View Poll Results: 22nd Amendment?

Voters
25. You may not vote on this poll
  • It serves a valuable purpose and should be kept

    11 44.00%
  • It does more harm than good and should be repealed

    12 48.00%
  • Other

    2 8.00%
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 43

Thread: 22nd Amendment... unintended consequences?

  1. #31
    Phonetic Mnemonic
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:54 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,399

    Re: 22nd Amendment... unintended consequences?

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    I could be wrong but I do not think amnesty was ever given to illegals before and it it has its been an extremely long time.In Bush's case many people still remember or have been educated on the failure of the Reagan Amnesty. So it is kind of hard to trust the government on another so called immigration reform compromise when they have not done anything to crack down on illegal immigration. This is why Bush Was not successful.Had Reagan not given amnesty to illegals Bush would have been successful if pushing amnesty. It basically like someone wanting you to loan them money when they have a past of not paying you back.
    I'm pulling this out of the deep dark cobweb-covered recesses of my brain, but if I recall correctly Reagan's amnesty was sold as a one-time deal. I do recall some during Bush's attempt saying we shouldn't because we already did it.

    Getting way off from the 22nd Amendment, though.

  2. #32
    Sage
    lizzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    between two worlds
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,581

    Re: 22nd Amendment... unintended consequences?

    I, for one, am glad we have term limits on the prez, and if I had my way, we'd have one for congress as well.
    "God is the name by which I designate all things which cross my path violently and recklessly, all things which alter my plans and intentions, and change the course of my life, for better or for worse."
    -C G Jung

  3. #33
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: 22nd Amendment... unintended consequences?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    I'm pulling this out of the deep dark cobweb-covered recesses of my brain, but if I recall correctly Reagan's amnesty was sold as a one-time deal. I do recall some during Bush's attempt saying we shouldn't because we already did it.

    Getting way off from the 22nd Amendment, though.
    This is due to the failure of the fist amnesty and the fact the government has proven it can't be trusted to uphold any enforcement provisions.This is why Bush's amnesty failed to pass, not because of term limits.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  4. #34
    Phonetic Mnemonic
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:54 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,399

    Re: 22nd Amendment... unintended consequences?

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    This is due to the failure of the fist amnesty and the fact the government has proven it can't be trusted to uphold any enforcement provisions.This is why Bush's amnesty failed to pass, not because of term limits.
    I didn't mean to imply that it was because of term limits, hence my next sentence regarding getting away from the topic.

  5. #35
    User rocket boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    columbus, oh
    Last Seen
    06-24-12 @ 04:30 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    41

    Re: 22nd Amendment... unintended consequences?

    other.
    ive never agreed with term limits.
    when the voters think someone has been in office too long,
    they can vote them out.
    forcing someone out of office,
    just to give someone else a turn
    is kind of ridiculous.
    its not pee-wee soccer.
    its not important that everyone gets to play.
    ' ... i disagree with you ... but im pretty sure youre not hitler ... '
    - jon stewart -

  6. #36
    Phonetic Mnemonic
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:54 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,399

    Re: 22nd Amendment... unintended consequences?

    Term limits in general are just an acknowledgement that we suck as citizens.

  7. #37
    Educator a777pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Flower Mound, in the basement
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 08:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    815

    Re: 22nd Amendment... unintended consequences?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Does the 22nd Amendment limiting Presidential terms actually hinder the President (in their second term) and make them less effective?

    I understand the reasoning behind it, historically, but I don't care for it. One, it limits my choice should we ever actually have a good President.

    Two, I think the "lame duck" label is accurate. Even if they're popular, everybody in Congress knows the President will be gone soon, even people in the same party. Why would a Congressperson push a President's agenda when they know a President will soon be gone, and they need to push their own agenda so they can tell their constituents how important and effective they are? Essentially, the Congressperson is always running for re-election. Now, if Congress had the same limits, at least the playing field would be somewhat leveled, but I still wouldn't care for the idea.

    And third, I really think the historical fears were overblown. It's rarely been a serious issue. A small handful have tried, but only one actually succeeded.

    Thank you for this excellent question.


    I have been fighting for the repeal of the 22d Amendment since 1972.

    It has changed, and not for the better, the whole body politic of this nation.
    I came into this world fighting, screaming and covered in someone else's blood. I have no problem going out the same way.

  8. #38
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    8,351

    Re: 22nd Amendment... unintended consequences?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    We have term limits - always have. They are called regular elections.
    No know better than most on this site that is simply not true. Most districts in the country are "safe". Only wave elections sweep some of those incumbents out, even then a relatively small amount.

  9. #39
    Engineer

    RabidAlpaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    American in Europe
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    14,563

    Re: 22nd Amendment... unintended consequences?

    Quote Originally Posted by a777pilot View Post
    Thank you for this excellent question.


    I have been fighting for the repeal of the 22d Amendment since 1972.

    It has changed, and not for the better, the whole body politic of this nation.
    Why? I can't name one president since then that would've been worth keeping around longer than 8 years. Leaders who get too comfortable for too long tend to become tyrants.
    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I've got to say that it is shadenfreudalicious to see the rich and famous fucquewads on the coast suffering from the fires.

  10. #40
    Sage
    samsmart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,316
    Blog Entries
    37

    Re: 22nd Amendment... unintended consequences?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Does the 22nd Amendment limiting Presidential terms actually hinder the President (in their second term) and make them less effective?

    I understand the reasoning behind it, historically, but I don't care for it. One, it limits my choice should we ever actually have a good President.

    Two, I think the "lame duck" label is accurate. Even if they're popular, everybody in Congress knows the President will be gone soon, even people in the same party. Why would a Congressperson push a President's agenda when they know a President will soon be gone, and they need to push their own agenda so they can tell their constituents how important and effective they are? Essentially, the Congressperson is always running for re-election. Now, if Congress had the same limits, at least the playing field would be somewhat leveled, but I still wouldn't care for the idea.

    And third, I really think the historical fears were overblown. It's rarely been a serious issue. A small handful have tried, but only one actually succeeded.
    Actually, I'd rather limit our Presidents to single terms in office. Maybe then they'd have the balls to do what they campaign on.
    Also, we need to legalize recreational drugs and prostitution.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •