General Discussion

harrose

(380 posts)

49. Actually, as proposed, it would be legal.

Thu Dec 18, 2014, 12:15 AM

Dec 2014

An amendment to the Constitution disqualifying people of a certain family from running for office would override the earlier provision prohibiting corruption of blood (much like the 17th amendment overrode the legislative election of senators and the 21st amendment overrode the 18th).

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

67 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Can we get a constitutional amendment to bar people named "Bush" and "Clinton" from the presidency? [View all] XemaSab Dec 2014 OP

That's called "corruption of blood", and is forbidden in the Constitution... (nt) Recursion Dec 2014 #1

God created the Bushes evil XemaSab Dec 2014 #2

Ahh, so that's what attainder means. joshcryer Dec 2014 #6

Actually, as proposed, it would be legal. harrose Dec 2014 #49

I happen to think the Dynastic stuff is a bad sign, too. Warren DeMontague Dec 2014 #3

I'm looking at presidential rankings on teh Wikipedia XemaSab Dec 2014 #4

Seems as if you have a supportive congress, you get good rankings. joshcryer Dec 2014 #7

We may as well end the facade SamKnause Dec 2014 #5

If we were ever corrupt enough to elect this Bush bum to president THEN such an amendment... cascadiance Dec 2014 #48

From what I understand the SamKnause Dec 2014 #50

This message was self-deleted by its author cascadiance Dec 2014 #58

Haha...would you include Kennedy, Roosevelt, Udall, Rockefeller, Daley, etc.? Sancho Dec 2014 #8

I'm sure the OP didn't consider that wyldwolf Dec 2014 #9

I'm sure I did XemaSab Dec 2014 #43

There has only been one Kennedy in the WH. Bobby was taken out. There have been sabrina 1 Dec 2014 #51

Yes Nuclear Unicorn Dec 2014 #24

Dynasties are bad. earthside Dec 2014 #29

Yes. Throd Dec 2014 #39

Here's an idea wyldwolf Dec 2014 #10

that's what I'm doing RedstDem Dec 2014 #12

'bashing Hillary' is not the same as supporting someone else. wyldwolf Dec 2014 #13

lol, I know mostly kidding RedstDem Dec 2014 #15

it would be different if RedstDem Dec 2014 #11

Nader 2016!!...nt SidDithers Dec 2014 #19

If you can't tell the difference between their policies, then you powers of observation HERVEPA Dec 2014 #30

It would be one thing if a dynasty were remotely worthy, like the Kennedys. True Blue Door Dec 2014 #14

We simply don't have to vote for them JustAnotherGen Dec 2014 #16

How about anyone with a connection to Yale or Harvard. Jesus Malverde Dec 2014 #17

Harvard: Adams, Adams, Roosevelt, Roosevelt, Hayes, Kennedy, Obama, GW Bush Bluenorthwest Dec 2014 #18

I say this moving forward we cannot change the past. Jesus Malverde Dec 2014 #20

What I can't get over is why so many people assume... brendan120678 Dec 2014 #41

Here's the Issue: yellowwoodII Dec 2014 #21

No, we can't. Constitutional Amendments are Difficult to Enact. MineralMan Dec 2014 #22

I'm pretty sure the OP was written with tongue firmly planted in cheek. Nuclear Unicorn Dec 2014 #25

I can't think of a more boring, HappyMe Dec 2014 #23

Unfortunately I think that is what we are in for in 2016 davidpdx Dec 2014 #56

Yeah! And those Roosevelts and Kennedys too!...nt SidDithers Dec 2014 #26

As I said upthread XemaSab Dec 2014 #36

even this Clinton? SummerSnow Dec 2014 #27

It would be easier to do it by age, just cap it at 68 years old snooper2 Dec 2014 #28

Thank you for this post Rand Paul leftofcool Dec 2014 #32

God forbid experience should matter...nt joeybee12 Dec 2014 #34

Clinton stepped down after Obama's first term Capt. Obvious Dec 2014 #31

We elected the wrong Carter Capt. Obvious Dec 2014 #33

Hmm... So this one would have been better?.... cascadiance Dec 2014 #47

Dynasties. Feral Child Dec 2014 #35

Interesting how everyone who complains about dynasties ignores the Kennedy's... brooklynite Dec 2014 #37

I don't. Throd Dec 2014 #38

I'm going to bring your complaint up Capt. Obvious Dec 2014 #42

. XemaSab Dec 2014 #45

The Kennedys are overrated, too XemaSab Dec 2014 #44

And then there's this whatchamacallit Dec 2014 #40

Three Bushes would be too much, but there has only been one Clinton. I want one more Clinton. Metric System Dec 2014 #46

K&R AtomicKitten Dec 2014 #52

There is something very wrong with the system. Baitball Blogger Dec 2014 #53

The entire BFEE should be barred from politics. Initech Dec 2014 #54

If it was on the ballot for us to vote it in officially, Jamastiene Dec 2014 #55

I agree with you davidpdx Dec 2014 #57

Dynasties are bad in government AND business! Walton family is a case and point! cascadiance Dec 2014 #59

One small correction tabbycat31 Dec 2014 #60

I think it is because we allowed in the last election identity politics to be a "big issue" then... cascadiance Dec 2014 #62

I think the identity politics did sum up 2008 tabbycat31 Dec 2014 #63

Yep, I think Edwards was left in to draw our votes then... cascadiance Dec 2014 #64

I think he would have been defeated in 2008 tabbycat31 Dec 2014 #66

I was just conjecturing if he would have won without those personal failings... cascadiance Dec 2014 #67

Yes please. n/t 99Forever Dec 2014 #61

Or we can let the VOTERS decide who they want. NYC Liberal Dec 2014 #65