Check These Out: Buddy Finder | Videos | SpouseBUZZ | My Friend Network | News | Military Equipment


Military.com    Military.com Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Hot Topics & Current Events  Hop To Forums  In the News    Should the 22nd ammendment be Repealed?
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
  Login/Join 
*

Picture of mmulder67
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by karlhungusjr:
quote:
Why would she have to resign?
She can campaign for the party nomination just like Obama can.
Makes no difference what her job is.
C'mon, you know better then to say that.


I'm hard pressed to think of a cabinet member who ran against the president while staying a cabinet member.

she would need to resign IF she decided to run. Not legally need to resign but shes smart enough to know she should.

But I believe her position was a "you take this job in exchange for not running against me in 2012" type of thing.


None of them resigned their positions when they campaigned for the nomination last year so I highly doubt she would resign unless asked to and that puts Obama in a very precarious situation.
Asking for her resignation because she's running against him...hmmm, methinks Hillary isn't as dumb as people think.
I don't think she took the job with that particular caveat you mentioned. She doesn't strike me as that gullible.
 
Posts: 3331 | Registered: Thu 16 February 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Experienced Member
Picture of karlhungusjr
Posted Hide Post
quote:
I just mean I was surprised she did not head up the healthcare but I guess the role she took was a bit more status?


what would you rather do? sit in the US and argue with insurance companies, or travel the world hobnobbing with world leaders?
 
Posts: 3053 | Registered: Mon 06 August 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Posted Hide Post
She should have been VP rather than Biden.
 
Posts: 1974 | Registered: Mon 03 December 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Experienced Member
Picture of karlhungusjr
Posted Hide Post
quote:
None of them resigned their positions when they campaigned for the nomination last year so I highly doubt she would resign unless asked to and that puts Obama in a very precarious situation.


That's because no one ran against the president.

Running against The president while holding a position in his cabinet would be political suicide for her.

quote:
I don't think she took the job with that particular caveat you mentioned. She doesn't strike me as that gullible.


I'm not saying she's gullible. Since she lost any realistic chance she had for the presidency before 2016 she took the next best thing.
 
Posts: 3053 | Registered: Mon 06 August 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Experienced Member
Picture of karlhungusjr
Posted Hide Post
quote:
She should have been VP rather than Biden.


I can't speak for everyone obviously but I guarantee he would have lost my vote had he picked her as VP.
 
Posts: 3053 | Registered: Mon 06 August 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Experienced Member
Picture of Elesso
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by shuman14:
No I think there needs to be term limits on every office.

Once you've been in DC too long it all becomes about personal power and not the public good.


the problm with term limits is that if one is limited to two terms, the candidate will do everyything in his power to get elected, then reelected, thenn sit on his but collecting a paycheck and setting himself up for civil life, completelly disregarding his duties to his people.
i watched that very same problem in Mexico where there IS NO REELECTION.
term limits lead to rampant corruption
 
Posts: 3240 | Registered: Fri 07 September 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Highly Experienced Member
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by shuman14:
quote:
I know of no dictator in modern times who was democratically elected.


How far back do you consider "modern times"?

Almost every Dictator in Europe prior to WWII was elected.

Hitler
Mussolini
Dollfuss
Horthy

Franco seized power in Spain's three-way Civil War, and I'm not sure how Stalin took over after Lenin.
False.
* Hitler was elected to the equivalent of the Senate he was APPOINTED Chancellor after killing several opponents.
* Mussolini became Prime Minister in a coup d'état in what was called the March on Rome.
* Dollfuss was appointed Chancellor as head of a coalition government with a minimal majority. In 33 parliament could not conclude the session so Dollfuss used the resignation of the president and both Vice presidents of the National Council (to vote as members of Parliament) as a pretext to declare that the National Council had become unworkable. He then had entrance to parliament barred by the police eliminating democracy in Austria. In other words a coup d'état based on FORCE.
* Horthy took control of the forces that with allied and Romanian help overthrew a post WWI Communinst government Horthy was declared Regent and Head of State, a position he held until his ouster in October 1944.


NONE of these men were ELECTED head of state, the closest was Dollfuss who at least started as the head of a majority coalition in parliament before he overthrew the National Council.
 
Posts: 11193 | Registered: Wed 02 July 2003Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Posted Hide Post
Thanks Ray, I already got the memo. Wink

quote:
Originally posted by shuman14:
Well I guess my 1920 European history knowledge isn't as good as I thought.

Thanks for the corrections.
 
Posts: 5448 | Registered: Sun 07 March 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
  Powered by Eve Community Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7  
 

Military.com    Military.com Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Hot Topics & Current Events  Hop To Forums  In the News    Should the 22nd ammendment be Repealed?

© 2009 Military Advantage, Inc.