It has been a common them on many websites, that Barack Obama wants to be president for life, or at least a dictator. People point to his repeated use of Executive Orders to circumvent Congress, his compulsive lying and his open respect for the powers that dictators have which he does not.
Until now this concern was dismissed as nothing more than a crazy conspiracy theory. But now the Washington Post has published an editorial suggesting that at least one more term for BO would be a good idea.
End presidential term limits
In 1947, Sen. Harley Kilgore (D-W.Va.) condemned a proposed constitutional amendment that would restrict presidents to two terms. “The executive’s effectiveness will be seriously impaired,” Kilgore argued on the Senate floor, “ as no one will obey and respect him if he knows that the executive cannot run again.” I’ve been thinking about Kilgore’s comments as I watch President Obama, whose approval rating has dipped to 37 percent in CBS News polling — the lowest ever for him
Regardless of his political approval ratings, Obama could expect Republican senators such as Lindsey Graham (S.C.) and John McCain (Ariz.) to attack the agreement. But if Obama could run again, would he be facing such fervent objections from Sens. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Robert Menendez (D-N.J.)?
Probably not. Democratic lawmakers would worry about provoking the wrath of a president who could be reelected. Thanks to term limits, though, they’ve got little to fear.
Oh isn't that nice? What Jonathan Zimmerman is saying is that we need a president who is powerful enough to make people fear him and Obama could get that with a third term in office.
Nor does Obama have to fear the voters, which might be the scariest problem of all. If he chooses, he could simply ignore their will. And if the people wanted him to serve another term, why shouldn’t they be allowed to award him one?
“I think our people are to be safely trusted with their own destiny,” Sen. Claude Pepper (D-Fla.) argued in 1947. “We do not need to protect the American people with a prohibition against a president whom they do not wish to elect; and if they wanted to elect him, have we the right to deny them the power?”
It’s time to put that power back where it belongs. When Ronald Reagan was serving his second term, some Republicans briefly floated the idea of removing term limits so he could run again. The effort went nowhere, but it was right on principle. Barack Obama should be allowed to stand for re election just as citizens should be allowed to vote for — or against — him. Anything less diminishes our leaders and ourselves.
Oh it would take a Constitutional Amendment to eliminate the term limits and that process isn't likely to happen, but since we have a president who seems very willing to find ways by which to shred or at least ignore the Constitution, might he find another method by which to accomplish this goal?
Though the Washington Post didn't come right out and say as much, might that be what they meant when they said: "[I]f the people wanted him to serve another term, why shouldn’t they be allowed to award him one?"
Keep your eyes open. Don't forget what I've Told Jah: There's more than one way to skin a cat.
Comments