Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Social > Politics and News

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-09-2013, 06:27 AM   #1
Anarchist420
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 8,539
Default Res to Repeal the 22nd Amendment

The 21st and 22nd Amendments are two of only a few Amendments after the first ten that don't suck. However, I don't think that the 22nd goes far enough because it allows an individual 2 terms rather than just one.

Unfortunately, there is a resolution to repeal it completely rather than strengthen it.

Link

What do you think? Should the 22nd be repealed, should it remain as it is, or should it be strengthened to a limit of one term?
Anarchist420 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 06:40 AM   #2
Charles Kozierok
Elite Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,762
Default

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/termlimits.asp
__________________
"Of those who say nothing, few are silent." -- Thomas Neill
Charles Kozierok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 07:16 AM   #3
MomentsofSanity
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 3,449
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anarchist420 View Post
The 21st and 22nd Amendments are two of only a few Amendments after the first ten that don't suck. However, I don't think that the 22nd goes far enough because it allows an individual 2 terms rather than just one.

Unfortunately, there is a resolution to repeal it completely rather than strengthen it.

Link

What do you think? Should the 22nd be repealed, should it remain as it is, or should it be strengthened to a limit of one term?
And you wonder why you are subject to ridicule when you post things from lewrockwell.com.
MomentsofSanity is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 07:51 AM   #4
EagleKeeper
Discussion Club Moderator
Elite Member
 
EagleKeeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Bumps west of Denver
Posts: 42,600
Default

How about you provide some justification for what you are stating. give your OWN opinions on why you have such a stand.

You do too much regurgitating
__________________
F15 Air Superiority Fighter - Never has one been lost in aerial combat (104 kills)
EagleKeeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 09:55 AM   #5
dank69
Lifer
 
dank69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Corner of FORECLOSURE and BÅNKRUPTCY ST.
Posts: 13,102
Default

Think it through, kiddo. Obama can be more brazen now that he doesn't have to worry about re-election. You want even more of that? Or do you want the president to have a motive to listen to the people?

Think about a guy like Romney who was willing to do and say ANYTHING in order to get elected. Imagine if he got elected and could do anything he wanted within the law without considering what the people who voted for him wanted.
__________________
Nemesis 1: Above your age please. The climate is in fact warmer now . Maybe this erection will cool things down mother earth shes hot.

pcgeek11: IMO: Being gay is not a minority. It is a genetic defect

Idontcare: dank69 is hereby permabanned.

Last edited by dank69; 01-09-2013 at 12:26 PM.
dank69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 09:59 AM   #6
xj0hnx
Diamond Member
 
xj0hnx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 9,244
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MomentsofSanity View Post
And you wonder why you are subject to ridicule when you post things from lewrockwell.com.
Too be fair though, Lewrockwell is as valid as Mother Jones, Media Matters, or the DailyKos, which get posted here all the time.
__________________
www.svc.com

i7 920 | EVGA X58 E758-A1 | HIS HD6870 |12GB Crucial DDR3 | 5.5TB | OS X 10.6.8

Heat
xj0hnx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 10:39 AM   #7
Jaskalas
Lifer
 
Jaskalas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 18,415
Default

Term limits are anti-Democratic.

They're a sign that the people are too stupid to vote, and if we've reached that point then none of it matters anyway.
__________________
"because... you know... the Cold War has been over for 20 years."
-President Obama, 2012 debate.
Jaskalas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 10:48 AM   #8
Incorruptible
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 9,536
Default

The moron who suggested the idea needs some common sense instilled into him. Since most of the presidents have been absolutely horrible and have expanded government the 1 term idea doesn't sound so bad but there have been some good presidents who should have two terms.

Keep it at two terms since anything more than that is not healthy for liberty. fdr was the only one who went past two terms and he was a tyrant, his new deal really damaged America and he was a big violator of freedom.

If Ron Paul won and wasn't screwed over and had two terms he would have fixed the country.
Incorruptible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 12:05 PM   #9
Londo_Jowo
Lifer
 
Londo_Jowo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Richmond, TX
Posts: 13,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Incorruptible View Post
If Ron Paul won and wasn't screwed over and had two terms he would have fixed the country.
Even a miracle occurred and he won, he still wouldn't have the support to do anything more than most Presidents. He would need a majority in both houses to get anything major through both and signed into law.
Londo_Jowo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 12:09 PM   #10
Jaskalas
Lifer
 
Jaskalas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 18,415
Default

The voters should get the President they want, for as long as they want.
__________________
"because... you know... the Cold War has been over for 20 years."
-President Obama, 2012 debate.
Jaskalas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 12:48 PM   #11
ElFenix
Elite Member
Super Moderator
Off Topic
 
ElFenix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 94,087
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anarchist420 View Post
The 21st and 22nd Amendments are two of only a few Amendments after the first ten that don't suck. However, I don't think that the 22nd goes far enough because it allows an individual 2 terms rather than just one.

Unfortunately, there is a resolution to repeal it completely rather than strengthen it.

Link

What do you think? Should the 22nd be repealed, should it remain as it is, or should it be strengthened to a limit of one term?
so, the 13th amendment sucks?
__________________
I killed and ate the Fun Mod with some jellybeans and a little Chianti.

AnandTech Mean Moderator
ElFenix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 12:55 PM   #12
ichy
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 6,932
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xj0hnx View Post
Too be fair though, Lewrockwell is as valid as Mother Jones, Media Matters, or the DailyKos, which get posted here all the time.
And people who post that trash are rightfully mocked.
__________________
“Our belief is not a belief. Our principles are not a faith. We do not rely soley upon science and reason, because these are necessary rather than sufficient factors, but we distrust anything that contradicts science or outrages reason. We may differ on many things, but what we respect is free inquiry, openmindedness, and the pursuit of ideas for their own sake.”
-Christopher Hitchens
ichy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 12:56 PM   #13
ichy
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 6,932
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaskalas View Post
Term limits are anti-Democratic.

They're a sign that the people are too stupid to vote, and if we've reached that point then none of it matters anyway.
The United States is not a democracy, it is a constitutional republic. Most of the time the majority decides what happens but the constitution as un-democratic rules in order to make it harder for 51% of the population to vote to enslave the other 49%.
__________________
“Our belief is not a belief. Our principles are not a faith. We do not rely soley upon science and reason, because these are necessary rather than sufficient factors, but we distrust anything that contradicts science or outrages reason. We may differ on many things, but what we respect is free inquiry, openmindedness, and the pursuit of ideas for their own sake.”
-Christopher Hitchens
ichy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 01:08 PM   #14
MomentsofSanity
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 3,449
Default

This resolution really exemplifies the completely BS way people choose to approach politics now a days. The Rep. who proposed this has done so every 2 years since 1997. 0-8 so far. However this year it's being presented on numerous blogs and sites as "Resolution to declare Obama President for life."

It is just sad how dishonestly people want to approach political discussions these days.
MomentsofSanity is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 01:25 PM   #15
Jaskalas
Lifer
 
Jaskalas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 18,415
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ichy View Post
The United States is not a democracy, it is a constitutional republic. Most of the time the majority decides what happens but the constitution as un-democratic rules in order to make it harder for 51% of the population to vote to enslave the other 49%.
Which has nothing to do with term limits.

You didn't change what I said, unless you mean to imply that term limits prevent the 51% from 'enslaving' the other... but surely you don't think any of that is related...
__________________
"because... you know... the Cold War has been over for 20 years."
-President Obama, 2012 debate.
Jaskalas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 01:46 PM   #16
sm625
Diamond Member
 
sm625's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 4,791
Default

Potentially endless terms creates entrenched power, which is bad regardless of how popular the regime is. Because entrenched power creates entrenched corruption. It is better not to have any of that. The entire concept of "an establishment" is inherently against the wishes of the founders. Washington was supposed to be a place where the average person could go to perform a civic duty. Not a place to go to get rich and buy and sell shady pork barrel deals. It's all gone so rotten. One of the main reasons for this rot lies in the amendments. Look at the 17th amendment in particular.
__________________
I am looking for a cheap upgrade to my 3 year old computer.
AT forum member #1: Buy a 4790k

I am looking for a way to get 10 more fps in TF2.
AT forum member #2: Buy a 4790k
sm625 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 02:23 PM   #17
ivwshane
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 7,703
Default

So repealing, whether by strengthening or removing an amendment is ok and worthy of discussion just so long as you aren't talking about the 2nd amendment?

Is that because the 2nd is more constitutional?


Lol at fucking nut jobs!
__________________
System Specs
ivwshane is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 04:16 PM   #18
drebo
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 6,601
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaskalas View Post
Term limits are anti-Democratic.

They're a sign that the people are too stupid to vote, and if we've reached that point then none of it matters anyway.
Lack of term limits promotes career politicians who are more concerned about their job than the welfare of their constituents.

Which is worse?

IMO, I'd favor strict term limits over the current "elected aristocracy" we currently have.
__________________
"All men are not created equal, and if you believe they are, there's something seriously wrong with you. Some men are destined for greatness. Most aren't. End of story." - Jose Canseco
drebo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 04:19 PM   #19
Anarchist420
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 8,539
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElFenix View Post
so, the 13th amendment sucks?
It does because it kept the slavery issue a national one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by xj0hnx View Post
Too be fair though, Lewrockwell is as valid as Mother Jones, Media Matters, or the DailyKos, which get posted here all the time.
LRC is more valid than any commie shit.
Anarchist420 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 04:31 PM   #20
ElFenix
Elite Member
Super Moderator
Off Topic
 
ElFenix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 94,087
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anarchist420 View Post
It does because it kept the slavery issue a national one.
LRC is more valid than any commie shit.
it combined with union forces burning down georgia ended the slavery issue. it didn't keep anything.
__________________
I killed and ate the Fun Mod with some jellybeans and a little Chianti.

AnandTech Mean Moderator
ElFenix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 05:02 PM   #21
Smoblikat
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,718
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anarchist420 View Post
The 21st and 22nd Amendments are two of only a few Amendments after the first ten that don't suck. However, I don't think that the 22nd goes far enough because it allows an individual 2 terms rather than just one.

Unfortunately, there is a resolution to repeal it completely rather than strengthen it.

Link

What do you think? Should the 22nd be repealed, should it remain as it is, or should it be strengthened to a limit of one term?
I think presidents should have 4 terms avaliable to them. But they should be 2 years each, and not 4. That way, if you get a guy that sucks (like hussein Obama) he would only be in there for 2 years. But if you get a guy that wants to help America (Ron Paul) he can still have the total of 8 years.
__________________
3770K|ASrock Z77 Extreme11|4x8gb DDR3 1600|4xHD6970|1440P 120hz - Buzzard
X6 1055T|ASUS M4A89GTD-EVO USB3|2x4gb Gskill 1600|HD4870X2 + HD48701gb - Virgo
2xXeon L5639|EVGA SR2|6x8gb DDR3|4x2TB
Smoblikat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 06:26 PM   #22
RampantAndroid
Diamond Member
 
RampantAndroid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,704
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smoblikat View Post
I think presidents should have 4 terms avaliable to them. But they should be 2 years each, and not 4. That way, if you get a guy that sucks (like hussein Obama) he would only be in there for 2 years. But if you get a guy that wants to help America (Ron Paul) he can still have the total of 8 years.
I'd favor a vote of confidence, actually. The people do a vote of confidence every 2 years (in say, January. So we'd have one Jan 2014.) If the pres fails to get a 55% majority or something (not simple majority) then there's an election. Else, no election.
__________________
Someone apparently went up to the great philosopher Wittgenstein and said "What a lot of morons people back in the Middle Ages must have been to have looked, every morning, at the dawn and to have thought what they were seeing was the Sun going around the Earth, when every school kid knows that the Earth goes around the Sun", to which Wittgenstein replied "Yeah, but I wonder what it would have looked like if the Sun had been going around the Earth?"
RampantAndroid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 08:30 PM   #23
cubby1223
Lifer
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,412
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dank69 View Post
Think it through, kiddo. Obama can be more brazen now that he doesn't have to worry about re-election. You want even more of that? Or do you want the president to have a motive to listen to the people?

Think about a guy like Romney who was willing to do and say ANYTHING in order to get elected. Imagine if he got elected and could do anything he wanted within the law without considering what the people who voted for him wanted.
Your argument goes both ways...

In other words, you support Obama having the chance at re-election to a third term to keep him focused on helping the country, yet at the same time you want to make sure someone unpredictable as Romney cannot possibly swindle his way into unlimited terms?
cubby1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 08:55 PM   #24
Nintendesert
Diamond Member
 
Nintendesert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: LOLorado.
Posts: 7,761
Default

OP is wrong, you don't need anything except a Presidential edict, I recommend you start writing letters immediately!
__________________
TFP4Life!
Nintendesert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 09:11 PM   #25
GreenMeters
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 198
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cubby1223 View Post
Your argument goes both ways...

In other words, you support Obama having the chance at re-election to a third term to keep him focused on helping the country, yet at the same time you want to make sure someone unpredictable as Romney cannot possibly swindle his way into unlimited terms?
I think he was saying: consider how bad Romney would be in office if he didn't have to worry about getting elected for a second term.
GreenMeters is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.