"Perhaps it's time to look seriously at changing the Presidency to a single 6 year term."

That won't work. They will simply start up the investigations, etc. earlier.

Even Eisenhower had to deal with the Sherman Adams "gift" scandal in 58. Not to mention the stroke in 57 (although the heart attack was in the first term).

So if Cheney does resign who do you think Bush will pick to replace him? This might be the perfect opportunity to position a 2008 candidate for the presidential campaign.

Screw the investigations... I'd rather that Bush resigned, Cheney took over, and Karl Rove was VP.

Is anybody else starting to think that if Rove got the boot it might be a good thing for the White House? His strategerizing lately hasn't really impressed me all that much.

Justice, Honesty, accountability, & transparency at last! I hope, if things fall as they seem to be leaning, it's enough to jar that remaining mass of Americans out of their 911-induced state of mass hysteria. Blind faith & blind trust are for lemmings. Wake up America!

6-year terms won't change the fact that we as a nation tend to elect self-serving liars above straight shooters. I am including the Dem's choice to run a flawed candidate like Kerry in this blanket statement. To understand where I'm coming from, examine the transcripts from the debates in Ohio's last Governor's race. Tim Hagen told hard truths. Taft told pretty lies. Taft won and history has proven Hagen more than correct. The people pay the price. Term duration changes won't fix this. Education will.

I've wondered the same thing B Moe. I am assuming Bush can have an original thought without him. I just don't know who he would fall back on for strategy purposes. But, of late, things haven't been looking too good there either.

This just reinforces my belief that both sides of the political world commit endless crimes (hint: it's not "democrat" and "republican" that is the divide, but "politician" and "not a politician").

But what impresses me is that when democrats get caught, they say, "it's YOUR fault for blaming me, not my fault for doing it."

Whereas Republicans politely step aside.

If you have to choose between the two, Republican is the way to go.

But this particular scandal took root in Bush's first term...and if Bush were finishing up his one six-year term, we'd still have to be going through the Fitzgerald investigation.

Two points: 1. the Constitutional Convention considered a seven year term. 2. A single term Prez would be a lame duck from day one.

Aside: the best thing Clinton could have done for the dems was to step aside just after the two year clip and let Algore take over. He may have gotten elected, twice, to serve nearly 10 years. America would have been so green that kudzo would have overtaken the Capitol. Of course we'd all be unemployed and we'd have to eat it.

Aside 2: Reagan's genius was in seeing the forest, not in knowing the latin name for the species (as Gore would). GWBush is the same way.

Aside 3: He probably should have cleaned out State and CIA on day one, and brought in players who shared his vision. That may be the biggest mistake of his presidency.

Have to disagree that 10 minutes more of a Jimmy Carter administration would be acceptable to solve any perceived problem.

You mention the second term difficulties go back to Eisenhower. What else does that coincide with? That's right, presidents being limited to two terms of office. In most cases a third term would be a bad idea. However, I think having the president constitutionally precluded from running a third time leads to the attacks on the administration.

I'm a little bit behind on this story. What, exactly, was leaked? Her cover name was her actual name, so is it the fact that she worked for the CIA that was leaked? Couldn't our enemies have followed her home from Langley to find that out? Just the fact that the investigation had been going on for two years means something happened, but what?

If Fitzgerald says the law was broken then something should happen to those people (I'll bet there are indictments for obstruction of justice), but I don't see the connection many liberals are making that an indictment is proof that the administration warped pre-war intelligence on purpose. Steve Colbert and his Watergate-era female guest from 60 minutes, not to mention John Stewart and his audience, were creaming their pants over this last night.

"I am assuming Bush can have an original thought without him."

unlikely.

His most effective defense mechanism is that no intelligent person can pay attention to him for more than 30 seconds.

Aside 3: He probably should have cleaned out State and CIA on day one, and brought in players who shared his vision. That may be the biggest mistake of his presidency.

Unfortunately we have a civil service system that prevents this.

The 22 Amendment possibly had another unintended consequence. Before Eisenhower, only 1 sitting VP was nominated to follow his boss (Van Buren). However, every two term VP since the Amendment has been implemented has been his party's nominee to follow his boss (Nixon, Bush, Gore) and 2 one termers (Humphrey, Mondale) were as well. This may be just a coincidence, but the first term limited VP, Nixon, knew his boss couldn't run again and was, as Barone recently wrote, seething with ambition.

Adams & Jeffeson as well but their terms were before Prez & VP were constitutionally required to run as a team

ou have to go all the way back to the Eisenhower administration to find a two term Presidency that didn't go to hell (in the form of investigations, impeachment, or resignation) in the final years of their second term.

OTOH, you have to look wide and far to find a maladministration that was so inept from the word go that they have screwed up everything they have touched (or neglected). Public perception is coming around to this; a large majority of the American people think that the country is (for a good number of these, seriously) heading in the wrong direction. A look around is all that's needed to confirm that.

Cheers,

Two points: 1. the Constitutional Convention considered a seven year term. 2. A single term Prez would be a lame duck from day one.

They didn't put in the two term limit until very recently....

Aside 3: He probably should have cleaned out State and CIA on day one, and brought in players who shared his vision. That may be the biggest mistake of his presidency.

So the folks that reallyscrewed the pooch could have run completely amok without checks of any kind??? Wasn't the nay-sayers that ruined Dubya's grand plans (or that caused him to f**k up ... or go on vacation ... in the run-up to 9/11). It was that his plans don't even work on Pluto.....

Cheers,

" It was that his plans don't even work on Pluto....."

Ahhh, I was wondering WTF you were talking about for a minute there, so how's the weather on Pluto, Arne? None of that pesky global warming to worry about there, I betcha!

Ahhh, deleting comments, eh? All I did was tit for tat. He insulted me (with nothing in the form of a meaningful response to my actual points), so I turned the tables. Fair 'nuff?

Cheers,