|
Edited on Sun Nov-25-07 10:08 PM by calteacherguy
“There is one job we can’t afford on-the-job training for — that’s the job of our next president.” - Hillary Clinton
"No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once." -22nd Amendment
Hillary Clinton is implying she has had "on-the-job training" for the Presidency. Clearly, she is implying this "on-the-job training took place during her husband's terms as President. This a new argument in American politics. Never before has a citizen running for President made the claim that they have had "on-the-job training" for the Presidency, much less that it should be a requirement for the next President to have had such on-the-job training.
The implication is that Hillary Clinton assumed roles that are normally reserved for the President during her husband's term, for how else could she get such Presidential training? If this is the case, there were times where (by her logic) she was serving in the role of President. If this is true (again, by her logic) then she cannot serve another term, having already served two terms as co-President with her husband. Such an act would be in clear violation of the 22nd amendment.
Of course, this is ridiculous. Hillary Clinton was not co-President, as she implies when she says "There is one job we can't afford on-the-job training for," nor should such a thing be a requirement for are next President. Did FDR have such prior on-the-job "training?" Did Lincoln? Did Jefferson?
No President ever has had what she is claiming.
What we cannot afford is politicians fabricating lies to the American people about what we "cannot afford." We we cannot afford is believing that such on-the-job training for the Presidency is real, necessary, or even desirable.
It never has been.
|