Community >> View Post
·
Post By
mtyoung

In Reply To
Deborah

Subj: Re: no
Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 at 11:13:12 pm EST
Reply Subj: Re: no
Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 at 07:43:31 pm EST

Previous Post

>
> > > Congressmen are far more likely to be persuaded by outside sources, while the President is not.
> > >
> > Huh? That claim makes no sense at all. A president is human just like anyone else. And, if you think of it, far easier to persuade one single person that a group of hundreds.
>
> The President is only going to run for reelection once, congressmen run for the rest of their lives.
>
> A single congressman knows that since there are 534 other congressmen, that his actions will be less scruntinized. A President knows that all his actions will be under view.
>
> Put it this way. Since my "claim makes no sense at all". If you had to get away with something major, such as taking a bribe, what position would you rather have, the Presidency or as a Congressman? Id chose as a congressman.

Ok, when you put it that way, I see what you mean. But I still disagree. Yes, it might be easier for someone in congress to sneak around. But as you also pointed out, a president has so much more influence.

>
> > > The President is evaulated every 4 years, and if the people dont want him, they dont elect him.
> > >
> > Ditto Congress.
>
> Congressional stagnation. Over 90% of all congressmen are re-elected. Stagnation leads to corruption.
>
> The Presidency has term limits, why not congresS?

:) IMO, both already have term limits. They're called the next election. ;\) If people don't vote them out of office, there isn't a reason for them to leave.

> >
>
> In your propsed better phrase, it would imply that he lost his connection to the military, which he wouldnt have.

Not at all. Maybe I wasn't clear either. I simply meant a person on active duty can't run for president. Any president has to be *former* (not current) military.
>
As to never having served: Washington, Grant, Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Kennedy all come to mind. And I know I'm missing a lot more.

> > > > The President is evaulated every 4 years, and if the people dont want him, they dont elect him.
> > > >
> > > Ditto Congress.
> >
> > Congressional stagnation. Over 90% of all congressmen are re-elected. Stagnation leads to corruption.
> >
> > The Presidency has term limits, why not congresS?
>
> \:\) IMO, both already have term limits. They're called the next election. ;\) If people don't vote them out of office, there isn't a reason for them to leave.

The next election isnt a term limit 90% of the time.

And lets face it, people dont elect the best politician for the job, they elect the person most persuasive, or the richest, or the person with the most connections.

> Not at all. Maybe I wasn't clear either. I simply meant a person on active duty can't run for president. Any president has to be *former* (not current) military.

Can you be in the military and run for an elected position? I dont think you can, but I dont really know.

> As to never having served: Washington, Grant, Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Kennedy all come to mind. And I know I'm missing a lot more.

And I would counter with Lincoln, FDR, Jefferson, Wilson, Truman, and Madison. I chose those because they were in a list of top 10 greatest Presidents. I would think that very few, Presidents were career military men (washington the only one I can think of off hand, maybe Eisenhower?). I would think most were only in the military to fight in a war (JFK, TR, USG)


Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 on Windows XP
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2022 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2022 Powermad Software