Friday, October 20, 2006

Presidential possibility

What about a “Bush-Clinton ‘08” 3rd party presidential ticket?

 

Huh?

 

No, not the current President Bush, but the FORMER President Bush and FORMER President Clinton running a P/VP in ’08 under the banner of “The system is broken, and we’re willing to give our wisdom and leadership as former executives to help fix it.  Our Presidency will transcend party lines and lead the nation, not lead the parties.”

 

Of course, there’s debate as to whether or not WJC can be elected to the VP post since he’s ineligible to be elected President, but the Constitution doesn’t discuss the eligibility of a vice president except in amendment 12, and that just speaks of people eligible to be President, not eligible to be elected President.

Clearly, the intent of the 26th amendment was to prevent a President from sitting in office for more than 2 terms.  That’s a no-brainer.  I don’t think it was conceived that a President would ever want to run twice, step down, then come back as a VP.  Why the hell would anyone want to be a VP?

But we have had Presidents come back as congressmen or Supreme Court Justices, so why not VP?

Besides, wouldn’t it be kick ass to have two former Presidents as the 1-2 punch in the Oval Office?  These guys have been there, done that, and are mutually respected around the world.  Half the population has mad respect for Bush the elder, the other half has mad respect for Clinton, and I’d wager that a good portion of those 2 populations has mad respect for both of them as executors of the office of President of the United States.  Since Hurricane Katrina and the Tsunami in Indonesia these two have worked together and fostered mad respect for each other.  They’d make a great team.  It brings to mind the “Ex Presidents” cartoon from Saturday Night Live—one of the few things they still do that is funny.

These guys are ex-Presidents.  They tell their party what to do, their parties don’t tell them what to do.  These guys could get the politics back in shape.  They could straighten out the national dialogue.  They could correct a lot of what is wrong in the way things are organized both in our government and in our society.

6 Comments:

Blogger Vic said...

That'd be fine but George and Barbara loathe the Clinton's. After the way the Clinton's treated them when the "took over", I doubt George would ever do that. Get real, Joe!!! Clinton getting the politics back in shape? He's one of the worst ones. He's a mad jerk and a gift that just keeps on giving. I'm glad he doesn't just disappear. The best thing that's ever happened to Republicans.

1:09 PM  
Blogger Joe said...

Like I said, about half the people love him, about half loathe him.
And no offense, but your comment lends plenty of credence to "the system is broken... transcend parties and lead the nation, not the paries".
Plus, they're relationship is warmer than you think:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1317272/posts

6:31 PM  
Anonymous Iain said...

Barbara hates anyone who doesn't love her boys. She's a hypocrite and a complete bitch. One thing that the current Bush in office has done is give us respect for his father. Lord knows, I've no respect for junior.

4:33 PM  
Blogger Vic said...

no offense taken.

So what in the world does "transcend parties" mean. Those who think partisanship is a bad thing should read Federalist No. 10

5:29 PM  
Blogger Joe said...

The author(s) of the Federalist Papers were loyal the the budding new country, not his (their) party. Allegiance first to the nation, then to the party. When allegiance is to the party first, then there are problems...

6:16 PM  
Blogger Vic said...

this idea ignores human nature. The question isn't whether factions should or should not exist. Where there is liberty, they WILL exist. Fed. 10 explores how we deal with factions and it's not by giving up liberty. :)

3:51 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home