of President of the US.. It seems to me to be wrong.... Kinda silly too. Our Country is protected by an individual gaining too much power by limiting presidental terms.. A married couple can actually refuse to testify against the other.....What do you think. Please explain your answer...
2007-09-18 17:41:39 · 25 answers · asked by Born in the USA 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Yes I do. Say if Hillary gets elected as President. Bill will already have deep insight into the secretive aspects of the innerworkings of the White House and will be in a potentially powerful position of influencing decision making. The briefings which Bill, as President, had daily were considered classified. Most of these briefings are suspose to be restricted to trusted attendees only.
I think that Hillary will seek out the advice of Bill too often and maybe allow him some sembelance of Presidential power by proxie.
2007-09-18 17:52:52 · answer #1 · answered by engineer_retired 3 · 2⤊ 3⤋
How does the fact that they can't testify against each other have anything to do with being President? That makes no sense at all.
No, there shouldn't be a law like that. For what purpose? If so, then we should have a law that sons and daughters of Presidents can't run? How far down the family line would you like to go? Everyone is an individual with their own rights in this country and one of those rights is the right to run for President if you meet the criteria. Keep looking. This isn't the answer to keeping Hillary out of the White House. Madame President - get used to it.
2007-09-18 18:46:48 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, if the majority of the country votes for the former spouse, the candidate has the right to take office and not be penalized by family relationships. Creating a law for a specific individual is ridiculous. It's about like creating a law just so Ahnold can run for President even though he wasn't born in this country.
Besides, the spouse confidentiality thing applies whether the spouse is a predecessor President or not.
2007-09-18 17:47:38 · answer #3 · answered by Joe D 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I'm an FDR Dem. I would've voted for FDR all four times. Even five -- six -- ten times.
But in this instance I think the Willkie 1940 campaign slogan is apropos:
"No Third Term."
I'm not a Clinton fan.
I predict "No Third Term" will be the RNC campaign line in '08. And it'll work, unlike 70 years prior.
All I can say is it's a good thing the major GOP candidates are of the John Lindsay/Nelson Rockefeller wing. Extremely moderate pragmatists, regardless of the nonsense they're forced to say in these debates.
2007-09-18 17:59:43 · answer #4 · answered by Me 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Absolutely not.
Yes, our country is protected by an INDIVIDUAL attaining too much power, but a married couple is not an individual. They are two completely different people, and can have completely different views. Think of Arnold Schwarzenegger and Maria Shriver. One is a die hard democrat, the other is a die hard republican. They have completely different political views, but are still married.
Sorry, but the America that I have known and grown up with would never allow that kind of restriction on freedom.
2007-09-18 17:57:35 · answer #5 · answered by blank 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No i don't ANY American citizen can be President that was born on American soil, if we do that rule then we should rule out sons daughters cousins grandchildren etc etc etc , come on i don't really like Hillary but I'm not gonna deny anyone any rights of citizenship, unless they are in prison and then when they get out, they should be treated like a full fledged citizen once again.
it seems like some people and states seem to miss that part of citizens rights
2007-09-18 18:36:03 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, and believe me, I'm one of those who doesn't want the Clintons back in D.C.
I think this country is founded upon the principles of indivdualism and freedom, and that each person is his or her own, and should not be restricted by the actions of others, including their spouses.
2007-09-18 17:55:13 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Marriage doesn't mean the joining of the mind! Married people can have their own thoughts and opinions.
The best person should get the job, regardless of who they're related to, and the worst should be denied the job, regardless of family or marriage.
2007-09-18 17:51:11 · answer #8 · answered by lisa w 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
NO. There is no legal reason for stopping ANYONE who meets the Constitutional requirements from seeking the highest office in the land, and though the thought of Hillarious in the Oval Office makes me gag, let her run and make a fool of herself. When she gets destroyed, either in the primaries or the general election, it will bring to an end, once and for all, the MYTH of Clinton invincibility.
2007-09-18 17:49:26 · answer #9 · answered by Mike 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Why stop at the spouse? What about the brothers and the sons. After all this is not a monarchy. Oh wait, that would eliminate preferred candidates of the Republicans. Never mind.
2007-09-18 17:45:15 · answer #10 · answered by Tmess2 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋