Prophets on Politics and Leaders

Not me. I plan to vote for Rand Paul in the primary (I'm a Republican and the primary in CA is closed). Then I'll vote for the Constitution Party or Libertarian Party candidate in the general election. I don't think any of the three current major party candidates fall under the category of "good men" as described by Hyrum Smith.



That said, the President has only one role - national defense. Trump, though all over the map on foreign policy, has at least expressed some common sense on occasion (like not being belligerent toward Russia and reconsidering NATO alliances). Cruz on the other hand, is following in the footsteps of Obama, Bush, Clinton, and Bush when it comes to endless foreign wars.



I'm sure Cruz and Obama are great constitutional scholars, meaning they've read the convoluted decisions of the 9 princes dressed in black who make up the Supreme Court. If only the president abided by the plain words of the constitution that would be enough for me. I think Trump is much more likely to do that than Cruz if only because Cruz is a lawyer and will push the envelope as far as possible, making use of the secret courts of the land, keeping secret the legal arguments for his decisions (similar to the last constitutional scholar elected to the presidency).

jvquarterback wrote:
That said, the President has only one role - national defense.

:skeptic:



I think you're grossly oversimplifying. I understand and support a return to a truly Constitutional form of government, but assertions like this undermine your cause when you claim something patently wrong as a constitutional fact.



Remember, for example:



Presentment? As a check on the legislature:

Article I, Section 7 wrote:
Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.



Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.

His law execution powers?

Article II, Section 1 wrote:
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.

Appointment, with advise and consent, judges and filling vacant Senate seats?

Article II, Section 2 wrote:
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.

Unless you are categorizing those as national-defense responsibilities...

jvquarterback wrote:

I'm sure Cruz and Obama are great constitutional scholars,

Cruz is a Constitutional scholar. Obama is not. Obama is not even worthy to carry Ted Cruz's briefcase into a lecture hall.



Obama was not even a professor at the U of Chicago. He did not have the qualifications to be a professor. He was a part time lecturer.



The New York Times wrote that Obama taught 3 topics - "race, rights, and gender."



http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/01/heres_what_constitutional_scholar_obama_really_taught_at_law_school.html

Obviously there are the roles you outlined as well as some others. But I don't think it's an oversimplification to say the only role of the president is in national defense. Perhaps I should have said the one role in which Cruz and Trump differ is in foreign policy (as I've said previously in this thread).



Most of Trump's bombastic statements (torture, walls on borders, warrant-less searches, targeted killings of US Citizens without trial, targeted killings of family members of alleged terrorists) have been in common practice by the executive for many years. Where is Cruz, your constitutional scholar, on these subjects? Crickets.



When it comes to the Constitution, there is likely more to fear from Cruz, the Constitutional scholar, than from Trump. If not you'd hear Cruz speaking out about the overreach of the executive branch (and he wouldn't limit his critique to Obama). I think there is much greater likelihood that the Congress would finally check the executive rather than let him prance about like King George which is what the congress does now with Obama and would do for Clinton, Cruz or any other Washington insider.

jvquarterback wrote:
Obviously there are the roles you outlined as well as some others. But I don't think it's an oversimplification to say the only role of the president is in national defense.

Statements like these are why I generally don't engage with you in political discussions. If you can't just admit to overstating something (even after you tacitly admit it), it's not worth the effort to try and participate in a meaningful discussion, because you obviously have no interest in what the other person has to say, only in being right.



It's especially on-point here as you are arguing for a Constitutional president and you are arguing that the president only has one role under the Constitution, which isn't even arguable--it's patently false.

snoscythe wrote:

Obviously there are the roles you outlined as well as some others. But I don't think it's an oversimplification to say the only role of the president is in national defense.

If you can't just admit to overstating something (even after you tacitly admit it)

Irony

Primary Roles of the President, to me?



1. Protect American lives.

2. Protect American freedoms.

3. Improve American lives.

4. Get our country out of debt.



#1 to me would include crime & punishment, safety rules & regulations, environmental/health code, emergency/disaster response, etc., as well as homeland security and our military.



#2 is constitutional in nature, protecting our basic civil liberties, the Amendments and Bill of Rights, freedom of religion, ability to take part in our governmental system, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, right and access to a fair and honest judicial system, political and govermental openness and transparency, etc.



#3 is arguably the biggest and the hardest of the limited items I listed above. Public education, healthcare, and the economy all factor in heavily, as well as roads, libraries, parks, social systems and programs, retirement, welfare, etc.



#4 might be the most important in the long-term, and might also be what our recent Presidents have been the worst at. Low taxes and low spending, small government and responsible, frugal use of public funds, efficiency without wastefulness, and so on.

Mars wrote:
Primary Roles of the President, to me?



1. Protect American lives.

2. Protect American freedoms.

3. Improve American lives.

4. Get our country out of debt.



#1 to me would include crime & punishment, safety rules & regulations, environmental/health code, emergency/disaster response, etc., as well as homeland security and our military.



#2 is constitutional in nature, protecting our basic civil liberties, the Amendments and Bill of Rights, freedom of religion, ability to take part in our governmental system, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, right and access to a fair and honest judicial system, political and govermental openness and transparency, etc.



#3 is arguably the biggest and the hardest of the limited items I listed above. Public education, healthcare, and the economy all factor in heavily, as well as roads, libraries, parks, social systems and programs, retirement, welfare, etc.



#4 might be the most important in the long-term, and might also be what our recent Presidents have been the worst at. Low taxes and low spending, small government and responsible, frugal use of public funds, efficiency without wastefulness, and so on.

Hmmm...a measured approach. Ridiculous. ;)