CNN article on changing things for us presidents

[Briansol]

Interesting peice
Three new rules for U.S. presidents - CNN.com

i like 1, and can see the reasoning behind 3. I'm not a fan of point 2, however. While I think military experience should be considered a plus, i don' think it necessarily needs to be a requirement.

thoughts?

 

[Cashizslick]

That quote goes on to talk about the importance of having a fluid Constitution, one that reflects the society of the time as opposed to "the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."

Author LZ Granderson advocates changing the constitution around. Also feels its a barbaric document. Guy must love America.

Today, given how money, special interest groups and technology, including electronic media, have diseased the entire political process, I believe it's time we considered some sweeping changes.

Granderson doesnt seem to think CNN, a state run media machine, has had anything to do with messing up our political process. Its obvious he doesnt want other types of electronic media (i.e. websites that dont agree with cnn) skewing people's thoughts.

President Obama's open mic comment, telling Russian President Dmitry Medvedev that he would have "more flexibility" to discuss missile defense after the November election, wasn't as much an appalling gaffe as it was an accurate assessment of the inherent flaw of a two-term system for presidents.

Agree with granderson on this one.

But what if we were to amend the Constitution so that each president gets only one six-year term? He or she spends five years focused on governing without handwringing over a bid for re-election.

Obama and Bush were each bad enough during their 1st, 4 year term in office... I dont agree with extending the party.

When I hear Romney, Gingrich and Rick Santorum speak about Iran, their words are not spoken through the filter of Eisenhower's insight, but rather shouted arrogantly out of a megaphone at some people who hate Obama.
It's so twisted that the views of the only candidate with military experience, Rep. Ron Paul, are routinely dismissed as being naive by a handful of warmongers who don't look as if they've ever thrown a punch in their lives.
While I agree with the overall tone Obama has taken in the Middle East, I believe he too would have been better served with military experience. It certainly would have added credibility to his push to overturn the "don't ask, don't tell" policy as well as his decision on the Afghanistan surge.

Granderson is a big fan of the obama administration. Everyone knows Obama would crush Ron Paul in the 2012 election, and so does Granderson. His endorsement of Paul as Obama's opponent is pretty clear.

I know, I know, President Reagan was great -- for some -- but we don't need to be wondering if the person we elect is going to die while in the White House. And since 35 is the new 25, we definitely don't need an inexperienced youngster with his or her finger on the button either.

Typical leftist shot at Reagan. Also, does Granderson think Obama is inexperienced? Nope.


This is just a propaganda piece. Guy writing the article thinks obama's chances arent that great this november and wishes the chosen one could have another 2 years to fuck up our country. Awesome.

 

[TommyTheCat]

Wow dude did you even READ the article?

That quote goes on to talk about the importance of having a fluid Constitution, one that reflects the society of the time as opposed to "the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."

Author LZ Granderson advocates changing the constitution around. Also feels its a barbaric document. Guy must love America.

It's really quite profound when you think about it: a founding father granting future generations permission to make changes to a document with the ink barely dry on the original. And we have taken Jefferson up on his suggestion, such as granting women the right to vote.

I think his "barbarous" description may seem rude at first - but we are talking about an old society of unequality (more than today). But I also hate every other article he writes, its just his style - suck.

 

[Cashizslick]

i was listening to rush limbaugh when i typed my response earlier. sorry for my tone B

 

[invisibledemon]

while we live in a nation in which the vast majority of citizens either believe, or claim to believe, in the bible, i dont think we can legitimately call the constitution nor the framers barbaric.

 

[Drake]

I find talk about the constitution being antiquated baffling. The founders included a mechanism to ammend the damn thing. Hell we have done it before. Several times even. But they dont want that because 99 percent of what they want to propose would not have the consent of the people. The establishment thinks Joe Citizen is just to stupid to "get it". So they go forth with this ohh its so old, gramps didnt know what he was talking about nonsense. Dont like it? Ammend it. The process is clearly defined.

On a slightly unrelated note President Obamas little speach on the Supreme Court being un-elected offcials turning down legaslative law is just plain ridiculous. Do we elect officials to the EPA? Nope and both sides use departments to pass law with zero oversight or appeal.

 

[Cashizslick]

^ Tis a one way street with most libs

 

[DarkHand]

The military experience thing is plain dumb, a cheap idea thrown out to counter the current crop of crazies.

The age thing is weird too, I think it's fine as-is.


However, I and many others have come up with the idea of a single six-year term on our own before. I love that idea and always have.

Make congressional terms 3 years as well, single term, and deny them the ability to participate in lobbying activities afterwards. Federal and state.

You'll have solved 75% of America's problems in a few years.

 

[Briansol]

yeah, i'm not saying i agree with the whole meaning of this article-- jsut that the3 main points are something to look atl.

i had a big post in the other new thread darkhand started, and then java crashed and killed my browser with it. ugh. will retype that all later.

 

[Celerity]

Guy writing the article thinks obama's chances arent that great this november and wishes the chosen one could have another 2 years to fuck up our country. Awesome.

2 years in his second term ? You planning something ?

The constitution is a PERFECT document. I mean, even today. Even with it's references to God. The references to God make the document have a meaning that is larger than any one person. It means that Government isn't granting these rights - Someone or something larger than anything (that can threaten to take it away) is. It means that if I, Celerity, were to just fall to earth - I have a "God-given right" to freedom, the pursuit of happiness, and an ability to defend myself and whoever I choose to defend.

But alas, the Constitution is meaningless. And it always has been. We not only answer to it, but we also answer to the other law books - corporate, tax, motorvehicle, and so on. The Constitution has been over-turned.

The goal here is to return to it. A massive reset button on the country. Get rid of the millions of pages of complex fine-law, and start over again. And get rid of the career politicians. These people NEED to be knocked down a peg. They are our employees.

 

[|Chaz|]

Definitely agree with this. It's just too bad that instead of being our servants, we are their servants. They use our money to accomplish THEIR goals or the goals of THEIR supporters.