WaPo Makes New Appeal To End Presidential Term Limits

[daveman]

This is one Prof's opinion, nothing more. Though, this is the second moron to attempt to make it into something more. I have no illusions other partisan's, some morons and some liars, will continue the fraud implied in this thread.

The Conservative Republican Set has little to post when the truth is known, yet, it never stops them.

I've been predicting calls for ending term limits for a couple of years now. Your opinion that this is just one guy's opinion is meaningless.

If people didn't agree with him, he wouldn't have gotten an editorial in WaPo.

That is the truth. Your acknowledgement is neither required nor expected.

Hater dupes, not knowing that real news sources, newspapers etc, don't HAVE a lockstep propaganda point and have guest bloggers and writers that have no connection to the WaPo, keep making this ignorant mistake.

STOP PUTTING THAT IN THE THREAD TITLES FER CHRISSAKE YA GD morons, and change your stupid channel, chicken little dingbats...lol

Oh, shaddap, you incoherent loudmouth.

 

[daveman]

Phony crises and phony scandals, for dupes only- change the channel. Nothing illegal AT ALL-

Yes, just like Obama ordered you to say.

Good robot!

 

[daveman]

This would simply be the Senate filibuster rule change all over again you think it's a great idea if your party is the one likely to benefit from it at the moment if not you hate it and of course you never seem to consider that sooner or later the other side will benefit from that same change. Personally I think the term limits for the President should stay as is and term limits should be put in place for Congress as well.

Well, no, not really.

Changing term limits for the President would require a constitutional amendment, and there'd be no appetite for one at this point.

Dumping the awful Filibuster rule made sense because the abuse of the rule = one senator could hold up a nomination for months - perverted the original intent.

The original intent of filibusters was to make sure things were fully debated. but these guys weren't being debated at all.

Someone who believes the 2nd Amendment doesn't guarantee the individual right to own firearms prolly shouldn't be yapping about original intent.

 

[JoeB131]

[
We will see how people feel about the Senate rule change when the power flip happens again I'm sure the Republicans who are outraged now will be fine with it then and the Democrats who love it now will be less than thrilled when their the minority. Obama will be able to get his hardcore liberal appointees confirmed with much more ease now of course the Republicans will be able to do the same with their hardcore conservatives when the time comes this was a very short sighted decision in my opinion.

I'm not worried about it flipping again.

First, the Republican party is dying and it knows it. There simply aren't enough angry old white people to keep it afloat.

The Electoral math is so bad I doube we'll see another Republican president any time soon.

Secondly, if you did have a Republican president and a Dem minority in the senate, it would be equally wrong for Democrats to pull this same shit, which they never really did. More Obama appointees have been held up than all previous presidents combined. That's ******* ridiculous.

Third, if the Repukes were ever in charge of the Senate again, they'd trigger the nuclear option at the first oppurtunity. Probably on everything, because it would be their last oppurtunity to loot the country for the Koch brothers before people got wise to what they were doing.

 

[JoeB131]

This would simply be the Senate filibuster rule change all over again you think it's a great idea if your party is the one likely to benefit from it at the moment if not you hate it and of course you never seem to consider that sooner or later the other side will benefit from that same change. Personally I think the term limits for the President should stay as is and term limits should be put in place for Congress as well.

Well, no, not really.

Changing term limits for the President would require a constitutional amendment, and there'd be no appetite for one at this point.

Dumping the awful Filibuster rule made sense because the abuse of the rule = one senator could hold up a nomination for months - perverted the original intent.

The original intent of filibusters was to make sure things were fully debated. but these guys weren't being debated at all.

Someone who believes the 2nd Amendment doesn't guarantee the individual right to own firearms prolly shouldn't be yapping about original intent.

You mean they didn't put that part in about "Well-Regulated Miliitias"?

 

[blackhawk]

[
We will see how people feel about the Senate rule change when the power flip happens again I'm sure the Republicans who are outraged now will be fine with it then and the Democrats who love it now will be less than thrilled when their the minority. Obama will be able to get his hardcore liberal appointees confirmed with much more ease now of course the Republicans will be able to do the same with their hardcore conservatives when the time comes this was a very short sighted decision in my opinion.

I'm not worried about it flipping again.

First, the Republican party is dying and it knows it. There simply aren't enough angry old white people to keep it afloat.

The Electoral math is so bad I doube we'll see another Republican president any time soon.

Secondly, if you did have a Republican president and a Dem minority in the senate, it would be equally wrong for Democrats to pull this same shit, which they never really did. More Obama appointees have been held up than all previous presidents combined. That's ******* ridiculous.

Third, if the Repukes were ever in charge of the Senate again, they'd trigger the nuclear option at the first oppurtunity. Probably on everything, because it would be their last oppurtunity to loot the country for the Koch brothers before people got wise to what they were doing.[/QUOT]
Wow such paint by the numbers talking very funny especially given there is a good chance the Republicans could take back the Senate next year. I suspect when that time comes and the Dems are hating you will try to somehow blame Bush for the rule change instead of Reid.

 

[Old Rocks]

Boy, you asses are going to gnaw this bone to death. No, the 22nd Amendment will not be repealed. President Obama will watch the next President sworn in on 20Jan17. And you silly asses will still be braying on some silly subject that is an impossibility.

 

[JoeB131]

[
We will see how people feel about the Senate rule change when the power flip happens again I'm sure the Republicans who are outraged now will be fine with it then and the Democrats who love it now will be less than thrilled when their the minority. Obama will be able to get his hardcore liberal appointees confirmed with much more ease now of course the Republicans will be able to do the same with their hardcore conservatives when the time comes this was a very short sighted decision in my opinion.

I'm not worried about it flipping again.

First, the Republican party is dying and it knows it. There simply aren't enough angry old white people to keep it afloat.

The Electoral math is so bad I doube we'll see another Republican president any time soon.

Secondly, if you did have a Republican president and a Dem minority in the senate, it would be equally wrong for Democrats to pull this same shit, which they never really did. More Obama appointees have been held up than all previous presidents combined. That's ******* ridiculous.

Third, if the Repukes were ever in charge of the Senate again, they'd trigger the nuclear option at the first oppurtunity. Probably on everything, because it would be their last oppurtunity to loot the country for the Koch brothers before people got wise to what they were doing.

Wow such paint by the numbers talking very funny especially given there is a good chance the Republicans could take back the Senate next year. I suspect when that time comes and the Dems are hating you will try to somehow blame Bush for the rule change instead of Reid.

I don't think there's that great of a chance of the GOP taking the Senate Next year.

For starters, there aren't enough competitive races. They need to win six, there are only three that are certain pickups, maybe two that are toss ups, and that's before the GOP primary out otherwise sensible people in their own ranks with guys who think that the word "rape" needs to be qualified with an adjective.

Secondly, even if they did, they'd lose it again in 2016 when Hillary rolls over whoever the GOP puts up. All those Teabaggers who got in during 2010 will be up again, and people already realize what huge mistakes a lot of them were. So long Ron Johnson...

Third, the filibuster isn't really relevent unless you also control the presidency, which you wont after 2014 and probably won't after 2016.

 

[blackhawk]

I'm not worried about it flipping again.

First, the Republican party is dying and it knows it. There simply aren't enough angry old white people to keep it afloat.

The Electoral math is so bad I doube we'll see another Republican president any time soon.

Secondly, if you did have a Republican president and a Dem minority in the senate, it would be equally wrong for Democrats to pull this same shit, which they never really did. More Obama appointees have been held up than all previous presidents combined. That's ******* ridiculous.

Third, if the Repukes were ever in charge of the Senate again, they'd trigger the nuclear option at the first oppurtunity. Probably on everything, because it would be their last oppurtunity to loot the country for the Koch brothers before people got wise to what they were doing.

Wow such paint by the numbers talking very funny especially given there is a good chance the Republicans could take back the Senate next year. I suspect when that time comes and the Dems are hating you will try to somehow blame Bush for the rule change instead of Reid.

I don't think there's that great of a chance of the GOP taking the Senate Next year.

For starters, there aren't enough competitive races. They need to win six, there are only three that are certain pickups, maybe two that are toss ups, and that's before the GOP primary out otherwise sensible people in their own ranks with guys who think that the word "rape" needs to be qualified with an adjective.
I
Secondly, even if they did, they'd lose it again in 2016 when Hillary rolls over whoever the GOP puts up. All those Teabaggers who got in during 2010 will be up again, and people already realize what huge mistakes a lot of them were. So long Ron Johnson...

Third, the filibuster isn't really relevent unless you also control the presidency, which you wont after 2014 and probably won't after 2016.

The number one issue of 2014 is going to be Obamacare much like it was in 2010 a issue that killed the left then and likely will next year the website disaster is only a small part of the problem with it the truth and true cost is coming out and since this was passed with nothing but dem votes they can't run or hide from it

 

[JoeB131]

[

The number one issue of 2014 is going to be Obamacare much like it was in 2010 a issue that killed the left then and likely will next year the website disaster is only a small part of the problem with it the truth and true cost is coming out and since this was passed with nothing but dem votes they can't run or hide from it

Yes, you keep telling yourself that...

But frankly, the only people I really hear whining about ObamaCare are the usual suspects who hated Obama from the get-go.

 

[daveman]

Well, no, not really.

Changing term limits for the President would require a constitutional amendment, and there'd be no appetite for one at this point.

Dumping the awful Filibuster rule made sense because the abuse of the rule = one senator could hold up a nomination for months - perverted the original intent.

The original intent of filibusters was to make sure things were fully debated. but these guys weren't being debated at all.

Someone who believes the 2nd Amendment doesn't guarantee the individual right to own firearms prolly shouldn't be yapping about original intent.

You mean they didn't put that part in about "Well-Regulated Miliitias"?

Yeah, tell us again how you're right and SCOTUS is wrong. It's always hilarious.

 

[daveman]

Boy, you asses are going to gnaw this bone to death. No, the 22nd Amendment will not be repealed. President Obama will watch the next President sworn in on 20Jan17. And you silly asses will still be braying on some silly subject that is an impossibility.

In case you didn't notice, Roxy, it's not conservatives who are proposing this. It's your fellow progressives.

 

[francoHFW]

I've been predicting calls for ending term limits for a couple of years now. Your opinion that this is just one guy's opinion is meaningless.

If people didn't agree with him, he wouldn't have gotten an editorial in WaPo.

That is the truth. Your acknowledgement is neither required nor expected.

Hater dupes, not knowing that real news sources, newspapers etc, don't HAVE a lockstep propaganda point and have guest bloggers and writers that have no connection to the WaPo, keep making this ignorant mistake.

STOP PUTTING THAT IN THE THREAD TITLES FER CHRISSAKE YA GD morons, and change your stupid channel, chicken little dingbats...lol

Oh, shaddap, you incoherent loudmouth.

Any actual argument, brainwashed hater dupe loudmouth...read something, Beckbot...

 

[tinydancer]

[
We will see how people feel about the Senate rule change when the power flip happens again I'm sure the Republicans who are outraged now will be fine with it then and the Democrats who love it now will be less than thrilled when their the minority. Obama will be able to get his hardcore liberal appointees confirmed with much more ease now of course the Republicans will be able to do the same with their hardcore conservatives when the time comes this was a very short sighted decision in my opinion.

I'm not worried about it flipping again.

First, the Republican party is dying and it knows it. There simply aren't enough angry old white people to keep it afloat.

The Electoral math is so bad I doube we'll see another Republican president any time soon.

Secondly, if you did have a Republican president and a Dem minority in the senate, it would be equally wrong for Democrats to pull this same shit, which they never really did. More Obama appointees have been held up than all previous presidents combined. That's ******* ridiculous.

Third, if the Repukes were ever in charge of the Senate again, they'd trigger the nuclear option at the first oppurtunity. Probably on everything, because it would be their last oppurtunity to loot the country for the Koch brothers before people got wise to what they were doing.

Good grief what drugs are you on?

And you don't seem to get it. Rove, Bushes et al care about the Presidency.

I've been on the drum for years now and it is finally hitting home, **** the Presidency take the Senate and hold the House.

You hold the peoples wishes, you own it all because all that counts are the people.

 

[francoHFW]

74-They CARE, dingbat...funny how they wrecked the world, after selling out to the highest bidder economically, and started the stupidest wars EVER....Karl Rove CARES...UNBELIEVABLE LOL...

 

[daveman]

Hater dupes, not knowing that real news sources, newspapers etc, don't HAVE a lockstep propaganda point and have guest bloggers and writers that have no connection to the WaPo, keep making this ignorant mistake.

STOP PUTTING THAT IN THE THREAD TITLES FER CHRISSAKE YA GD morons, and change your stupid channel, chicken little dingbats...lol

Oh, shaddap, you incoherent loudmouth.

Any actual argument, brainwashed hater dupe loudmouth...read something, Beckbot...

See, that's the thing. You don't want me to think for myself -- that's the LAST thing you want.

No, you want me to unthinkingly and unquestioningly agree with and endorse White House propaganda -- exactly the way you do.

 

[francoHFW]

The people are NOT the brainwashed, ignorant Tea Party- that's the ugliest RW 20 per cent lol.

 

[francoHFW]

Oh, shaddap, you incoherent loudmouth.

Any actual argument, brainwashed hater dupe loudmouth...read something, Beckbot...

See, that's the thing. You don't want me to think for myself -- that's the LAST thing you want.

No, you want me to unthinkingly and unquestioningly agree with and endorse White House propaganda -- exactly the way you do.

I listen to every kind of propaganda, and the only bs kind is the RW kind you never leave...Fox, Rush, Beck, Savage, times examiner Daily MAIL ETC ETC ETC- ALL THE SAME GARBAGE...

 

[francoHFW]

Saying this idiot professor is the WaPo just shows how ignorant the TP is- and that's about 70 per cent of this board...

 

[cutter]

That is absolutely the worst fuckin' idea I ever heard.

Needless to say you’d be all for it if a republican were president.

No fuckin' way for any party. The only way we keep either party form being a complete failure is they go in knowing they are out of there in 8yrs. They may put another person from the same party in office buy it will be a different asshole and that keeps us from becoming a tyranny.