Special Announcement:
Hell Made Permanent
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution. (Introduced in House)
HJ 24 IH
February 17, 2005
Mr. HOYER (for himself, Mr. BERMAN, Mr. SENSENBRENNER, Mr. SABO, and Mr. PALLONE) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
- Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:
'Article --
- 'The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is repealed.'
Note carefully the date of submission as published.
With thanks to contributor Kaiyn at BlondeSense.
The Dark Wraith offers his condolences to the family of the departed democratic and free republic.
Published 2/20/2006 12:15:00 AM
<< 21 Comments Total
Good morning, Dark Wraith.
I'd figured something like this had to be on the cards. They've committed so many crimes now that they have 2 options: either stay in power for ever, or go directly to jail without passing go. That doesn't necessarily mean that this resolution will be succesful, of course, but it's interesting to see how they're testing the waters.
Personally, I'd thought they'd have the decency to wait until there was another terrorist attack on American soil, and then declare a state of emergency, impose martial law and postpone elections. Justifying it all with the Presidents war-making powers, as they did with the NSA wire tapping scandal.
But, hell, why take any chances? Perhaps Able Danger hasn't turned up any convenient terror cells for them to ignore this time around, and so they need a plan B.
I'm with Mr. Shakes: I knew this had to happen, but I don't think there's any way it's going to pass, at least with the current political climate.
I think another terrorist attack would make this amendment much more likely to happen, especially if it played out anything remotely similar to 9/11, with a similar unified political climate. It doesn't seem like a stretch to hear people parroting the line "What if Kerry had been prez?" to soften up the electorate's stance on a third Bush presidency.
Good morning, Charlie.
The proposal does have that preparatory air to which you and Mr. Shakes allude. It would certainly legitimize any permanency of power if a sitting President's status as essential monarch were constitutionally sanctioned through an amendment. With such an amendment ready to head out the door for ratification votes in the states, all that's needed is the right kind of crisis.
(I can almost hear the offer: Well, we can secure the nation through these controversial means, or we can get an amendment passed that will stabilize the nation with more certainty about who will lead us through the next couple of decades.)
It will be hard enough to dislodge the extremists of the Republican Party, but having a standard bearer of their ilk who could keep running for office over and over again would make it next to impossible to move beyond him if the voting system were sufficiently rigged.
But of course, our voting system isn't rigged, now is it?
That's a good thing because, if this proposed amendment were ever to be sent to the states for ratification, we would certainly have to rely on the integrity of the voting systems in every possible Blue State to ensure its defeat.
Thank Heavens for secure voting.
The Dark Wraith is typing with an entirely straight face, y'know.
"Good night, America, how are you?"
The City of New Orleans -- Steve Goodman
Don't ya know it:
I'm your favorite dog.
The Dark Wraith sings the old tunes for the new world.
I remember talking about this a year or so ago. Last May, maybe? The same people (Sensbrenner stands out) keep trying this. So far it hasn't gone anywhere. But they keep trying and hoping no one notices and that democracy will fall in the quiet pushing of papers.
I was wrong, it was in Jan of '03.
What is up with that date? 2005? Exactly one year ago - so what does this mean for us now? Is it still in committee? Has it been re-introduced? You posit this information as if it were current - as if its passage is imminent. I responded at Blondsense as if it were. So what's up, exactly?
I posted this up on my little "blog".
I'm a bit shellshocked, but hope to recover soon.
Thanks for the headsup. At least my passport is valid.
Holy Fuck Dark Wraith!
Oh FLS:
I missed the year! Sharp eyes, you have.
Good Afternoon, Dark Wraith,
Unless they want masses of people in the streets demonstrating about paperless voting machines, I don't see how someone with only 39% popularity could be reelected, especially when the very base who could be expected to vote for him are rabid conservatives (like my brother) who wouldn't vote for a third term for Regan, nevermind Mr W Brainless hisself.
happy monday dw!
this does it. i'm back to midnight embers. the lighter color scheme is just too perky and cheerful for such news, late tho it be.
so now we gotta hope that enough of the barely awakening electorate gets it before the rascals fix the law for their domination.
the good news is that a constitutional amendment has to be right out in public to pass. the bad news is that it looks right now as tho at least half the country is in thrall to the loonies, and, as you point out, the "elections" might not care how anyone voted.
Good afternoon.
I'm not sure I understand the whole thing. I see the date was last year. Has this passed underneath our notice?
'The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is repealed.'
Or is that the way they write them before they're voted on?
Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:
These folks are barking mad but if they keep up their drive to convert our nation to a fundamentalist theocracy where economic slavery will be practiced by the new plantation owners, rapacious corporations working hand in hand with the government, they may get more than they bargained for.
The last time these issues were contested in our nation my favorite American, after Lincoln, famously said: "I, John Brown, am quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away but by blood. ..."
And the crimes he spoke of were.
It would seem that many never got the word that they lost the Civil War. They seem to want to fight it again.
Let us hope they do not get their wish.
But if they do...I, for one, stand ready to defend a nation I can live in.
One which does not stand for torture, illegal wars or the abandonment of it's own citizens to the scourges of national disasters and the Pharmaceutical Industry.
Maybe we have a chance as long as Clinton is alive. Seems to me the pukes hate Clinton as much as most of us despise the Idiot Prince and Elmer Fudd.
OMFG
no more no less
OMFG
Hello, Dark Wraith.
It may be something worth noting for your more cynical (and possibly less well informed) readers that actually many attempts in recent years have been made (one or more per session of Congress), to modify or repeal the 22nd Amendment; although none have yet been successful.
Personally, I think it no bad thing that this amendment be modified, and favour Clinton's suggestion of a hiatus period between the 2nd term and any future term.
Although I acknowledge the concerns put forward by yourself and other commenters here, I can think of several good reasons for a repeal of the 22nd. Most notably is the fact that a President serving his 2nd term will not suffer the chagrin of an overwhelming defeat at the polls after a disasterous term. Psychologically, I feel the 22nd encourages a certain mindset in 2nd termers that is potentially counter-productive. I feel it diminishes the power of democracy rather than enhances it.
Of course, if our elections are not fair in the first place, then the 22nd amendment serves a good purpose. Although I imagine a corrupt administration capable of rigging elections will merely place an alternative dumb-ass puppet in the top spot and carry on with their reprehensible regime regardless.
Although I imagine a corrupt administration capable of rigging elections will merely place an alternative dumb-ass puppet in the top spot and carry on with their reprehensible regime regardless.
I believe this to be Rove's plan.
- oddjob
Good morning, CorrespondAnt.
That previous attempts have been made to repeal the 22nd Amendment is not in dispute. I would submit to you that this is exactly the point.
The Democrats of the 109th Congress believe that all things are as they have been in previous times, in Congresses of yesteryear, and in manner of progress. They hold to old lines of authentic rhetoric, mechanistic proceduralism, and statesmanly patience.
And they have been wrecked as such. More importantly, the Republic in its growth as a liberal democracy has not been truncated; it has, instead, been ended. The Republicans set forth action in proposed laws, move forward in aggression, and leave nothing behind for the Democrats to negotiate. Worse, the nation will not, as it has in other eras of excessive conservatism, recover. Certainly not for decades, anyway.
The Republicans maneuver outrage into law with the finesse in foreplay of Don Juan followed by the copulatory sensitivity of a Roman Legion battering ram.
And the Democrats stand flat-footed.
John Conyers is relegated to the outdoors to hold a phony "hearing," Harry Reid pulls a Senate closed-session desperation play, and Howard Dean energizes the masses of the disaffected with hot language.
And still, the descent into the abyss continues.
Abortions will become practically impossible to obtain within a decade, military adventurism will be the instrument of America's global situation management, evangelical Christianity will speak through both law and regulation, and political thought will run through a filter of wariness about consequences from both private and public thugs.
Yes, it is different this time: Medievalism in the Age of Enlightenment is no longer Medievalism; it is, instead, neo-conservatism, and it wields an iron fist.
Until the Democrats understand this, they will know not how to respond to nuance; and until they know how to respond to the subtle whispers in the preambles, they will know not how to save this Republic.
If it's not too late already, that is.
The Dark Wraith has laid his assessment on the table.
I can't say I'm surprised. This administration has a record of completely flouting ethics in all things political. This would be a logical next step for them. Of course the indoctrinated apathy of the general public could have something to do with this government's utter gall.
Good evening, Dark Daughta, and welcome.
There's certainly a truth in your comment about the indoctrination: although apathy can come naturally to a lazy people, it more often comes as a trained or, worse, a conditioned response: what seems to us as daily outrage does not even come close to meriting coverage by the mainstream media in part because people just wouldn't care.
Certainly, some would, but not as many as a newspaper would need to overcome its own inertia, fear, and drive to deliver the trivial as important at the expense of the monumental.
This is, of course, the 21st Century. So far, it sucks about as much as the early part of the 20th Century.
One would think we could have done a little better in starting off a century this time around.
The Dark Wraith sometimes hopes for too much.