PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   US Politics Hamsterwheel v2.0 (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/559612-us-politics-hamsterwheel-v2-0-a.html)

con-pilot 14th Apr 2015 00:12


I wouldn't be surprised to see her in the number two slot on someone's ticket.
Do you think that the DNC has someone hidden in the wings for when Hillary implodes? I wonder who it could be, as the Clintons are the Golden People of the Democratic Party.

Guess it could be Warren, but she is so far to the left she turns off a lot of the rank and file Democrats.

West Coast 14th Apr 2015 00:16

Perhaps it will be like the SNL skit, Bill will be the VP. Hadn't really put much thought towards a VP selection for her. Whoever it is better have a shitload of patience and a stiff upper lip.

galaxy flyer 14th Apr 2015 01:09


Hilary is not a shoo in. There must be a credible, electable person. We haven't seen that so far from the GOP. I think the American public is still a little annoyed by that letter sent to the Iranians.

Gf, so what sounds like the espousal of libertarian philosophy in what I posted? I'm about improving our country for all of us, not just myself or the entitled few. I don't mind paying my fair share. I deeply resent Corporate welfare and the destruction of our middle class through Corporate Greed. I don't trust our Corporations to not poison us without proper oversight. Like the EPA, the FDA, the USDA, etc. We need OSHA and Workers Comp. We need banking regulation. We need the SEC and Stock Watch.

OK, St Jerome was right, the Love of Money is the root of all Evil but other than that, we need a strict separation of Church and State. I don't care what goes on between two consenting adults. What goes on between me and my doctor is not the business of anyone else.

I believe in the Death Penalty. Child molesters, rapists and murderers should be dealt with quick and sure justice. (I'm fine with dealing it out)

Hmmm, now that I've thought about it, perhaps I should run.
Where to begin in that screed?

First, what was so terrible about Congress members expressing the facts of the Constitution? Ted Kenndey tried to treat with the Soviets over reagan's head. Pelosi visited Damascus undercutting GWB. Both parties have done this, see http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinio...lumn/24711069/

What goes on between my doc and I are, indeed, no one's business, exactly why Obamacare is an illegal and immoral intrusion in private lives.

Corporate greed? Well, read up on "regulatory capture". The current economy is way too driven by businesses who have captured the government. Citizens United was simply a statement that groups of people, whether organized in unions, corporate entities or NGOs, have rights to speech and redress.

GF

obgraham 14th Apr 2015 04:02

Can't run Bill for Veep as he is not qualified to be Pres.

But they could, of course, run somebody else and allow Bill to "manipulate" them -- he has lots of practice at that.

Monica seems out of a job these days.

MTOW 14th Apr 2015 04:49

Rubio has announced his nomination. I've watched him interviewed by Sean Hannity on Fox. I know Hannity hasn't asked him any hard questions, but having said that, he's come across as very articulate and very well-informed, giving solid answers to many and varied questions.

It surely would be a dream ticket for the GOP if they closed ranks and didn't rip and tear each other to pieces in a self-destructive primaries contest, and did what the Democrats seem to be doing with Hilary Clinton by going with a Rubio/Carson ticket right ***ing now.

Rubio has also promised that he will not seek re-election as a Senator. If he misses out on the Republican nomination, he won't have the fall back of a senate seat. Hispanic heritage to the fore with shades of burning the boats on their arrival in the New World?

galaxy flyer 14th Apr 2015 11:59

Hilary can't win--she reminds every man of his ex-wife. Who'd vote for their ex?

GF

rgbrock1 14th Apr 2015 12:43

WC wrote:


Hadn't really put much thought towards a VP selection for her.
Monica Lewinsky? :}:E

rgbrock1 14th Apr 2015 12:47

Rubio stands as much chance in getting the GOP nomination as the proverbial snowball does in hell. Would not be a good choice for the GOP at all. And Hillary would trounce him in the general election.

Mitt Romney anyone? :ok:

West Coast 14th Apr 2015 13:53

I've not seen anything that would indicate that. He will be a formidable player. Strong potential to nab Florida, the Latino vote, younger voters turned off to establishment candidates, a lack of baggage (known that is) His lack of name recognition may be a plus. There's a lot of time till the primaries for him to craft a message. No one should be written off this early.

rgbrock1 14th Apr 2015 14:08

WC:

Suggest you do some further research on Mr. Rubio. The Latino vote? He can kiss that goodbye as he is not at all liked in the Latino community. (Due mostly to his back-tracking on his support for O'Bummer's fast-track to a green card crap.) Youthful voters? Perhaps. His name recognition is a minus for him as aside from the Latino community - who are well aware of his name - not many probably know who he is. Then again, back in '92 not many knew who Bill Clinton was either.

MarkerInbound 14th Apr 2015 15:09


Can't run Bill for Veep as he is not qualified to be Pres.

He's 35, born in the US and been living here the last 14 years. If you're referring to the 22 Amendment, it says you can't be elected to the office more than two times. Nothing about succession.

West Coast 14th Apr 2015 15:38

RGB

What I've read doesn't indicate a love vest with Rubio, but suggests he will get a lot of Latino votes. You can post op/ed pieces to support your position if you care, I can match you one for one on that indicating support for him.

Lonewolf_50 14th Apr 2015 16:52


Originally Posted by MarkerInbound (Post 8943541)
He's 35, born in the US and been living here the last 14 years. If you're referring to the 22 Amendment, it says you can't be elected to the office more than two times. Nothing about succession.

There is also a 10 year limit.

Section 1.


No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.

But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.
Because he can succeed to the Oval Office, he is not eligible as he'd run over the ten year limit implied in the above language. This is the bit about conflict with 12th amendment.

There is a point of contention regarding the interpretation of the
Twenty-second Amendment as it relates to the Twelfth Amendment, ratified in 1804, which provides that "no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice President of the United States."

While it is clear that under the Twelfth Amendment the original constitutional qualifications of age, citizenship, and residency apply to both
the President and Vice President, it is unclear whether a two-term president
could later serve as Vice President. Some argue that the Twenty-second Amendment and Twelfth Amendment bar any two-term president from later serving as Vice President as well as from succeeding to the presidency from any point in the United States presidential line of succession. Others contend that the Twelfth Amendment concerns qualification for service, while the Twenty-second Amendment concerns qualifications for election, and thus a former two-term president is still eligible to serve as vice president. The practical applicability of this distinction has not been tested, as no former president has ever sought the vice presidency, and thus the courts have never been required to make a judgment regarding the matter.

con-pilot 14th Apr 2015 17:33

Well that seems simple enough.

Bill runs as V-P, sends Hillary to Dallas and he becomes the Prez. :p


But then Bill is impeached (again) for knocking off Hillary, but Congress realizes what Bill did (got rid of Hillary) and instead of impeaching Bill (again) they give the American Freedom award.

Bill dies in office of old age, with a big smile on his face.

End of story. :ok:

West Coast 15th Apr 2015 04:04

You're dreaming Con, there's no more than a 1 in 3 chance of that happening.

MTOW 15th Apr 2015 07:35

From sound bites we're hearing on TV from the US here in Oz, I fear Hillary RhyphenC might get up for the same reason the totally disastrous Julia Gillard (sort of) got up here in Oz.

Enough airheads will vote for her just "because she's a woman".

For the life of me, I cannot understand why any sane person would vote for a politician just because of that politician's gender. Would you choose the surgeon who was to operate on you based on gender or upon his/her skill and proven reputation?

Surely to God selection on who should lead your country, particularly in a time of severe crisis, is similarly serious. And if anyone selected Hillary Clinton for any job of higher status than municipal dog catcher based upon her proven performance that person hasn't been following her history very closely at all.

Or they've only been watching the US MSM, where, (like Julia Gillard on 'our' [Australia's] ABC), Hillary can do no wrong.

rgbrock1 15th Apr 2015 12:05

MTOW wrote


For the life of me, I cannot understand why any sane person would vote for a politician just because of that politician's gender.
For the same reason some people vote for a politician because of that politician's race.

rgbrock1 15th Apr 2015 15:45

The Honorable Harry Reid (nothing honorable about that scumbag) has gone on record as saying "They're all losers" when asked about the current crop of candidates for the GOP nomination.

Really Harry? How cerebral your words. Must have taken a lot of brain power for that summation.

rgbrock1 15th Apr 2015 17:37

If this media blurb is true, this is not good at all. (I have seen the same story in several media outlets though. Which is disconcerting.)

The Islamic State terror group is operating a camp in the northern Mexican state of Chihuahua, just eight miles from the U.S. border, Judicial Watch reported Tuesday.

Citing sources that include a “Mexican Army field grade officer and a Mexican Federal Police Inspector,” the conservative watchdog group reported that the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, is organizing only a few miles from El Paso, Texas, in the Anapra neighborhood of Juárez and in Puerto Palomas.

Judicial Watch sources said that “coyotes” working for the notorious Juarez Cartel are smuggling Islamic State terrorists across the U.S. border between the New Mexico cities of Santa Teresa and Sunland Park, as well as “through the porous border between Acala and Fort Hancock, Texas.”

rgbrock1 15th Apr 2015 18:21

Today, 15 April also known as Tax Day, it would do all of us some good to remember these words:

http://assets.patriotpost.us/images/...f331_large.jpg

Or, perhaps the words of Thomas Jefferson:

"Would it not be better to simplify the system of taxation rather than to spread it over such a variety of subjects and pass through so many new hands." —Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, 1784


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:40.


Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.