And so it begins
NY Times editorial advocates repealing the 22nd Amendment:
Should presidents - whether George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton - be denied the opportunity to serve their country and carry through their programs? Should they be allowed to govern without any accountability to voters? Should voters be denied two supreme powers - the right to give popular presidents more terms in office and to repudiate a failed president at the polls?
Boy, THAT'S an innovative arguement. It isn't fair to the voters to allow only two term presidencies! We have to hold our leaders accountable!
Strangely enough, there IS a way to hold them accountable, if the Congress would just show some respect for the Constitution and the limits of executive power - it's called impeachment. Even ignoring the (to put it mildly) questionable results from 2000 and 2004, Bush is entirely the wrong person, at the wrong time. Bush/Cheney shouldn't even be allowed to contemplate running another scare-campaign, smearing the Dem opponent as "unAmerican" and claiming megadeaths in the offing if they don't win.