PDA

View Full Version : the president is NOT "our leader"


nehemiah
January 8th, 2008, 2:05:20 PM
the president does not "lead" the country. the president does his/her job and that's it. we don't need some gibbering tit talking about "bipartisanship" and "healing" the country. *cough* obama *cough*.

****. that. noise.

we need someone to follow the ****ing constitution and do the job. we don't even need to hear the idiot speak. with emails - the president can now easily be a deaf/mute.

just DO THE JOB.


The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

35Pete
January 8th, 2008, 2:07:06 PM
THANK GOD SOMEONE SAID IT!

Bravo nehe! Bravo!

:thumbup:

Sparx
January 8th, 2008, 2:17:37 PM
So he's not "Educator in Chief"?

twosheds
January 8th, 2008, 2:44:06 PM
Someone who would claim to "just do the job" wouldn't get elected. Most people want to be lead.

nehemiah
January 8th, 2008, 2:45:38 PM
Most people want to be lead.those people are stupid.

pmoon6
January 8th, 2008, 3:04:57 PM
those people are stupid.How could you say that my leige?

I'd follow you to the ends of the Earth and we'd fight many battles together.

We'd plunder, pillage, have our way with conquered women, and enslave their husbands.

And what would I get in return?

"Thanks dude, but you're stupid"

Oh, I'm cut to the quick.

shiva2999
January 8th, 2008, 6:33:47 PM
To take a shot at Hillary too, I don't think you "hire" a President.

Elected officials are not "hired".

Elected officials are PUBLIC SERVANTS and are allowed to serve.

Comparing them to employees is ridiculous.

CoachC.
January 8th, 2008, 6:40:55 PM
pmoon6: "I'll follow you to the ends of the Earth and we'll fight many battles together, nehemiah. We'll plunder, pillage, have our way with conquered women, and enslave their husbands."

nehemiah: "Yes. Let's rape their horses and ride off with their women!!"

35Pete
January 8th, 2008, 6:42:05 PM
To take a shot at Hillary too, I don't think you "hire" a President.

Elected officials are not "hired".

Elected officials are PUBLIC SERVANTS and are allowed to serve.

Comparing them to employees is ridiculous.

Uhhm yes, they are. We've fired many a president for poor performance. They have a job to do as outlined in the constitution.

The board of directors of America (in theory the voting public) hires the president. Just like any employee. He's got a boss too.

I am not led. I refuse to be ruled. I hire a president, by casting my shareholder vote. His contract says that he can work 8 years and we can fire him in the 4th year if he sucks. Yes, he is a public servant (or supposed to be at least), but he's still an employee. His job is to carry out his job description as enumerated in the constitution. That's it. No more, no less. Yeah yeah, rally the country, inspire an ideal...blah blah blah.. That's our job. The community. Unfortunately we Americans really suck at it.

That's the ideal. The reality is that he's not hired. He's appointed by Long Island, Connetticut, and Westchester.

But hey, you guys can dream, right?

slowpokemcgee
January 8th, 2008, 6:44:29 PM
we need someone to follow the ****ing constitution and do the job.
[/I]

Ron Paul!!!

shiva2999
January 8th, 2008, 6:45:40 PM
Uhhm yes, they are. We've fired many a president for poor performance. They have a job to do as outlined in the constitution.

The board of directors of America hires the president. Just like any employee. He's got a boss too.

I am not led. I refuse to be ruled. I hire a president, by casting my shareholder vote. His contract says that he can work 8 years and we can fire him in the 4th year if he sucks. Yes, he is a public servant (or supposed to be at least), but he's still an employee. His job is to carry out his job description as enumerated in the constitution. That's it. No more, no less. Yeah yeah, rally the country, inspire an ideal...blah blah blah.. That's our job. The community. Unfortunately we Americans really suck at it.

That's the ideal. The reality is that he's not hired. He's appointed by Long Island, Connetticut, and Westchester.

But hey, you guys can dream, right?

You rail against the power of corporations and yet embrace a corporate definition of the Presidency?

Curious.

35Pete
January 8th, 2008, 6:48:45 PM
You rail against the power of corporations and yet embrace a corporate definition of the Presidency?

Curious.

Odd, isn't it?

In theory shareholders are supposed to have power over the uber-rich bastards that run the joint, right?

Well, unless a very few of the shareholders control say...20-30-40+ % of the corporation.

Then the few **** the many. Corporate raiders are an example. Congress another.

It's a fitting analogy really. In theory it the right way to do things. In reality someone's always getting pooched. But they THINK they have a say because they hold 200 lousy shares of ACME.

shiva2999
January 8th, 2008, 7:09:15 PM
Odd, isn't it?

In theory shareholders are supposed to have power over the uber-rich bastards that run the joint, right?

Well, unless a very few of the shareholders control say...20-30-40+ % of the corporation.

Then the few **** the many. Corporate raiders are an example. Congress another.

It's a fitting analogy really. In theory it the right way to do things. In reality someone's always getting pooched. But they THINK they have a say because they hold 200 lousy shares of ACME.

This is why you don't want a CEO President and a corporate government.

Public office is a sacred trust that requires an identical allegiance to EVERYONE.

A CEO is by definition beholding to his largest stockholders.

twosheds
January 9th, 2008, 12:22:13 PM
those people are stupid.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LQqq3e03EBQ&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LQqq3e03EBQ&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>