Our Sponsors
____________________
Note: Comments are moderated so be sure that your responses are expressed in a respectable and friendly way. We are here to express our thoughts toward controversial issues, not to scold or defame anyone. Watch what you say, and remember that by using this site, you agree to our Terms Of Use and Privacy Policy.
I personally do not agree with the fact that you have to be at least 35 years of age.
Wether you like it or not, actual wisdom comes with age and not out of a book!
I believe that the POTUS should have at least ten years military experience, and that the elected position of POTUS is way too large for just one person.
Just my not-so-humble opinion.
No way. We already have the military experience in charge of the actual military. The President should be the exact opposite. Also, I don't want some 28 year-old being President.
I am fine leaving it as it is. Once we start updating this we will want to "update" lots of things in the constitution. Let's leave it be.
Countries aren't supposed to go to war against each other.
I agree with you on that. However, I don't see how a younger person under 35 could be terrible.
Obviously it all depends on the individual candidate. But papdawg, who would you say is your all-time favorite president?
Well technically the president is the commander-in-chief, making him in direct control of our armed forces, but the actual military makes all of the decisions anyway.
What do you mean?
That is another way to look at it and in fact, it is a good point. However, the constitution was created to be adapted over the course of time.
George Washington.
#2 on the list would be Ike.
I don't think that the military makes all the decisions . . .
The reason the POTUS should have had military experience is for the exact reason that we now have an idiot in the white house who cannot seem to make a decision on what to do in Afghanistan. Our troops are dying while this nutcase is sucking his thumb and attacking talk radio and opinion tv shows while trying to force this country into "third world" status . . .
Well, to be honest, and contrary to my Grandson's belief, I was not around when George Washington was President.
You need to note that he was a military officer long before he became President – and that he very reluctantly accepted the job as President. The same holds true for Ike because all he wanted to do was retire after WW2. He was coerced into the Presidency with the guarantee of the Interstate Highway Act.
You do not get life experience by not having life experience – that can only be obtained with time.
Get my drift?
A President should be second generation American at least. Be 40 years old or older. Thats how we should choose our President.
I'd much rather get rid of the office of Vice President than worry about the tinkering and requirements for the President. Those seem fine. If people want to apply their own requirements for their votes, they are more than welcome to do so.
I don't favor term limits and would even favor repealing the Presidential term limits amendment. If you want to vote people out for serving "too long" or "too many terms", however long that means, go right ahead.
The general point is quite correct though. Congressional service has never been all that common in the background of Presidents. It's a completely different branch with different responsibilities. I don't see why it's essential that somebody was in the Senate or House at any point anymore than I don't think it's essential that they were ever in the military, or even in government service at all.