Three Terms for Barack Obama?

Mark,
Don't you feel the thrill going up your leg? Barackin' and Rollin' for decades.

Lets hope Obsama serves one term at most.

H-I-L-L-A-R-Y!!!!!

I would imagine the O-Bots would like to see this happen, but let's see how well he lives up to what he has already promised before we talk term 3.

Remember people a president only has so much power it's the congress and senate that has the true power. Or how much money you line the pockets of the other countries to let you do what you want in their country. Look at Bush he should have never even had one term. After all it is up to the people who elect him in. Unless once again whom can buy the election. Bush is the best example. He passed things what was good for his pocket by lining others pockets

I believe that there should be term limits for all elected officials, at all levels of government, local, state, and most importantly, at the federal level, where many elected idiots, for the most part, spend taxpayer dollars, often unwisely, in the ceaseless effort to be re-elected.

Term limits would preclude tenure, which creates power, which creates absolute power, which produces the ilk of Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, Nance Pelosi, and notably John Murtha, who likely has the greatest number of "pork" projects named after him.

Two terms in office should provide officials ample time to learn the way to their offices, their seats in their respective chambers, and how to actually vote rather than as being "present".

The man has not even taken the oath yet for goodness sake. Let us see how well he does before we commit him or anyone else to more than 2 terms. I would not mind if they changed it to where a President could only serve two consecutive terms, 8 years as it stands. but after 8 more years he should be able to run again. What would that hurt? Especially if the people elect him. As for Obama, let us hope he does even half of what he promised, unlikely but lets hope. He could be worse than GWB or worse than Clinton. Yah, that will make you wake up screaming in the night. Besides, Congress and the Senate have the power and the CFR rules them and the President so it really does not matter.....

No, two terms is plenty. FDR serving four terms was at a very unusual time in history. While one could have understood three maybe (with the country being on the brink of WWII) by his fourth term FDR was quite ill and should have stepped aside.
Presidents today live in an instant media age - cable news, internet, etc. - things that were science fiction in FDR's time. A President's every move is analyzed now and Americans just get tired of looking at the same guy for 8 years and want a fresh face and change of direction. Hence we go from Bush to Obama.

how stupid can anyone be. 2 terms is long enough.

yep this is another change we cannot believe in.

hummmmmm

This is a peculiar excuse fo some people to bash Obama. Then again, coming within a hundred miles of any word such as 'Washington', 'president' or 'Obama' seems to elicit these knee-jerk reactions.

It's not such a simple question, since once you get beyond the theory and into the actual world, the correct answer would seem to depend upon the identity of the president. To come down on the side of safety, it should be limited to two terms, although when we get a really good one, it seems a shame.

A larger question, one which rose its ugly head during this past administration, is the degree to which the executive branch understands and honors the balance of power. We were heading towards a truly dangerous imbalance, so the limit makes a great deal of sense.

Being a Constitutional scholar, it's likely that Obama will honor the Founders' intent, and he has already shown signs of it. We shall see.

Hugo Chavez, here we come. Why am I not surprised?

And by the way, for those of you who think he's a "constitutional scholar" -- he's not. He was a lecturer, not even an assistant professor, at Chicago. Another part of the Hollywood mythmaking.

I would like to see the 22nd Amendment repealed or revised. Only because the House and Senate will not place term restrictions on itself. In some cases, I have to wonder if 8 years is really enough. I would be willing to change the term limit to 3 terms. So, that will make that to be 12 years. In addition, the House and Senate should also be included to have term limitations to say 18 years. That would be 9 terms in the House and 3 terms in the Senate. Plus, if they wish to stay electively employed, they can run for office in the other House or for President. Let's say if a Senator at the end of his or her term limitation still want to be in office, he or she can run for a seat in the House of Representative. And if a member of the House of Representative at the end of his or her term limitation want to stay in office can run for a US Senate seat. And the US Supreme Court Justice's term limit to 20 years.

For Pete's sake the guy hasn't even begun his first term. He could turn out to be a total disaster. More about the "unknown" could be learned which I hope is the case as you selected a fabricated potential president & the gullible voters fell for his empty unrealistic promises. Thank goodness he has surrounded himself with some experienced individuals who have somewhat of an idea of how to procede with all the problems our country is facing. The constitution should not be messed with. This recommendation is the most ridiculous thing I have heard of. Is it being raised because Obama is HALF white? There seems to be no end to the manipulation attempts where he is concerned.
It is high time to focus on the NOW. He was "anointed" early in his campaign for no reason & he has not yet accomplished anything for the people. It continues to be about self. H-e-l-l-o......Americans are struggling. Get your head out of the sand. (I bet there will be a lot of congressmen voted out the next time around & rightfully so the way things are going.)

And by the way, for those of you who think he's a "constitutional scholar" -- he's not. He was a lecturer, not even an assistant professor, at Chicago. Another part of the Hollywood mythmaking.
_________________________________________

If 'constitutional scholar' is an exaggeration, then so is mere 'lecturer'. That implies reading from notes to a large audience. Leading seminars - which he did - requires a very detailed understanding of the subject. Some of his former students have described his skill at eliciting analyses from them - this is more than a simple passing knowledge of a particular field of law. It would also be difficult to avoid studying the subject, given his field of concentration at Columbia and the general knowledge of law studied at Harvard. These things add up. The semantics either way can be misleading.

For those whining about Obama's being 'annointed' and being 'empty' - he was elected for his obvious intelligence, ability, cool analytical skills, combination of idealism and pragmatism, and focus. His accomplishments are real, and to undervalue them is to undervalue education and breadth of life experience. Whether it's possible for anyone to deal with so many problems simultaneously, we can only wait and see.

He has surrounded himself with good people not by sheer accident.

And why, when the press or bloggers choose to tackle a particular subject, do people blame the subject?
Can anyone show any evidence that Obama or his backers have tried to extend the term limit?

Rollando - good ideas. I've long thought that congress should have term limits, but are they ever going to vote themselves out of a job? They don't even vote against their own wage increases in a worsening economy.

I read your comments and I smile because you will see that Obama will fufill his promises to the best of his ability with our help. He will be a fantastic president and even for those who would rather he not be in the position he is I believe that by the end of this 4 years you will be begging him to stay for another term or two. After all we have been slowly drowning for 8 years or more please recognize a lifeline when you see it.

What we really need is a Constitutional amendment that limits the presidency to one per family that goes out to second cousins and great, great, great grandchildren. We've had two father/son presidencies so far (Adams and Bush) and both have been profound mistakes! There are enough people in America for a good selection.

"Representative Jose Serrano (D) has introduced a bill in the House to abolish the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution,"
__________________________________________________

Watta pud.

jan9:48AMJan 15th 2009

For those whining about Obama's being 'annointed' and being 'empty' - he was elected for his obvious intelligence, ability, cool analytical skills, combination of idealism and pragmatism, and focus. His accomplishments are real, and to undervalue them is to undervalue education and breadth of life experience. =============================================================================To what accomplishments are you referring?