From WND's article on the bills to repeal the 22nd Amendment:

"We do not have to rely on rigid constitutional standards to hold our Presidents accountable," said [Rep.] Hoyer. "Sufficient power resides in the Congress and the Judiciary to protect our country from tyranny."

Do you think that's true? Do you think the Legislative and Judiciary Branches do a good job of protecting us from Executive tyranny? Or do you think the three Branches have essentially teamed up to create and maintain tyranny?

It depends upon your definition of tyranny. If you mean government regulation and taxation of almost every facet of our "pursuit of happiness," then we live in a tyranny. On the other hand, if you mean unchecked power wielded by government--well, we're there, too. On the third hand (???), if you mean unchecked power by a single man, then we're far from it.

It seems only this last definition of tyranny (that of one man) is what the ignorant masses prefer to use. The Founding Fathers wanted to avoid all kinds of tyranny; thus, they created a division of power among three Branches, two Houses, voting blocs, etc. However, when these divisions act together with "a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object", the people most certainly inherit "a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism".

It's just too bad the masses are too stupid to define and recognize tyranny, let alone define and defend freedom.