Three New Rules for U.S. Presidency

#1
YorkVol

YorkVol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
19,021
Likes
4,512
#1
Anyone see this editorial on CNN today? The writer recommends:
1. One 6 year term for the president to alleviate the time spent running for re-election
2. Mandatory military service for the president
3. Raising the age of eligibility to 45

Thoughts?

Three new rules for U.S. presidents - CNN.com
 
#2
#2
Don't really care for the age limit. If the people believe a 30 year old is the best candidate than a 30 year old should be the president. I actually don't want any of these.
 
#3
#3
My issue is not with the requirements for President but needing term limits for Congress.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4
#4
Pretty interesting stuff. I do like the one term deal.

I can see his points on the Military service part as well. However I am not sure if I agree with it. Excuse my ignorance but don't people in military have to meet physical requirements? What of Handicapped individuals? If the military wont have them, then their chances at office are gone.

Beyond that something about the required service does not seem right to me, I am afraid I cannot explain it.


On the third point, I can take it or leave it. It would depend on the average age of Americans. If the President is consistently significantly younger than the average, I could understand the change.
 
Last edited:
#5
#5
Don't care for military service requirement, either. That's like a company enforcing a rule that for CEO eligibility, you had to run a forklift for 4 years.

I realize in hindsight, that analogy is going to be misconstrued as derogatory towards our military members, but that's not how I intended it, and I'm too lazy to think of another one. What I mean is that I don't think military experience is necessary to gain political know-how.
 
#12
#12
I don't like any of them but #1 is the least offensive (however 6yrs could be a long, long time)
 
#13
#13
Mandatory military is a joke. Just because you enjoyed it and benefited doesn't mean it's best for everybody.
 
#14
#14
n_huffhines said:
Yeah! More slavery to the state. I like it!
Click to expand...

You would probably like the result - fewer foreign engagements. People would have more respect for what the military does and would understand all that foreign engagement actually entails
 
#15
#15
golfballs03 said:
You would probably like the result - fewer foreign engagements. People would have more respect for what the military does and would understand all that foreign engagement actually entails
Click to expand...

We had a lot of war when we had a draft. I'm not sure this brand of compulsory service would produce a different result.
 
#16
#16
Weezy said:
Mandatory military is a joke. Just because you enjoyed it and benefited doesn't mean it's best for everybody.
Click to expand...

I agree with the first part, but not the second. For the job I was doing in the military, I could have demanded twice the salary for in the private sector or even in civil service. And, I wouldnt really classify it as real fun. Just my .02
 
#22
#22
n_huffhines said:
We had drafts periodically throughout the 20th century. We conscripted 1.5 million Americans in the Selective Service Act of 1948, and went to Korea a couple years later.
Click to expand...

That is not compulsory service. That established the current system. You have a link to that 1.5 figure?

There isn't a doubt in my mind that if the system were unequivocal and even politicians and their sons and daughters were tied to compulsory service, that we would have a different national stance on foreign engagement.
 
#23
#23
so you would trade domestic freedoms for foreign policy changes?
 
#25
#25
golfballs03 said:
That is not compulsory service. That established the current system. You have a link to that 1.5 figure?

There isn't a doubt in my mind that if the system were unequivocal and even politicians and their sons and daughters were tied to compulsory service, that we would have a different national stance on foreign engagement.
Click to expand...

I dont think a draft would affect politicians or those inside a certain social status or wealth. Those who you would want to feel the brunt of compulsory service would have ways (legal) of getting out of it. IMO anyway
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top