A number of readers have pointed out that Ronald Reagan was no fan of the 22nd amendment either (Steven Chapman mentions here). Surprise, surprise, Dems were upset back then that a Republican president leaving office was proposing such a thing. So people’s positions on presidential term limits depends on who the president complaining about the amendment is? I’ll speak for meself: Never been a fan of term limits for anyone. I’m pretty sure we’d be critics of Rudy as mayor now–it’s inevitable–but people wanted him in ‘01, and the alternatives were terrible, as we are seeing now in NYC. Though I don’t see a movement for repealing the 22nd Amendment catching fire, and I am not going to push it along, the term limit has never been something I am terribly comfortable with. Would that have meant a third Clinton term, if Reagan had lead a successful movement to get it repealed? Who knows how the 2000 campaign would have played out–but it is certainly a possibility. But, even when people make lousy decisions, that is the way we usually work, isn’t it? They can always fix it in four years. And yes—it goes without saying–given what has happened in the world in the last few years, I am very glad things happened the way they did presidency wise, 22nd or not.