Tuesday, January 23, 2007

Hillary Clinton's Candidacy:Violation of US Constitution

U.S. Constitution - Amendment 22
Amendment 22 - Presidential Term Limits
1. 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. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President, when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress

On my way home, on the bus , to Montrteal from Quebec City, I had some time to think. I reviewed the nice evening I had had. Moth Minister are quite charming. HM Minister Josee Vermeer impressed me with her warmth and kindness. HM Minister Lawrence Cannon was also impressive.
I began to think about other things as well. One of them being Hillary Clinton and how to stop her from the Presidency. I had a malicious thought, that perhaps her candidacy violates the spirit of the 22nd amendment of the constitution. Sionce her husband cannot run, this is an attempt to bypass the constitution. In any case she acted like a co President for 8 years. So I think her candidacy is unconstitutional.


renniem said...

This has got to be, without a doubt, the stupidest idea I've see from Conservative bloggers today.

How is her candidacy a violation of the 22nd amendment? She was not president.

Just what does this mean anyway, CoPresident? Is that lower than a president, but higher than a vice president? Is such a thing even recognised in the US Constitution?

It appears Conservatives have such a hard-on hate for the Clinton's, they're willing to grasp at straws that don't even exist.

Werner Patels said...

I agree with commenter no. 1. Taking about living in la-la-land.

Robert Vollman said...

Why stop her? It's a democracy. If the people elect her, that's it.

It's not like she's going to put people in prison camps and take away the right to free speech. Her policies will probably only be slightly different than her opponents'.

That being said, I'm sure there are strict rules preventing Bill Clinton from simply using his wife to run the country again. You could just as easily argue that George Sr. is using his son to run it again. It's nonsense.

Or at least I think so. Let the people decide. If you don't want her elected, help an opposing campaign and persuasively argue your case.

ken chapman said...

George Bush's "Reign of Error" is over and he proved it last night in the State of the Union speech.

The far right has nothing to fear from democracy in the USA or Canada so why do they try to manipulate the system - just like the past corrupt regimes that they succeeded?

I Support Lord Black