bush must be gearing up for a third term.

[tuvor]

From February 17. How did this slip under the radar?

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution.

ON EDIT: Original link not working. You'll have to access it via...

http://www.haloscan.com/comments/katsiva/111879875729703761/#384107)

(Thanks to CTW, a reader of AmericaBLOG

[deadparrot]

1. That's okay.

Let 'em do it.

We run Bill Clinton, we win. :)

[Eloriel]

13. Not with these voting machines, we won't.

And the voter suppression and other dirty tricks and fraud. Not even Bill Clinton could save us.

[libertarianseeker]

16. Sorry Eloriel

I didn't see your post

[libertarianseeker]

15. Not if they count the votes again

Diebold, ESS, Blackwell....

[deadparrot]

18. Well, then, let's all pack up

and go home. Hell, let's forget about elections from now on. We'll just curl up and die.

Yes, the voting system in this country has some serious problems. We've seen that in 2004 AND 2000. But if we stop discussion on future nominees and elections because we've got other issues, then we're going to lose on BBV, and we're going to lose in every election from now on. There's no doubt about it.

I'm not throwing in the towel quite yet. :)

[libertarianseeker]

24. I'm not suggesting we "pack it in"

And 2002...I'm just pointing out that if we don't do something to ensure an honest count, nothing else will matter. Kick me once- shame on you, kick me twice- shame on me, kick me three times- call it 2004 and seize control of 3 branches and the intelligence community. I have not received one Democratic fund-raising letter that mentions electoral reform!

[deadparrot]

26. Run Bill Clinton,

and I doubt the voting machines, for all their faults, will be a problem.

But that won't happen, because the 22nd won't be repealed or changed.

I know, we're not supposed to say "never," not with these people in power. But it won't happen.

[newyawker99]

22. Hi libertarianseeker!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[libertarianseeker]

25. Thanks newyawker

but I'm not really new. Just had to start a new account due to ISP changes and generally poor computer skills. Are you on lon giland?

[Sub Atomic]

2. link's broken.

can you repost?

thanks

[tuvor]

8. Check the edit in the OP.

Thanks for letting me know. Can't figure out why it's not working.

[BattyDem]

3. BushCo can't allow anyone else to take over the government ...

because that person will have access to all the secrets - and BushCo will go to jail!

They're not going to go quietly. We're not getting rid of them easily. :scared:

[mcscajun]

4. It hasn't even gone to markup in the Subcommittee on the Constitution

This thing is never getting out of the Judiciary Committee; it'll certainly never see the light of day.

[dchill]

27. I don't think BushAdmin is concerned ...

about the Constitution or legal processes of any kind. They've never used legal means before to get or maintain power. What makes anyone think they will be concerned in the future?

Their control of the House, Senate, Judiciary and intelligence is the only reason they are in power. It's also the only reason they have not been indicted for any of their scores of crimes.

They are free to do as they please. None of the laws or rules apply to them, or they already would have been applied. And unless the media starts to wake up and take responsibility, the end of BushAdmin will not be achieved through any kind of legal proceeding.

[mcscajun]

28. All I'm saying is...for now...they're going through the motions...

...and this one hasn't gotten out of the gate.

[Davis_X_Machina]

5. Let's look at it from their point of view...

...Bush has been chosen by God Himself, as a special dispensation for America, to lead the nation in its hour of maximum crisis.

The crisis isn't over.

So we still need him.

And in a conflict between the immutable Will of God, and a merely human Constitution, who wins?

See, that was easy.

(Do I get the job at Fox? Huh? Huh?)

[jus_the_facts]

6. it didn't go under the radar.......

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1851972

[tuvor]

14. Thanks, JTF. I kicked your link.

[jus_the_facts]

19. backatcha....

:hi:

[tsuki]

7. Bush will be absolutely ga-ga before the third term. He is not far

from that now. Look at the videos. He is deteriorating quickly.

[Enraged_Ape]

23. You're right; he becomes more and more incoherent every day

Compare how he was 5 years ago to how he is now. Within two more years, he's going to be a gibbering idiot, as compared to just an idiot.

[dave502d]

9. So how will he beat the Big Dog,If we get rid of Diebold's n/t

[tuvor]

10. By hook, or by...crook. n/t

[punpirate]

11. Steny Hoyer...

... is the principal of the bill. I'm beginning to think that too many "y"s in one's name makes one stupid.... :shrug:

[Richard D]

12. Odd . . .

3 out of 4 sponsors are dems, as is the person who introduced it.


Official Title: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution.

Status: Introduced (By Rep. Steny Hoyer )
Introduced: Feb 17, 2005
Last Action: Feb 18, 2005: Introductory remarks on measure. (CR E302-303)
Sponsor: Rep. Steny Hoyer
Cosponsors: hide cosponsors
Rep. Howard Berman
Rep. Frank Pallone
Rep. Martin Sabo
Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner
Cosponsorship information sometimes is out of date.

[zulchzulu]

17. Please...please...please have the Repugs pass this....so...

...we finally get people in the street to take the US back from PNAC!!!

We need to have them step so over the line that even those that voted for these treasonous traitors rise up.

Let's call it our little "Pearl Harbor-type event". That's the only way we can proudly take our country back.

[seabeyond]

20. even if they took the 22 amendment out, bush couldnt run

but if his brother ran, with these machines, he could be president until his son was old enough

[Independent_Liberal]

21. It won't happen...

Trust me. We have nothing to worry about.