Not only that, but I don’t believe that such a constitutional amendment would apply to Obama, since it would be ex-post-facto.
Perhaps a Constitutional lawyer could correct me, but I have heard it said about repealing the two-term limitation—that the repeal would not apply to someone who was already in office.
Of course, Obama is a constitutional lawyer himself, whose specialty appears to be bending and breaking the Constitution and the rule of law. So perhaps it doesn’t matter.
On a positive note, there has been an enormous epidemic of leftist responses to the birther issue. Evidently they are very worried and have received instructions from Obama to go all out on these attacks.
Much better than the previous instructions; silence and coverup.
It should. There are exceptions for people in office at the time of adoption, but otherwise the plain language should allow a second-term president to run again if it were no longer in effect. This of course depends on the language of the rescinding amendment. While it would be hard to push such an amendment through, it would be nearly impossible if it let the current president stay in office because cries of "dictator for life" and "power grab" would be legitimately all over the place.
Likewise. if Obama were forced out and this idiot's amendment passed, Obama would be free to run again at the next election unless the rescinding amendment stated otherwise.
That depends on how the amendment is written. When the two-term restriction was added, the amendment specifically excluded anyone who was already President at the time of ratification. This probably made it easier to get it ratified.
If the repeal did not include similar language, it would be seen by many as a power grab by the current President, and it would be much more difficult to get 3/4s of the states to ratify it.
Would that be something like hillary voting as a Senator from NY to raise the salary of the Secretary of State?
Hmmmmm...
Regards,
GtG