"Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.Term limits on the presidents term are to me a very good improvement. In this country as you have a bipartisan system there are not many choices and one candidate might receive the majority of votes several times consecutively. In Germany this happened with Helmut Kohl who has been the chancelor for 16 years. Nevertheless, two of those elections have been in times of a big change in the 1990s. So to me, to advance and to improve competition amongst parties it is very good to have term limits.
Section 2. This Article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress."
"King Obama: House Considers Repealing 22nd Amendment
Kurt NimmoSource: http://www.infowars.com/king-obama-house-considers-repealing-22nd-amendment/
January 19, 2009
Earlier this month, Rep. Jose Serrano, D-N.Y. introduced H. J. Res. 5, a bill that would repeal the Constitution’s 22nd Amendment prohibiting a president from being elected to more than two terms in office, thus potentially paving the way to make Barack Obama president for life. Not surprisingly, the corporate media — currently caught up in Obama mania — has not covered this story.
“Will George W. Bush end up being the last true US President?” asked Sher Zieve, writing for the Canadian Free Press on January 14. “As I warned you on multiple times prior to the 2008 General Election, ‘once Obama is elected, we won’t be able to get rid of him.’ Tragically, this warning is now being realized. Not only has Obama established his election-fraud organization — ACORN — nationwide, his adherents have now begun the process to repeal the US Constitution’s 22nd Amendment.” In addition to the ACORN election-fraud organization, Obama’s behind the scenes handlers have reinvigorated his “grass roots” election organization, calling it “Obama 2.0,” essentially a classical fascist mass movement designed to keep Obama mania alive and as well go up against those opposed to the bankster policies Obama and the elite plan to shove down the throat of the American people.
“The Amendment limits presidents to a maximum of eight years in office – or, under unusual circumstances, such as succession following the death of a president, a maximum of ten years in office. Should Rep. Serrano succeed in repealing the Amendment, Obama would be cleared to run for an unlimited number of terms, restricted only by the vote of the electorate,” writes Drew Zahn for WorldNetDaily.
As the election campaign of Obama revealed, it is relatively easy to whip up irrational frenzy over a candidate, thus ensuring his re-election indefinitely if the 22nd Amendment is indeed repealed.
The United States is no longer the country it once was. “Prior to Franklin Roosevelt, presidents honored the precedent established by George Washington, who – though widely popular – refused to run for a third term of office,” notes Zahn.
Thomas Jefferson followed Washington’s example and foresaw the eventual passage of the 22nd Amendment. “General Washington set the example of voluntary retirement after eight years,” Jefferson wrote in an 1805 letter to John Taylor. “I shall follow it, and a few more precedents will oppose the obstacle of habit to anyone after a while who shall endeavor to extend his term. Perhaps it may beget a disposition to establish it by an amendment of the Constitution.”
Jefferson’s immediate successors, James Madison and James Monroe, also adhered to the two-term principle.
During Franklin D. Roosevelt’s second term, supporters cited the bankster engineered war in Europe as a reason for breaking with precedent. In the 1944 election, during World War II, Roosevelt won a fourth term, but died in office the following year. The 22nd Amendment was ratified by the requisite number of states on February 26, 1951.
Following the potential repeal of the 22nd Amendment, Obama’s handlers will exploit the bankster engineered economic crisis to push for a third term. As Gerald Celente, the CEO of Trends Research Institute, and others have predicted, by 2012 America will be wracked by civil strife, “marked by food riots, squatter rebellions, tax revolts and job marches,” writes Paul Joseph Watson.
“In order to achieve repeal of the 22nd Amendment, Serrano’s proposal must be approved by a two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress and ratified by three-quarters of the states’ legislatures,” notes Zahn.
If Celente’s prediction occurs, this approval will not prove to be much of a hurdle. In fact, as Rockefeller minion Henry Kissinger noted well over a decade ago, under such conditions the American people will beg for a dictator to led them out of the wilderness.
Of course, King Obama will not lead the American people out of the wilderness. He will usher in a New World Order with its high-tech control grid and a horrific race to the bottom."
This article is just a mess to me. It compares Obama's followers to facists that want to keep him as their leader. This kind of does not go in line with calling Obama a communist as those two are in two ends of the political spectrum.
If something like the repeal of the 22nd amendment would be considered by Mr. Obama I think there would be a great disapproval in the society and there would be measurements to not let this happen.
To me there is no clear evidence that Obama wants this and therefore it is just wrong to imply something like this.
I do not know if this is a fake video, but it has a good point at the end. Nevertheless, the author misses that George W. Bush couldn't have run for presidency for another term anyway as hid/her title implies.