No, they’re on total terms.
[QUOTE=22nd Amendment, §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.
[/QUOTE]
Ah, I should have looked it up instead of going by memory. :takes lashes:
Well, that’s the thing, I don’t think she’s either. I think she’s further to the right than I am, absolutely, but her views are held by about half the country, really. And she’s clearly a very bright person, compared to let’s say, Palin.
.
Well, besides the fact he belongs to a cult that I despise, I think you detailed why I wouldn’t vote for him. He’s venal, greedy and has no priniciples.
For the love of Og, quit it with these blase uncited ad populum fallacies.
Oh, wow, that old excuse…
Funny, Slick Willy had Republicans controlling BOTH houses of Congress. He managed to deliver a pretty good economy.
Obama controlled congress for his first two years and his party still controls the Senate. He couldn’t get his own party to go along with him on a lot of things. Also, his priorities were pretty mucked up.
“Mr. President. Mr. President. Unemployment is climbing to 10%!!!”
“I know. Let’s impose a new health care law that will cost employers more money to insure the people they have! That’ll create a bunch of jobs!!!”
“Brilliant.”
Seriously, George W. Bush was able to get things passed when Democrats controlled the Senate for half his term and the house for the last two years. If he had a 60 vote Senate like Obama had, who knows what he would have done.
Hey, I was willing to give the guy the benefit of the doubt until a few weeks ago, until he compared the budget process to his kid’s homework.
That smarmy, condescending BS from a FAILURE is really all the reason I need to want to see him gone.
Given what a horrid experience his first three years have been, is there really any excuse to give him more?
Ignoring the troll and back to Bachmann:
My theory is that she’s neither crazy nor stupid- she’s a tuning fork. She knows how to set just the right pitch that resonates with a segment of society- the ones that cling to guns and religion, the ones suspicious of everyone who’s not a white Christian, the ones who bought the Reagan welfare queen story just as much as they buy the idea that tax cuts create jobs. She knows her audience and will say whatever they want to hear and do so convincingly. Does she believe what she says? I don’t care and neither does she. She discovered the secret to separating the rubes from their money. She can tell them that government spending is the root of all evil, all the while her father’s farm rakes in the subsidies and her latently homosexual husband bilks Medicare for handing out Bible passages to gay men. And her masses eat it all up. There’s gold in them thar rubes. She’ll make her run, from her point of view if she gets nominated, great, if not, it still boosts her market value. All the face time she gets on the news just adds to her future book sales. Like Sarah, she’s running for billionaire, she’s just a bit more discreet about it.
That’s what did it? You were ok with Obama, he made an analogy about the budgeting process, and that did it - now he’s the most incompetant leader in the history of mankind?
I mean, I know you’re full of shit, and you hated him all along - but if I were to take you at your word, it would just make you look psychotic, going from “giving a chance” to “take over message boards spamming about how he’s the worst ever” over that.
Dude, this person also thought that the Captains of Industry were going to hire hundreds of thousands of workers (goodness of their hearts and all), but now they’re not going to because Obummer said something mean about the taxes on their private jets.
-Joe
n Of course not. we need Bush back in. That was a righty who knew how to govern.
Bulls fans?
You mean, you’ve never seen someone do something so obnoxious that their action turned you against them? Really?
Well, I’ll admit, watching you guys make apologies for him, pretending he hasn’t failed miserably, watching you slander good men and women who want to fix the problems, that’s probably had an effect. Or perhaps getting out of the toxic environment of right wing boards like Town Hall made me step back, and re-evaluate the thing.
I guess watching my company downsize people, (We employ about 25% less people than we did when I started there in 2008), driving by a gas station with gasoline that never goes down (back up to $4.09 yesteday.) has had an effect.
Wow, someone else who never worked in the real world.
They won’t know because there’s no point in hiring people to make more money when the government is going to take it.
Part of that stimulus that cost $278,000 per job saved or created was a tax break for buying these jets, and now he wants to tax them. Brilliant.
“Waaaauughhh! Teh Evil Federal Gubmint is going to take my RECORD profits and keep me from flying my corporate jet to and from work everyday!! Waaaaauuughhh!”
Cry. Me. A. River.
I think all of us in this thread have.
You hire when there is demand. Cutting taxes to the rich does not increase demand.
With all the tax cuts, the rich are at an all time low tax level. Besides they evade taxes like crazy and we give them the loopholes to do it. Can you say Swedish bank account, Caiman Islands drop box, or Bermuda accounts?
If your business grows and gets bigger, whatever your cut is, it is a bigger amount. They become richer. But the last couple decades have demonstrated that if the rich get tax breaks , they do not hire. They have proven that conclusively because they have had their taxes drop on a steady basis since Reagan. Employment has dropped. It is such a silly thing to keep saying the rich will hire when they get tax breaks, when they have already gotten them and have not expanded businesses or hired.
yup. Play that class warfare card.
Hey, remember when you guys claimed Obama was only getting donations from the little people?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43776664/ns/politics-the_new_york_times/
*Twenty-seven fund-raisers collected more than $500,000 each in contributions for President Obama and the Democratic Party in the past three months, helping Mr. Obama collect a record haul of campaign cash as he starts his re-election effort.
The list of Mr. Obama’s biggest bundlers, which was posted on the president’s campaign Web site on Friday, is filled with celebrities and the well-connected, like Jeffrey Katzenberg, the Hollywood mogul; Andy Spahn, a close friend and consultant to Steven Spielberg, the moviemaker; and Anna Wintour, the editor of Vogue.
More than 200 other people scooped up tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars each in contributions for the president. Collectively, they raised at least $35 million for Mr. Obama and the Democratic National Committee, or about 40 percent of the $86 million he reported for the quarter. *
Except that businesses DID expand after the Reagan Tax breaks and they did expand after the Bush tax breaks. And heck, give him credit, Clinton cut capital gains taxes (after being prompted by the GOP) and that contributed to his job growth.
You work on the delusion that when you tax those who produce, you are actually taxing them and not the rest of us. They pass those taxes on to their customers in form of price increases, to their employees in the form of layoff, and so on.
Let’s go back to the Jet thing. Who gets hurt with that? The guys who fly the jets. The guys who maintenance the jets. The guys who work at airports. The guys who make the jets.
No, actually. What are you going to do with this army of strawmen once you’ve finished using them to make silly arguments? It would be awfully dangerous if they fell into the wrong hands.