PDA

View Full Version : The Sarah Palin Amendment


normdoering
7th October 2008, 11:14 AM
James Fallows proposed this 28th Amendment to the Constitution:

"No Person shall be elected President or Vice President without accepting a session of questioning by the press, such session to last no less than one hour and to be open to normally accredited members of the press in the same fashion as at Presidential news conferences. The questioning shall occur and the results shall be made freely available to the public at least one week before an Election is held."

I think a Sarah Palin Amendment would be a good idea. However, instead of just "accredited members of the press" why not members of the Congress and the Senate representing both parties and then a town hall with questioning members of the public selected based on a raffle? Make the campaigns a more formal process where candidates must be questioned by the opposition. The problem with the "accredited members of the press" qualification is that Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh might be enough to get Palin over that hurdle.

Palin shouldn't be allowed to get away with just doing one debate and canned rally speeches with a folksy pronunciation of phrases like "you betcha" and "doggone it" that makes her sound like a clone of Frances McDormand in the movie "Fargo" to get elected.

http://normdoering.blogspot.com/2008/10/sarah-palin-amendment.html

noch1Narr
7th October 2008, 03:16 PM
Great suggestion for future VP candidates; this one slipped through without such a test and she unfortunately continues to beguile the mindless, lock-step 'choir' with smear attacks and empty slogans. A journalism major, she? Yikes, which (faith-based?) institution granted her a degree?

Regnad Kcin
7th October 2008, 03:22 PM
Would there be a swimsuit portion of the event? A talent display?

JoeTheJuggler
7th October 2008, 03:46 PM
Great suggestion for future VP candidates; this one slipped through without such a test and she unfortunately continues to beguile the mindless, lock-step 'choir' with smear attacks and empty slogans. A journalism major, she? Yikes, which (faith-based?) institution granted her a degree?

It was a communications-journalism degree from the University of Idaho. (Isn't that what the jocks get?) She hopped around a bit to get her 4 year degree in 5 years:

Palin attended Hawaii Pacific College in Hilo, Hawaii, in 1982 for a semester, where she majored in Business Administration, and transferred in 1983 to North Idaho College for the 1983-1984 school year. After winning a scholarship, she transferred to Matanuska-Susitna College in Alaska for one term before transferring back to the University of Idaho the following year where she finished out her college education and received a Bachelor of Science degree in communications-journalism from the University of Idaho in 1987, where she also minored in political science.
Reference (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_Sarah_Palin's_educational_background).

JoeTheJuggler
7th October 2008, 03:50 PM
James Fallows proposed this 28th Amendment to the Constitution:



I'd support it.

"Deference" indeed!

The way I see it, she's applying for a job, and we the people are the prospective employer. The media conduct our interviews for us. Since when is "deference" appropriate in that situation?!

Sure, she can skip the interviews, but that doesn't give her much of a shot at the job, does it?

UserGoogol
7th October 2008, 04:05 PM
What would third party candidates do? Would they hold their meetings and have nobody show up and have that be deemed good enough, or would they be ineligible unless they could find people to talk with them? I mean granted, if you can't find members of the press willing to talk with you, you probably aren't going to get elected, (and realistically, the big four of Green, Libertarian, Constitution, and Ralph Nader could probably find someone willing to talk with them, if only CSPAN and indie journalists) but it could complicate things.

A neat enough idea in principle, though.

ProbeX
7th October 2008, 04:21 PM
Would there be a swimsuit portion of the event? A talent display?

Yikes. I'm not trying to look at a middle-aged woman in a swimsuit (forgetting for a sec about the older candidates). LOL

Dragoonster
7th October 2008, 04:32 PM
I think a Sarah Palin Amendment would be a good idea. However, instead of just "accredited members of the press" why not members of the Congress and the Senate representing both parties and then a town hall with questioning members of the public selected based on a raffle? Make the campaigns a more formal process where candidates must be questioned by the opposition. The problem with the "accredited members of the press" qualification is that Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh might be enough to get Palin over that hurdle.

Candidates? That Amendment only targets VPs. What about Presidential candidates? What about third-parties as UserGoogol mentions?

I assume support for this Amendment is only tongue-in-cheek, because it's 100% leftist reactionary and almost equally ridiculous. If the American people don't like candidates who don't offer themselves for interviews, there's a simple way to change that. Vote for the candidates that do. Or complain loudly about it. No need whatsoever for an Amendment.

Cain
7th October 2008, 05:07 PM
Candidates? That Amendment only targets VPs. What about Presidential candidates? What about third-parties as UserGoogol mentions?

It says President and Vice Presidents.

The problem with these sort of measures is that they are paternalistic and elitist (in a bad way). We get the leaders we deserve. It's not unlike how the Founders wanted to protect people from themselves with the condition that the President be over 35 (and of course the president MUST be a man), born in the U.S. There should be virtually no "qualifications," so let the voters decide. There was some forward-thinking in Article VI, which said no to religious tests.

Nyarlathotep
7th October 2008, 05:51 PM
I have to say I am with Cain on this one. If a candidate continually ducks the press for the duration of a campaign and that candidate wins anyway, well.....all I can say is that the people will get what they deserve in that situation.

Thunder
7th October 2008, 05:57 PM
I think candidates for President and Vice President should be required to take a standardized 300 question test to evaluate their knowledge of American history, civics, international affairs, economics, and Supreme Court decisions.

Darth Rotor
7th October 2008, 08:44 PM
James Fallows proposed this 28th Amendment to the Constitution:
Do you also propose gang rape as a suitable method of courtship?

You and he pretend that the press is the issue here.

It isn't, but I now know one more person who only knows what he reads in the papers. Stay away from heavy machinery, please.

I suggest the following amendment:

No man should be allowed to run for president, nor vice president, who Monica Lewinsky would not blow.

No woman should be allowed to run for president, nor vice president, who I wouldn't do after no more than three beers.

There: a suggested amendment that makes more sense than the crap you offered.

normdoering
7th October 2008, 08:52 PM
I think candidates for President and Vice President should be required to take a standardized 300 question test to evaluate their knowledge of American history, civics, international affairs, economics, and Supreme Court decisions.

They did something like that in imperial China:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_examination

normdoering
7th October 2008, 08:53 PM
Do you also propose gang rape as a suitable method of courtship?

No.

Are you a moron?

Tricky
7th October 2008, 08:55 PM
No.

Are you a moron?
Darth is not a moron. He's tipsy. Let him have his fun.