect a president at age 45 or 50, and then 20 years later the country comes up against the same kind of problems the president faced before," said Mr Clinton. Yeah who knows when another intern needs to give a bj. http://home.earthlink.net/~sbp777/smilies/disgusted.gif Instead of taking care of the nations business, the office is abused for perverse gain.

[johnnymk]

Originally posted by sbp
http://www.lemonizer.com/uploads/29clinton6.jpg
If I can't run for a third term, I am going to have to sell used cars

Actually, I think he's worried that Hillary is going to steal the limelight from him.

[topane]

I'd hate to go back to that that nightmare of peace and prosperity (http://www.theonion.com/onion3701/bush_nightmare.html).

[topane]

http://members.dsli.com/kniemi/images/clintoncigar.jpg
Mmmmm.... tastes like Monica....

[LPMiller]

Originally posted by sbp
Yeah sure this is for "future generations". http://home.earthlink.net/~sbp777/smilies/rolleye.gif And this is not the first time he's brought up this idea.

This guy just can't stand being out of the limelight. Clinton is full of it when he believes people want to have him again as President.

Yeah who knows when another intern needs to give a bj. http://home.earthlink.net/~sbp777/smilies/disgusted.gif Instead of taking care of the nations business, the office is abused for perverse gain.

Yeah well, Regan brought up the same idea about 6 months before the end of his last term. Granted, he then forgot about it, but it's not new. I never did agree with the 22nd amendment - I mean, if can manage to get elected over and over again, people must want you, and it is supposed to be by the people, yadda yadda.

And He could get elected again. You forget, people are capable of anything come election day.

[zenbooty]

Originally posted by LPMiller


Yeah well, Regan brought up the same idea about 6 months before the end of his last term. Granted, he then forgot about it, but it's not new.Reagan was forgetting about a LOT of things toward the end of his second term :heh: .

[bachviet]

Just another Clinton's episode...

[whitak24]

generally, i am opposed to term limits.

we instituted them in Michigan in the early 90s (during the term-limit craze that swept the country), and they kicked in during the 98 election cycle. basically, now instead of just having idiots making the laws, we have inexperienced idiots who are insecure in their position. which means that the real power has shifted even moreso to the party caucuses, well-funded special-interest groups, lobbyists, and unelected staffers.

it definitely hasn't prompted better lawmaking -- it's probably worse.

that said, i am VERY opposed to the idea of changing the 22nd Amendment. particuarly with the strength of the media and the incredible position the president is in to manipulate that media for his own ends, i think it could quickly become impossible to unseat a president once they were elected.

not because they are doing such a good job, but because they are using the media so well to pound their message down people's throats. we saw it happen with reagan. we saw it NOT happen with bush I, due to his poor media management. clinton mastered the art, and bush II has taken it to an even higher level than clinton did.

the 22nd Amendment helps put a brake on this by forcing people to step down after 8 years. different leadership is good.

as for clinton's proposal, it's pure arrogance. why does he think that he'd be so uniquely qualified to handle certain situations (other than scoring with interns)? we don't need back to the Clinton, part II or back to the Bush II, part II in the future.

[Dave_7]

The 6-year, one term limit used by the Philippines ain't a bad idea. I think they still do that. No wasted year of campaigning between terms.



Dave.

[whitak24]

Originally posted by Dave_7
The 6-year, one term limit used by the Philippines ain't a bad idea. I think they still do that. No wasted year of campaigning between terms.



Dave.
hmmm....that's an interesting concept.

on one hand, i think 6 years is a fairly long time to have one president in office. i mean, would we really have wanted two more years of jimmy carter? :heh:

on the other hand, to have a one-and-done system would be a huge advantage on so many levels. i mean, really, presidents spend the last year of their term campaigning. they spend the two years before that making decisions that are based almost entirely on their desire to improve their public image and further their chances of reelection. and they spend the first year trying to settle into office. not a particularly efficient system.

the six-year, one-and-done plan might result in more presidential decisions based on the public interest, as most presidents aren't looking to move to any other elected office. they could perhaps move beyond the stranglehold of the special interest groups who helped elect them and make decisions based on common sense.

i realize that's somewhat unlikely, but it seems more likely to happen under a one-term limit system than under our current structure.

[brainsmile]

I believe it should read former president Hillary Clinton :hihi: