by Dr Mary W Maxwell
I heard today that Marjorie Greene (R-GA) put herself forward as a possible VP candidate in 2024. She will be 50 that year. Maybe she should also consider the presidency. Let me say something about three possible candidates — Rand Paul, Marjorie Greene, and Robert Kennedy Jr, and then inquire what talents we should be looking for.
Rand Paul was born in 1963 and was first elected US senator from Kentucky at age 47. He has tried thrice for the White House job. Rand (Randal) has been married to Kelly since 1991 and they have three sons. He is the son of a much-loved former Congressman Ron Paul, an obstetrician. Rand himself is an eye doctor, and we have seen him grilling the head of the National Institute for Allergies and infectious Diseases, the perfidious Dr Fauci.
When I ran for Congress this year in NH, I said on my website (www.ConstitutionAndTruth.com) that, legislatively, I would be a clone of Rand Paul. He is a fiscal conservative, is anti-war, and does not deviate from the US Constitution. He once filibustered for 13 hours against the nomination of a CIA director who approves of killing Americans by way of drones.
Marjorie Greene , mother of three, was born in 1974. She campaigned several times for Congress and finally got in on January 3, 2021, three days before the “Insurrection.” She is pro-gun, anti-abortion, and fears no one. She accrued $48,000 in fines for disobeying the rules that the unvaccinated must wear a mask in the House. In earlier years she was a writer for conspiracy websites, and has spoken against Hillary Clinton re Pizza-gate and doubts that a plane hit the Pentagon.
In her short time on the job, Greene took many proper actions: she filed impeachment proceedings against President Biden the day after his inauguration (this died on the vine as she had no co-sponsor); she made a challenge during the vote count on January 7 against the Electoral ballots from Michigan; she called for the expulsion of a member of the House, and she sponsored a “Fire Fauci Act” which got 20 co-sponsors. I have called Marjorie’s actions “proper” in that they make correct use of available law.
Robert F Kennedy Jr was born in 1954, one of eleven children of Ethel and Bobby Kennedy. His father, who was first a senator and then a US Attorney General for his brother JFK, was a candidate for president in 1968 but was killed. RFK, Jr is an attorney who has mainly dealt with environmental law, trying to un-pollute the Hudson River, and then founded Children’s Health Defense.
I followed Kennedy’s work on autism for years. He correctly claimed that there was too much mercury in babies’ vaccines. I have been disappointed that he did not speak even more strongly, but now he has made up for it with his book, “The Real Anthony Fauci.” He also agreed that Sirhan Sirhan should be released — after 50 years — for Pater’s assassination (but failed to say that Sirhan was an obvious patsy).
So there you have it — three persons who do speak out, of whom Greene has the biggest mouth. (She’s almost a clone of me in terms of conspiracy theory.)
“What Does Your President Do?”
The job of a US president is laid out in Article II of the Constitution. If you read the discussions that went on when the parchment was being drafted in 1787 (Madison kept good notes of what everybody said), you will see that the plan was to have a not-very-powerful executive. This is partly seen in the so-called Necessary and Proper clause of Article I, sec 8, clause 18, which gives Congress sole authority to make laws. And Congress can impeach the chief.
The president is head of state for all dealings with foreign powers. He/she can sign treaties but then must submit it to the Senate for ratification. She/he is Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces during war — if Congress declares a war. Really, it’s not much of a job. But depending on the personality and background of the person, the job can grow in different ways.
As far as I’ve observed, no president gets excited about the phrase “He shall take care that the laws are faithfully executed.” Via the prosecutors in the Department of Justice he/she could really crack down on such things as treason and genocide, not to mention war crimes, but this does not happen. And all presidents have had the chance to discuss matters with the public, but they seldom do.
How Does a President Get Elected?
The choosing of a president is meant to be done by Electors in each state. The great Party conventions in the summer of presidential elections years, and the voting at November polls, are merely decorative. I mean they are not part of the Constitution.
If the Framers wishes were carried out, the Electors would do some serious head hunting for the best candidates. I can only say that this never happened because Party politics intervened, and for the last century at least, Big Media took over. I guess it’s more or less correct to say that presenting two candidates for public choice is a game or a circus. It takes away from people dealing with crucial issues. You have to fit everything into pre-determined categories.
Who Has Got What It Takes?
Each American may have a personal preference as to the qualities of a good president. I have already displayed mine by picking out the three persons above, and by emphasizing, approvingly, their attention to the vaccination problem. Also, me being me would insist that the man or woman be of good character — honest, principled, and courageous. I think we should leave their sexual history out of it — as I think we should never delve into anyone’s sexual history. (And no recording of presidential conversations, Mr Woodward, thank you.)
My husband, a doctor, frequently had to hire personnel for his academic department, or for the hospital. He used to make two piles from the job applications — the ones who had enough discipline to answer the questions efficiently, versus the others. Then, from the efficient pile, he looked for applicants who had accomplished something in life. It could have been completely outside the medical field. “If you’re competent at one thing, you can be competent at another.”
I mention that approach, to indicate that what you read on Ballotpedia is strictly “politics.” Did she get more than 40% in the primary? Did he choose the right slogan? How many members of the existing legislature have endorsed her? Is the other Party putting up money to smear him? We can do much better than that.
Scanning the Horizon
There is no reason to try to pick a president from persons already holding lesser offices. And it does not have to be someone who has already thrown her hat in the ring — your organization can go out and recruit any desirable-appearing candidate. Most people ae scared to run for office, and are too modest to declare themselves worthy. But they are very likely to respond to an invitation!
There is nothing in the Constitution that forbids sortition. I am referring to a method suggested in ancient Greece by Ari himself. Anyone interested in being a political leader can put his name in a basket of names and may get picked by luck. (Then their state’s electors would have to OK it.)
In the US we are limited to native-born presidents. Right now, I’d go out and recruit Archbishop Carlo Vigano, age 80, who certainly has his act together (anti-vax, you know). He was the papal nuncio in New York, but was born in Italy. Too bad.
Don’t worry, though. There are tens of millions of others who meet the constitutional qualifications: age 35 and up, born here, and resident in US for 14 years.
How about you?
POTUS has seized power by ‘Executive Orders. FDR confiscated gold by one in 1933.
Federal encroachment on State rights has been accepted by SCOTUS…. Americans live in a Gang state.
Worse, federal encroachment on States’ rights has been accepted by States!!!
BUt Sheriff Richard Mack is fighting this from inside the counties.
It is a stupid thing when you can debate all day about problems but not be allowed to mention evidence for the cause.
You may mention any evidence you want. We all need evidence in this deceit-laden world.
Of course, no one in this “enlightened” age would be even slightly interested in a thoughtful investigation of the nature and purpose of civil authority by a neo- Neanderthal from the C13. Thomas Aquinas is so backward that he even uses some of the Australopithecine observations of the knuckle-dragging Aristotle. Worse still he even uses examples from Scripture to make the case that a civil authority is of the natural order and necessary for a coherent society.
If you are convinced that a system of “musical chairs” in which a merry-go-round sequence of virtually unaccountable lackeys of occult powers (“democracy”) is the best, and most highly evolved, kind of civil authority, do not read this:
https://isidore.co/aquinas/DeRegno.htm
Tom and I agree that a civil auhority is of the natural order (at least up to the point of the village chief), but as we are then left with “gang” rule, there is no way but by democracy (weak as it is) to confront laws that make the people miserable.
Tom wasn’t around for the 20th century, was he?