The Real Story Behind Presidential Term Limits

Power doesn’t usually arrive with a villain speech, it piles up quietly through attention, advantage, and time. We take a listener’s question about presidential term limits and follow it straight into the real history behind the 22nd Amendment: Franklin D Roosevelt’s four election wins, Harry Truman’s push to formalize limits, and the fear that long tenures can start to look like a monarchy or worse.

We also get honest about what changed between Washington’s day and ours. George Washington set the two term precedent with personal restraint, but modern politics runs on name recognition, fundraising, and nonstop “earned media.” We talk about why wartime presidents can become impossible to challenge, how mass communication can tilt the field, and why today’s media ecosystem makes the incumbency advantage feel even more powerful than it used to.

Then we widen the lens to Congress, Supreme Court justices, and federal judges. If the goal is limiting accumulated power, should term limits apply beyond the presidency? And if “staff is policy,” what happens when elected officials rotate out but the permanent class of staffers and institutions stays in place?

To close, we pivot to something practical and fun: a list of American history movies that aim for real historical accuracy, including classics like Sergeant York, The Longest Day, Tora! Tora! Tora!, Amistad, and Apollo 13, plus a few content caveats for families. If you like biblical, historical, and constitutional talk that stays grounded in facts, subscribe, share this with a friend, and leave a review. What would you change about term limits, and what history film do you trust most?

Transcript

Rick Green [00:00:07] It's Thursday, Foundations of Freedom Thursday here at the WallBuilders Show. Thanks for joining us where we take on the hot topics of the day from a biblical, historical and constitutional perspective. On Fridays, we love getting your questions. So be sure and send them in radio@wallbuilders.com. That's radio@wallbuilders.com. I'm Rick Green here with David Barton and Tim Barton guys. We've got first question's coming from Ryan and he asked why exactly are presidential term limits in place? Should it be the people's right to vote someone in as many times as they want. Thank y'all for all you do. God bless. Okay, so presidential term limits guys. 

Tim Barton [00:00:42] Now, Dad, it sounds like he's been listening to your conversation about Congress and the Senate. 

David Barton [00:00:48] That's right. 

Tim Barton [00:00:48] And so now, Rick, he might be in trouble for a little bit right now. 

David Barton [00:00:55] No, because he didn't ask what I thought. He asked why they're in place. So, I could, I could tell you why they are in place, but that's a different question from what I think about them. So, and by the way, that's exactly right. I have not been a fan of term limits. I think the people are the, the, the term limit if they want it. Now there's here's, here's a caveat that's different from back when they originally did it. So, what's interesting is, and this goes back to really World War II, we’ve only had one president who served more than two terms. That was Franklin Roosevelt, World War II. He was there long before World War II, died in World War II. He was elected four times as president, died in his fourth term. And it's interesting that the guy who championed this amendment was his vice president from that fourth term, that was Harry Truman. So, Harry Truman finished out FDR's fourth term and then he had his own term. So, he had a, didn't serve a full eight years, but here's the guy who did this. And it was interesting the, the logic that they gave back at that point in time. They argued for limited power and that if you had someone who stayed in too long, that it could end up being like hit Hitler or Mussolini or others that are just in now, here's where I think that the difference is with kind of a presidential term limit; is back at the point in time, you had so much earned media for FDR in his fourth term, a wartime president, everything else he did, I don't think there's anybody in the United States that could get anywhere close to being able to advertise their name at anywhere the level that FDR did without having to pay for it. He got all this earned media, and so there was no way of having an even playing field coming in for anybody else to be able to compete with him whatsoever at any point in time. Now there's some of that that goes today with the reelection, but not four terms, four times in. So yeah, I mean, anybody that's president has an advantage except with Biden, you saw that that didn't work. With George Bush, 41, that didn't work. There's been a number of one-term presidents, and that's even in the modern era, Jimmy Carter. So, it's not that being president gives you a massive advantage if your policies aren't good. In wartime, we all came together. We're not talking about politics so much. We're talking about saving lives and ending the war. And so that just gave a huge advantage with four terms. And that's where I think the difference is. So that's why the concern, why they did it back when they did that. The 22nd Amendment is we don't want a person in so long that they become like a dictator or like someone else, because at that point you cannot compete on an even playing field with somebody who's been in four terms and had all the earned media that FDR had. So that's kind of, I'm still philosophically, I think the people have to be equipped to make the choice and as long as there's a somewhat level playing field, which occurs because we do have two term limits, that means you're only gonna run for reelection once. I think that really helps even the playing field a lot more. 

Tim Barton [00:04:11] Well, and Dad, to maybe even add some thoughts, I don't want to say disagree with you because I don't fundamentally disagree with you on some of this, but obviously George Washington being the father of the nation, being the model of the kind of leader we want, the guy who really is just there to serve, he's not there to, George Washington benefited in no way from being the president. Because he's an introvert, he's a homebody. Nothing about this is what he wanted, but he was the guy who was so loved and respected. He's the only president ever elected unanimously through the Electoral College. He was the one that could bring everybody together, and he's the one who set the example after two terms, you need to be done, because we don't need some kind of king who's running and it's his will and his whims, and that's not the way it should work. And so, if nothing else, his example set the precedent that should be followed. And, and it was so clear that no president can fuse that until FDR did. And, so I would say, even though fundamentally, I agree with you, the people should be in charge. As you mentioned, there's a lot of dynamics have changed now with funding and campaigns and name recognition. And you can kind of go down the list where there certainly is a unique advantage to people that have been in politics for very long, because they can grow their war chests, meaning all of their campaign contributions they can use to continue to do a lot of what they've done. We know the name recognition makes a difference when voters go to the polls. They often will vote on names they recognize, even if they have no idea who that person was. So there definitely are some advantages. And so even though for a president, there wasn't term limits until Harry Truman is the one suggesting and promoting that. The precedent was so clear that no president confused it. And so, it was kind of like an internal integrity term limit, if you will, as opposed to having some kind of legal requirement. 

David Barton [00:06:11] And I think the thing that really makes the difference is all the earned media, because I think any president in the 1800s could have run several times and not been reelected time after time after time. But I do think a wartime president gets more earned media. I think Lincoln got a lot of earned media because he is the president in a civil war. I think that when you look at Woodrow Wilson, he got a lot earned media in World War I. He probably could have ran for a third term. And might have been able, but I think you, you take anybody else that was not a major wartime president. And I think that, I think, even if a president had run three times and been elected three times in 1840's, that didn't give them an advantage at all over somebody else that might have run, a governor from a state that might've run or something else. And, and I, yeah, with you, Tim, I think the real thing that changed it was media, not the principle of, of running. And you're right. Well, I mean, If it's good enough for George should have been good enough for FDR, but it wasn't obviously, but I think, I think now the difference is that earned media. And I don't think that existed until after World War I when it really, because even McKinley, you know, McKinley is the first guy to really have media coverage per se and he got assassinated. And then you have Teddy Roosevelt who comes in and he gets media coverage. But it just didn't make that much of a difference until you got in World War I, had a war president with Woodrow Wilson and he appeared to handle that pretty well, so gets reelected. So, it's just one of those interesting things. 

Tim Barton [00:07:49] Well, and it's something to add that it's, is where Trump had a unique idea in his 2016 election win, going to social media, because that's almost what FDR did during World War II with his fireside chats. 

David Barton [00:08:03] That's right. 

Tim Barton [00:08:04] He was in everybody's home every week. And, and so he's getting to speak directly to the American people. It's what President Trump did. And it's why the social media the tech giants changed the algorithms to try to stop him and slow him down. Because once a individual is able to speak in mass to that many people, they can have a huge voice and influence and then to your point, if there's a crisis going on and they're saying, I'm the guy you need and FDR is the guy in everybody's home every week on their radio with these fireside chats, his opponents weren't having that same opportunity. This is where again, it's so different. Once you've been elected, it is very hard. generally speaking, the pit- There are unique situations and circumstances, not that you can't remove an incumbent. It's not that can't have a challenge or win, but they have, generally speaking, a more uphill battle the longer someone is entrenched in the system, the more advantage they have in seeking reelection. 

Rick Green [00:09:08] Yeah, it's the reason you can get a, you know, walking carcass able to win at 90 years old that has to be wheeled around and the staff is the ones actually voting. 

Tim Barton [00:09:17] Rick, how dare you talk about half of Congress like that? 

Rick Green [00:09:22] It's the truth though, and in fact, a guy I had lunch with earlier today was they had to say he's like what an embarrassment we're projecting weakness to the world when we do that. And yeah, I think Ryan who sent this question in, great question, by the way I think you're actually trolling us because you probably know this is the only thing I disagree with the Barton's on like a Million different issues we talked about over the last 20 years of doing radio. Here's the one thing I would love to reset the table so that just like we require 

David Barton [00:09:52] Tell me that you like basketball better than baseball. Oh, you're right. 

Rick Green [00:09:55] Well, I should've said political. The only political issue, yeah. 

David Barton [00:09:59] I got you, all right. 

Rick Green [00:10:01] No, but I have to me it's like reset. It's what are the rules of the game? So, it's, it's not that you're taking choices away from, from the American people willy nilly, cause we already say you gotta be 25 to run for Congress. You gotta be, you know, 35 to be president. You gotta, we got age limits. We got geography limits. We got all these different things. So why not have a limit on how long you can serve when we know this 90% advantage goes to incumbents and we know that it gets abused and people stay there for 30, 40, 50 years. So, Mitch McConnell and Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi are the poster children for why we should spread the power out to more individuals by not allowing that person to stay there so long, their district will still send a liberal or a conservative more than likely, but at least it's a new person that hasn't accumulated all that power. That's my argument for it, which is kind of the same argument Truman was making with why the president should be limited to two terms, just so you don't accumulate too much power. I think the same thing applies, and I would even apply it not just to members of Congress, but to judges, Supreme Court justice especially, but any federal judge, you know, 10 years maybe, 10 year term, and then maybe a reappointment or two, but man, 30, 40, 50 years, it's just too long to be in the bubble and have everything handed to you. 

David Barton [00:11:15] You know, Rick, and with the judges, I mean, the Founders didn't give term limits because they use good behavior. But I would argue that the thing that has messed the Constitution up regarding judges, has been progressive law schools in the 20th century that taught a whole new purpose for judges and what they do. Which just earlier this week, the story came out about a judge who ordered the release of a criminal who has been released several times, violent. And the police in Las Vegas just said, no, we're not putting the guy back on the street. We've arrested him too many times. Every time we let him loose, and the judge says, I told you to let, I'm sorry, you're not the executive branch, Mr. Judge. You're the judicial branch. You can say what sentences are, but you don't execute the sentences. That goes to the other branch. And we're just in this thing because of the way law schools have been in the 20th century. Progressives, they gave all this to the judges. I mean, judges supposed to be the weakest branch, and it's not. And so that's where you kind of say, man, again, because we were not consistently good in putting good leaders in, including at universities, we now have all this garbage that's been handed to us in the 20th century that causes us to have to challenge original intent. Their plan was great. We just didn't stick to it. And now that we're off the road, how do you get back on the road? And so, you know, whether that's term limits or limiting judges or whatever, those or great discussions to have. 

Tim Barton [00:12:38] Well, and to just continue down this rabbit hole for just a moment, something that we all also have talked about and agree with, but as long as we're going down this rabbit hole, I think it's worth throwing out there. Rick, as you've advocated for term limits, one of the things that we have all agreed is that the people that need term limits maybe the most are not just the congressmen and senators. Obviously, we mentioned judges, that's a given, but also, it's the staff members that are up in Washington, D.C. And we know right now, under President Trump, that there are so many young people serving, which is so encouraging. But I would say like on a positive side, we have a very good friend who served a really solid Christian congressman. She then served a really solid Christian Senator. She's now working in the White House. I love the fact she's there where she's been there for quite a while. And the reason I bring this up is if you put term limits on congressmen and said, you can only be there 12 years. Right? For Senators, you get three terms, it's 18 years, and then you have to be done. I think that's plenty of time for them to serve in general. So, Rick, I would kind of side with you on that, but if you remove them and you allow the swamp creatures, everybody from who the lobbyists are, who the people involved in these different agencies are, and then even who the staff members are. If you're not changing out that ideology and worldview, then the people that are actually influencing the congressmen and senators the most, those that are around the most every day in DC, if that doesn't change, it's not gonna have the desired outcome that putting a term limit on a congressman and senator would, to the extent that we would hope it would, if you don't change out some of the other people in DC. 

Rick Green [00:14:23] Yeah. And it's like we've said, staff is policy, right? Because there's so many issues and there's so much to cover that staff person actually ends up really influencing how the congressman actually votes. So, what's the, how does Trump say it? Not hugely, I guess just huge. Huge. It's just huge major, major factor. 

David Barton [00:14:42] To that point, I mean this last week when we were in D.C., I was talking to one of my friends who had just seen one of the U.S. Senators coming down the hall. And he could not, he was not cognizant of where he was, of where was he headed. He had someone guiding him and leading him. And so, he votes, no, no. The staff says, go out there and punch the yes button or the no button. I mean, he wasn't even cognizance of where.

Rick Green [00:15:09] I thought- Cornyn was back in Texas campaigning, I didn’t'... Oh, I'm sorry, I'm sorry

David Barton [00:15:16] Oh! Take note of that one. So, so it's exactly what Tim is saying is, is you really do get the staff because the guy, you know, they, they know exactly how to do the right clips to, to look cognizant to look all together, but when you see it between the clips and between times that they choose to put them out there. It's, it, it it's clear that his cognitive abilities are not there and he is a retiring Senator this time, but that should have happened before now. 

Rick Green [00:15:43] And it makes you, it makes, you kind of pine for a, we want to see Daniel Webster going up against, you know, whoever and just, you know, the good debates and the, and the sharpest, the best being there to, to debate these issues. Not, not what you just described for sure. All right, guys, quick break. We've got more questions coming from the audience. When we return folks, you're listening to The WallBuilders Show. 

Rick Green [00:17:09] Welcome back to The WallBuilders Show. It's Thursday. Foundations of Freedom Thursday. Send your questions in to radio@wallbuilders.com, radio@wallbuilders.com. Spencer's up next, guys. Spencer said, Dear Mr. Barton, our family so appreciates everything that you do. I have a specific question. Could you please direct me to any films or documentaries about American history that you know to be historically accurate? It's been so disappointing to enjoy an American history film only to realize that some information was either false or mischaracterized. I would appreciate any guidance you could give, thank you. Oh man, we could give not a whole lot of them, but there's some. What do you guys think? What would you suggest? 

David Barton [00:17:48] The first thing I think is, what's his name? Fran, uh Frederick Chandler Harris, uh who did, the, the Brer Rabbit stuff and Brer Rabbit and Tar Baby. And his thing was don't throw me, don't throw me in the briar patch, which is where he wanted to be. I mean, this, this is a question. Oh, I hate that you asked me this question. Yeah, like, no, I love this question and it kind of, kind of a fun side of this. There are some really, really good movies out there. There's not a whole lot in the last 20 years, I'm gonna say. There are some. There's a whole a lot in The Golden Era of Hollywood and the 40s and 50s and 60s, there's a lot. And the connection we have with WallBuilders and the museum we've got, and then our friend Glenn Beck, and we helped run the American Journey Experience, which is another museum. So, there's the WallBuilder staff and the American journey staff. We collaborate a lot together and talk a lot. We want; we don't want to buy the same thing or compete against each other. And if they get something and we like it, or if we see something, we'll send to them or whatever. And so, it's fun. We'd try every three, four weeks to get together and say, hey, what are the new items we've got in the last month? And so, we go through and look at them together. Maybe we got it WallBuilders and they haven't seen it over an American Journey or vice versa. And then we would all, as both staffs would get together and sit down and watch a Hollywood movie, that was accurate to the things that we had, and particularly for me with a lot more white hair, I knew a lot of those movies, and a whole lot of the younger guys had not seen a single one of those older movies. 

Tim Barton [00:19:24] And Dad, this is where it's worth pointing out that most of the staff that that is an American Journey Experience are younger than 30. That we have severpeople at WallBuilders that are younger then 30. Now, we do have some that worked for us for a couple decades right out of high school or college and so we they've already had mandatory movie time, where we've already walked them through some of these movies and so not to give away what might be on your list, but it's... 

Rick Green [00:19:53] Wait TIm, mandatory movie time. I love it! 

Tim Barton [00:19:59] It's like mandatory fun time like hey you have to come in and have fun with us. You don't have an option We're gonna have fun. Yeah, you just you know, every now and then, you know, mandatory movie night to watch something good. And, you know Dad, so often when we will watch a film, these young people never would have chosen, halfway through or by the end they're like wow that was a really good film! And we go, yeah! Because back before they had AI and whatever animation and whatever you know studio, current graphic work they do, you used to have to be good storytellers. You used to have be really good actors if the film was going to be good. And so, several as you mentioned of those older films are so stinking good. So, dad, I know the question, that the people are wanting the answer to is, what are some of those films that people should watch? And of course we could give caveats, because I know one that's gonna be on your list, I'm gonna throw it out there Sergeant York, yeah, such a good one. Sergeant York the actual man who is was Sergeant York, he was actually there on set helping direct. Of course, because of the film there's abbreviations. There's a little nuance different from the story not dissimilar maybe from like a Hacksaw Ridge the more modern film, a little more graphic than Sergeant York was. But these are stories that are honest to form, but there's some Hollywood details that have changed or nuanced. But for example, Sergeant York really really great film. If people haven't seen that go back and watch it. It is so good so that as an example is one of the things on the list. So Dad, what else is on the list? 

David Barton [00:21:43] Other things I would point to would be the film called The Longest Day. That was really the D-Day invasion. It was done in the 60s I think, Zanook maybe, I think it was 60s, but the guys who were on the set that helped ran that were the guys that landed on D-day and they made sure everything was accurate right to it. It is stellar. The A-listers of Hollywood, a whole bunch of them were in there. Several dozen A-Listers were in that movie. It was great. The movie Tora! Tora! Tora! Is really accurate. That's Pearl Harbor, the attack on Pearl Harbor. The movie Amistad is very accurate. John Quincy Adams, the court case that he did in 1840s, that's a very accurate movie. 

Tim Barton [00:22:25] And let's point out real quick, that's Rated R. There is some tribal nudity in that, and there is some violence in that. So just for families that might wanna look at these, some of the ones you mentioned, the old black and white World War II movies, those have fighting in it, but it's from the 60s, and so it just looked a little like, it's like. Almost like an old A-Team, or Lone Ranger TV show, right, that the gun goes bang and the guy falls down. So not graphic, but if there's one that is graphic, we will try to identify it. Or obviously as parents, you can do a quick internet search and see what the content is in those films before you choose to watch it on a family movie night. 

David Barton [00:23:10] Others that I would point to would be PT-109, the story of John F. Kennedy that was done post-World War II as his World War II experience. They Were Expendable, which is the story how PT boats came into existence in World War II. Disney had the Miracle of the Life Stallions, which was an operation under Patton, it's a true story of what happened in World War II, awesome movie, I love that one. The Man Who Never Was a World War II intelligence operation with Great Britain that helped deceive the Germans on D-Day helped us land without them knowing what was happening. The Scarlet and the Black is a Catholic priest during World War II and some secret stuff that he did. The Great Escape, another classic movie big Hollywood A-listers. To Hell and Back is the autobiography of Audie Murphy, the most decorated soldier in World War II, he played himself in that. Gi Joe's the story of Ernie Pyle who is the most famous journalist in World War II. 

Tim Barton [00:24:12] Well, let's clarify, if people are looking up GI Joe, they might find one of the newer movies, GI Joe. It's definitely not that one. 

David Barton [00:24:21] Good point. 

Tim Barton [00:24:23] Don't go to that one, that's not historically correct at all. 

David Barton [00:24:26] Yeah, if G.I. Joe that you look at is not black and white, it ain't the right one. And so, G. I. Joe. Apollo 13 was another one that was that was considered to be very accurate. Inn of the Sixth Happiness is World War II, a Chinese missionary lady who led a bunch of kids out. It's a real good movie. Ingrid Bergman. I mean, there's a lot of movies like that, just a lot of movies. 

Tim Barton [00:24:52] Well, so Dad, I think a good follow-up question would be, which of those maybe is your favorite and your top recommendation? If you're gonna watch one, watch this one. But let me, while you're thinking, let me ask another question about an old movie that like, how historically accurate was it? So, there's a movie called The Devil and Daniel Webster. Daniel Webstar was a real guy. Was that an accurate movie or? 

David Barton [00:25:19] Yeah, that, that was a, an accurate legend. Daniel, Daniel Webster was such a good speaker. He debated Satan and beat Satan in a debate. And so, he got it. He saved the soul from going to hell. 

Tim Barton [00:25:30] Yeah, Guy sold his soul to the devil for momentarily financial gain, and then he regrets it later, but he's stuck. And so, Daniel Webster comes and argues with the devil and ends up winning the debate because the guy's soul was never his in the first place. It belonged to God. And so, you couldn't... Anyway, it was really great. That's not a real movie. Daniel Websters a real guy. It's a fun movie because he's a great debater. But Dad, of the movies you mentioned, which one's your favorite movie? 

Rick Green [00:25:55] I could have sworn that was a Charlie Daniels song and there was a fiddle involved, but anyway. 

David Barton [00:26:00] Yeah, that's right. That's right. I would probably go for Sergeant York, Longest Day is, is my top two. Entertaining movie is Disney’s Miracle of The White Stallion it's not the best acting in the world. It's got A- lister's in it for sure. And one more is Operation Dumbo Drop another Disney movie based on true events. And it's a really fun Vietnam war story. So those would be the ones I'd point to. 

Rick Green [00:26:25] So lots of good options, and by the way, don't forget our friends over at VidAngel, so some of the more recent stuff that you wouldn't be able to watch normally, you can watch by cutting out a lot of the bad stuff as well. So, check that out as well, thanks for listening today folks, send your questions into radio@wallbuilders.com, you've been listening to The WallBuilders Show.