You can bet your bippy, suckers.
There’s been a lot of weird Neo-Con activity that would indicate that they would like to repeal the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution and run George Bush for a third term. This, to me, explains the sudden attack on PBS since it is the last vestige of a free press now that the various National papers and the big TV networks are held hostage by large corporations.
If you think I’m kidding here is a bill introduced in the house this February by both Democrats and Republicans including a Congressman from Wisconsin, Sensenbrenner as well as the Dem. House Whip, Hoyer. The bill has one article and one sentence only:
`The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is repealed.’.
A few bloggers picked up on this in February when it was introduced, then it died down until lately when I started seeing bi-partisan support for the idea.
I can only assume that either these Democrats are being blackmailed or they actually expect to run Clinton again. There is no other reason for their support. The real idea is to get George Bush in for a third term so he can continue his consolidation of power. It’s important to get rid of PBS in the meantime.
This attempt to repeal the 22nd amendment is not new to this administration. One website, the Carpetbagger Report, has a good discussion of earlier attempts.
The general thinking concerning this initiative is that if the Conservatives can pick up a few more seats in 2006, they can go ahead with this scheme. There is no evidence that the Democrats are getting any traction for anything so this is quite likely.
And there is the foreboding. If you listened to the issues concerning the Air Force Academy and it’s Evangelical management the one thing that appears in the discussion was the promotion at the institution that the “separation between church and state in not in the Constitution — it’s a myth.” A myth propagated by Liberals. Jerry Falwell, as mentioned in this blog here, and others have come out and openly stated that their intent is make the USA non-secular, in other words – a religious state. Giving Bush a third term is one step in that direction.
What is frightening about all this is the bi-partisan support for this and the support exhibited by liberal bloggers. Click here for an example. They honestly believe that in 2008 the public is going to oust Bush and they can get Clinton BACK in. It’s unbelievable. Today’s Democrat party should disband. Bush is consolidating power as this is written and might never be removed from office if this is allowed, or hasn’t anyone noticed? He is young and could be re-elected five more times. With his Rasputin-like marketing genius Karl Rove by his side nobody will beat him, get a clue. And the public just loves to reelect their officials rather than worry about the unknown. Furthermore there is a war going on and we must “stay the course.” How dumb are the Democrats, you have to wonder.
related link:
Another Public Display Of Anger – Goons Attack Elmo —
The guy from the Kansas PBS station noted that Moyers is just one man on one show. He further mentioned William F. Buckley Jr., a staunch conservative, very popular (who founded the National Review), that was on PBS for thirty years! The goon’s response was something like, “well, you were lucky to catch Buckley at midnight!” The very few times that I’ve watched Moyers was right before PBS went off the air in the evening, the same time spot that Buckly was said to have had ;)
As I said above, bias was the entire basis for his argument. It took the good, non-biased, PBS journalist to ask the question about tax payer money and PBS… good answers were given from the pro-PBS side, answers that I won’t go into in this article. The goon responded with, “No one watches PBS anyway!” Well, first, this begs why he cares about bias at all if no one is watching? Second, as the other guy pointed out, this is factually quite wrong. Despite what many think or would like to think, cable news shows get only a very small percentage of Americana on a regular basis. PBS and NPR are also currently growing.
I guess this brings us back to the Antichrist thesis posted here. At least it’s entertaining.
I’ve predicted this since 9/11 happend. And again with the war in Iraq. He thinks he has some bead on this War-Time presidency that no one else would understand. :/
PBS is “the last vestige of a free press?” How can a state-sponsored, state-funded media outlet ever be considered part of the “free press?”
It’s clear Bush is anti-peace and pro-rich, therefore at least anti-Christian. Also, guess who is scheduled to have the most important job in the world on 6-6-06?
Actually there is no seperation of church and state in the constitution. There is a non-establishment clause. That clause also states that religious practice should not be curtailed.
The seperation of church and state, as we know it today, is a judicial creation.
In my personal opinion, the seperation of church and state is in violation of the establishment clause, since by any rational analysis, athiesm is itself a belief system (aka religion) and seperation of church and state in fact establishes athiesm.
If you agree with me, or disagree with me, like seperation of church and state, or dont, and regardless of what religion you are, and regardless of what you think of Falwell – his statement is true. The constitution does not have seperation, the judiciary does.
I don’t know, it sounds like bullshit. For any conservative that wants to repeal the 22nd amendment, you only need two words: Bill Clinton. (For liberals those two words would be George Bush.) I think the public would have a cow if they tried this. Besides, correct me if I’m wrong, but would it not take another amendment to repeal the 22nd amendment? If that is the case, then they need two thirds of the states and I cannot imagine there are even two states that would pass this.
Thanks John! And here I thought I’d actually get some sleep this weekend! This nation could really use a decent 3rd party…
This cannot be a serious post!!
My God, with control of three branches of the government and popular support I’m afraid a move like this would almost be a shoe-in.
Maybe the USA can invade Canada and Mexico next under some sort of border protection policy?
I’d agree that this is probably bs – wait! PBS!
But really, it’s so unlikely. But that’s America. Keep your eyes open because this is a government of the people, and you know how crazy they are.
“–“
Great. Plausible is the new paranoid.
Wilde: life imitates art.
Reagan had Star Wars, which was kind of funny. GWB has Revenge of the Sith.
Not so funny.
– Ron
I heard that George W. Bush is going to admit that he wasn’t actually elected in 2000, so he is elegible to run in 2008 for a second elected term.
We have a huge debate on this topic at Sqlspace…
http://sqlspace.com/new-bill-could-make-bush-president-for-life-vt12809.html
It’s really a big problem if this guy can pull it off.. however I doubt he will get the support needed to get a constituional change like that…
Today, by the way, 87 republikans decided to be Republicans and voted against Bush’s anti-PBS budget request. Isn’t it amazing what passes for a conscience in a politician’s pea-brain — when you start sneaking up on mid-term elections.
They’re still ALL sleazy opportunist bastards. I can’t agree enough with Frustrated Consumer. It’s so tough, though, to try to build any sort of independence, Right or Left, in this land of half-baked news and half-assed voters. Another topic for that forum of the future, John.
I wasted a couple of youthful years, trying to drag a significant number of Liberals all the way over to principled resistance. Excepting those years when a military draft threatened individual prospects for a polished, plastic, instant post-college acreer, I think I wasted more gray cells than they ever did.
Equally vain, in the immediate future, would be an American equivalent to the Canadian Progressive Conservatives — who are involved [well, on paper, anyway], themselves with their own flavor of Bush League reactionaries at the moment. American Conservatives haven’t even the organization to take back the Republikan Party.
At my advancing age, I’d still join up if something principled came along. I don’t care if it’s an NDP or Progressive Conservatives — US-flavor. Between Ralph Nader’s last display and our NM Greens equivalent opportunism during the last presidential election, I hold out little hope for the Greens — even though parties of that name stuck to it and have garnered respect in other lands.
As usual, I’m stuck with being a cynical optimist. Science tells me we are capable of being a self-perfecting species. Just not in my lifetime.
You’re whack, Dvorak!
Well, if the Democrats are concerned about the possibility of Bush being elected to a third term… there is one thing they can do:
Try nominating a candidate that can actually win an election, for a change.
Uhh… That is why the sudden attack on PBS?
PBS?
Wait… PBS?
Is that one of those channels I program my set top box not to display? Really, John, PBS is not going to survive generation X and Y or the iGeneration as you might say. What do we care about PBS for? Sesame Street maybe for our kids? Nah… I’ll bittorrent whatever I want the kids to watch. I can’t think of a show on PBS worth watching. If it goes away… who cares? And you think PBS is what’s standing in the way of Bush and world domination? I really had to struggle to get past that line to finish reading the post.
John, take off the tinfoil hat, put away the hard narcotics and just relax with a brandy or something. Really…
Oh, and after that… make another appearance on TWIT already!
You actually need 3/4 of the states, and 2/3 of each part of Congress. Why is it so unlikely Bill Clinton would run again, but Bush runs forever? They are about the same age, and Clinton clearly loves the spotlight. He’s pushed the idea before, and he would probably relish the idea of running against Hillary.
The constitution does not have seperation, the judiciary does.
I like the comments of the person running this site: http://www.usconstitution.net/
“Some of the first colonists of the nation for which the Constitution was written had been seeking to escape religious persecution. The constitutions of several of the states prohibited public support of religion. And above all, the many varying sects of Christianity in America required that to be fair to all, there could be preference to none. It would have been discraceful for anyone to wish to leave the United States because of religious persecution. So they decided it best to keep the government out of religion.“
I’d absolutely love to see an election duel between W and Bubba.
It is always nice to see a governmental site that is poor in structure, has tables and does not validate. Maybe if I cared more about politics, I’d stay on topic.
What’s wrong with repealing the 22nd?
If the American people want to do so and get it through the hellish amendment process, and Bush is re-elected, more power to him.
As long as it’s part of the democratic process, why not?
Why don’t we be a bit… Easy going for once?
To be honest I like the idea. And it’s not because I’m a Republican who supports Bush. I would like to get Bush out of the picture. Not because he is a bad guy, but because everyone seems to think he is. It would be nice to have a fresh Republican face. Clearly that wouldn’t happen if we got rid of the 22nd by the next election.
I think that while trying to protect the country the 22nd actually has a large potential to hurt it instead. There are more then enough Presidents who served more then 2 terms and did a great job.
Then again I have for a long time thought that the rules for being President in this country are a bit old school to begin with. The rules for being President rely way too much on stereotypes.
Only people in their mid (or older) 30s are capable of running a country.
Any person is washed up after 8 years.
No person born outside of this country is capable of running this country well.
In reply to Mel Liu
“Because politicians, like baby nappies, should be changed often and for the same reason.”
“…right wing nut from Wisconsin, Sensenbrenner…”
I like that. It parses equally well as “right-wing nut” or “right wing-nut”. That’s our man.
Many of the shows on PBS have gone on to be multi-million or billion-dollar companies. Sesame Street/Muppets is one example. Moyers’ specials are another. Let them support PBS. It would be a drop in their budget bucket.
Buckley’s show hardly compares to Moyers. Buckley always invited liberals in for debate, he did not do long-winded documentaries with a leftist-bent which are then provided free advertising to be sold on vhs and dvd to profit Moyers and his production company.
You guys need to wake up. The conservatives are not as devious as you get yourself worked up in paranoid hysteria to think, and the lefties aren’t as public-minded as you all think. We have much more in common than we have which differentiates us.
3rd term = 3rd Reich?
How long before these fascists repeal the Bill of Rights? …or now that the Christian right devotees are infiltrating the last “free” bastion of government, how long before we start to see the re-emergence of “witch trials”? Stop-the-planet! I want to get off!
Sounds like Russia is having the same fun.
http://breaking.tcm.ie/2005/06/24/story208625.html
There are more then enough Presidents who served more then 2 terms and did a great job.
In what country?
From the Wikipedia:
“Franklin D. Roosevelt is the only President to serve more than 8 years in the office (1933-1945). Prior to his administration, presidents chose to follow the example set by George Washington to limit their tenure to two terms or less. Following the passage of the Twenty-second Amendment in 1951, however, a two-term limit became the law.”
Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_States
Marty,
If you didn’t like the PBS programming, then you either could have turned the channel OR contributed some money so the local station could afford better shows. It appeared that you tuned in at least three times so why not contribute? If you didn’t like it the first time, then why tune back in?
Public broadcasting does not earn money the same way as commercial stations. They don’t sell advertising blocks of time OR jump to the tune of their advertisers. Most of their programming is done on small, or shoestring budgets.
Contrary to popular belief, shows such as Sesame Street are not the financial bonanza for PBS people think they are. The show is owned by a private production Company, as are most commercial network shows. PBS buys the show and pays the Children’s Television Network for the rights to broadcast it. For 2004, it cost $98.6 million to produce and broadcast Sesame Street around the world. They took in $96.8 million in revenue, including Elmo Doll royalties. In other words, they are short almost 42 million dollars.
Sesame Street’s 2004 financial statement: http://www.sesameworkshop.org/aboutus/pdf/SesameWorkshop2004.pdf
Separation of Church and State.
For those that haven’t done so, read over the Federalist Papers. As written, the constitution was in danger of not passing most of the colony / State legislatures. Several Federalists insisted on, and used the term, Separation of Church and State during debate. Of the 13 colonies, 11 had restrictive religious clauses stating that members of the legislature and judiciary could only be members of the Church of England. It was only the convincing of Jefferson, Madison, and Hamilton that had this important amendment allowed into the constitution. Because the term is in the Federalists Papers, it has continued to be used for the past 200 years by the judiciary.
If the Federalists had not gotten this amendment into the Constitution then Dubya would not have been allowed to run for President. Nor would have Clinton, Bush Sr, Regan, Carter, or most of the other Presidents. Excepting Maryland and Rhode Island, the other states all barely passed the Constitution as written.
Why is Sensenbrenner a right-wing nut? YOu should like him, since he was the one holding up the Intellignece reofrms unless they added in some immigration controls.