New Constitutional Amendment

[AIRret]

We need a new Amendment stating that all future Presidents MUST have served in the MILITARY!!!!

How can you be a good commander in chief if you have never served.
Military service would give the President a better understanding of a key part of
our government!

[JohnR]

I'd rather have an Amendment mandating immediate removal from office if anyone in Federal government violates the Constitution. Try them in court later, but deny them the privilege of power first.

Since the Executive branch is chief law enforcement and can't be trusted to enforce itself, maybe set up a citizen's tribunal of randomly selected registered voters to act as a grand jury.

[AIRret]

I'd rather have an Amendment mandating immediate removal from office if anyone in Federal government violates the Constitution. Try them in court later, but deny them the privilege of power first.

Since the Executive branch is chief law enforcement and can't be trusted to enforce itself, maybe set up a citizen's tribunal of randomly selected registered voters to act as a grand jury.

John, I agree.....let's have two new Amendments.

There seems to be no accountability in Washington period!

[JohnR]

I'm in favor of having the President have military experience, not just for the obvious reasons, but because it would mean he'd have been background checked and his records should be accessible. He should have an honorable discharge too, and preferably serve a full enlistment term, not just wash out of basic.

[codegeek]

The Joint Chiefs of Staff are supposedly the brightest minds the military has to offer. A principle of our government is that the military answers to the civilian government. I don't think requiring the President to have military service makes any difference. Plus, it would seriously restrict the pool of bright candidates for the job.

[yqtszhj]

I want an amendment that every year the government must pass a balanced budget, and if they don't the government shuts down and no one get paid except the Military and there is no back pay. That would be no pay for the congress and president too. The only exception would be if we were in a declared war and then the only people that would continue to get paid would be those essential to the military effort (excluding the president and congress who still wouldn't get paid at that time.)

That would get them working on something maybe.

[JohnR]

Plus, it would seriously restrict the pool of bright candidates for the job.

Considering the pool of candidates we already pick from, I suggest it would greatly open up the pool of bright candidates.

[xsailer]

Ya know, there are a lot of very intelligent folks out there that wouldn't think of going into Government. It would be nice to get some of them proven successful guys and gals to give it a shot. If successful already they surely would have had to learn how to pick people, that report to him, that know what the hell they are doing as credentials would have shown. The Pres. can't be expected to know all there is to know to run the US. But it would be nice to see a Pres. that picks GOOD QUALIFIED leaders that are appointed ONLY for their will and worth to get the job done and do it correctly.
After reading the above I'm thinking my God, am I pie in the sky idealist or what! Please don't think me a Democrat....i beg you, don't. Just dreamin I guess. Never going to happen is it?
Seriously though, there are a lot of good leaders in the private sector that I would like see in Politics and then because of the newly enforced regulation of the two term limit must move on to other things.

Just dream'in.

[JohnR]

Seems like our candidates are picked by the kids in Lord of the Flies. Only the ones that survive severe bullying and ridicule make it to the ballot. Only the ones meek enough to take no public stand on important issues, and seem likely to compromise with the extreme left bullies, get to run.

[AIRret]

Ya know, there are a lot of very intelligent folks out there that wouldn't think of going into Government. It would be nice to get some of them proven successful guys and gals to give it a shot. If successful already they surely would have had to learn how to pick people, that report to him, that know what the hell they are doing as credentials would have shown. The Pres. can't be expected to know all there is to know to run the US. But it would be nice to see a Pres. that picks GOOD QUALIFIED leaders that are appointed ONLY for their will and worth to get the job done and do it correctly.
After reading the above I'm thinking my God, am I pie in the sky idealist or what! Please don't think me a Democrat....i beg you, don't. Just dreamin I guess. Never going to happen is it?
Seriously though, there are a lot of good leaders in the private sector that I would like see in Politics and then because of the newly enforced regulation of the two term limit must move on to other things.

Just dream'in.

A lot of very qualified folks won't run because the press drags every skeleton,
however small, out of the closet.
That is except for Obammer!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[getsome]

Dr. Ben Carson comes to mind as well as Neal Boortz...Both of these gentlemen would make great presidents but don't want to go through the meat grinder of Democratic politics and dirty tricks to get the job...Look what they did to Herman Cain...

They said Herman may have been in an inappropriate situation with a female staff member when he was president of The Restaurant Association of America and it was never proven but it ruined his run for office and harmed his family.....What definitely has been proven is that sitting President Slick Willie Clinton never let go of Monica's ears anytime the two of them were together and she was just one of many BUT...He's a Democrat so what difference does it make if he used the Oval Office for a whore house and that's perfectly ok because Democrats are special.....

[codegeek]

Considering the pool of candidates we already pick from, I suggest it would greatly open up the pool of bright candidates.

considering the current pool already includes those with military service, I'm not following you ;-)

[xsailer]

I like Dr. Carson. Neil I like but I think you would agree that although you may like his blunt, non-sense comments he would turn off many voters. Got to have some tact.
I've not heard anyone talk the sense that the good Dr. does including the new crop of politicians. Of course he's not a proven or declared canadite either. From what he says he's been vented pretty well by others and he declares he's clean and they won't find anything. As Eisenhower and others have said, the military has, by definition, a single minded approach. Always exceptions though.

[JohnR]

considering the current pool already includes those with military service, I'm not following you ;-)

How many presidential candidates do we anticipate with military experience? Allen West isn't even pretending to run at this time.

The comment wasn't to lay out technicalities, but to suggest that there's a de facto exclusion of experienced military candidates for one reason or another. If you subscribe to the theory that dark unseen forces (pick your favorite - Bildebergs, Freemasons, Trilaterals, George Soros) pick the nominees, then they are excluding ex-military people.

[muggsy]

FDR and Harry Truman didn't serve in the military, but they made fairly good C-in-Cs. They won WWII.