Franken proposes dems move to repeal the 22nd amendment

[BOSSHOG]

so bush can run for President again. Wacky Al things it would be hilarious to have republicans get up in congress and oppose the move. Not a bad line of reasoning but with just a degree of danger as to remain in Al's bag of jokes. Al be careful what you ask for. With diebold margin of error, bush only needs about 35% of the vote to "win."

[NYCGirl]

1. He also said before he would run for president, with Bill Clinton as VP,

and his only platform would be that he would resign immediately after being sworn in.

:rofl:

[BOSSHOG]

3. The 22nd was pushed by the republicans

in 1951 to show just how rough and tough they were. No more 5 term FDR's for them; and the first casualty of the amendment was President Eisenhower. Even back then the only thing republicans good do well was get elected.

[CrushTheDLC]

11. Bill Clinton can't run for VP either (unless such an ammendment is passed)

The constitution says that a VP must be able to become President, should the need arise, and as a two term President, he's not eligible.

The tragic thing here is that Poppy Bush could run for VP (and probably would if he wasn't so old) even though he probably performed 90% of the Reagan "presidency" himself.

[librechik]

2. I reminds me of some of the stunts the Pukkkes pull

to get us to discredit ourselves.

Why are we in this position? Can Congress' business not be done straightforwardly anymore? That is my impression.

[bigbrother05]

4. Sure, would let Clinton run again, too.

Any doubts who would win that one?

[n2doc]

5. Do we really want Clinton again?

Sure, I'd take him over any repuke, but he wasn't exactly the standard bearer for progressive causes....

Maybe the 'pukes would counter with a stuffed St. Ronnie. He would be about as lifelike as he was during his last few years in office...

[jumpoffdaplanet]

6. God yes!

Clinton fixed one rethug mess. He'd be able to fix this one, esp. with a dem congress backing him.

[lojasmo]

7. No. EOM

[rep the dems]

9. You're right, he wasn't.

Just look at the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy. It's not as bad as proposing an amendment against gay people, but it is not the kind of policy a true progressive would accept. I'm glad that Clinton was able to give democrats 2 terms away from the typical right wing bullshit, but to do so, he had to take a moderate approach to gain appeal from conservatives.

[Posteritatis]

8. I'm of mixed feelings about that amendment

On the one hand, a three-term Bush or Reagan gives me soul cancer to even think of.

On the other hand, if someone has enough voter support to run for three or four terms, I don't think the voters should be denied that choice.

[CrushTheDLC]

10. There's only two circumstances under which I could support that idea.

1) Every electronic voting machine would have to be destroyed.

2) The "election year ending in zero" curse would have had to be successful with the current occupant of the White House.

(if you don't know what that means, I can't elaborate further without Secret Service harrassment)

[dflprincess]

12. Let's remember that Al seems to be in denial about Bush stealing

the last two elections which means he hasn't considered that he could do it again. (Perhaps Stewart Smalley should talk to Al about his denial.)