I get so irritated at the new "definition" of lame duck. A lame duck office holder isn't a guy that can't run anymore, a lame duck is a guy whose replacement has already been picked (either because he termed out or he lost re-election) but who hasn't packed up yet. Bush won't be a lame duck until November of 08, until then he's a president freed from the burden of candidacy.
That's how a lame duck was defined during the Clinton Presidency from my recollection. If you stretch the definition you might go so far as '07 when primaries heat up. I don't recall it being from the minute someone is electd to a 2nd term, but imo, it's more wishful thought on the part of the Press as well as a desire for a story.
1. The Establishment Clause does not create a "wall of separation." That unfortunate phrase was a figment of Thomas Jefferson's fertile mind, and he wasn't at the Constitutional Convention. Therefore, we should clarify the First Amendment by adding the following sentence: "The purpose of this Amendment is not to create a secular society. Therefore, no judge shall seek to create such a society by interpreting this Amendment based on statements made after the fact by a man who played no part in the preparation of this Amendment."
2. The Second Amendment should be amended by adding the following sentence: "What part of the phrase "shall not be abridged" do you not understand Mrs. Brady?"
3. The Tenth Amendment could be amended by adding the phrase "and we really mean it" to the end of it.
4. We could at least consider repealing the 19th and 26th Amendments.
5. The Commerce Clause could be amended by adding the word "significant" between the word "regulate" and the word "commerce."
I'm sure you all have other suggestions.
There's no new definition of lame duck. It's just the dims spin. They were hoping if they said it often enough, it would depress the Republicans.