Pelosi’s Only Purpose For Existing

[Flanders]

Incidentally, months before the 2016 election I speculated on the odds against the next president surviving in office:

William Henry Harrison [1841] Died in office

Zachary Taylor [1849-1850] 9 years after Harrison

Abraham Lincoln [1861-1865] 15 years after Taylor

James A. Garfield [1881] 16 years after Lincoln

William McKinley [1897-1901] 20 years after Garfield

Warren G. Harding [1921-1923] 22 years after McKinley

Franklin D. Roosevelt [1933-1945] 22 years after Harding

John F. Kennedy [1961-1963] 18 years after FDR

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...74#post3157074

Nancy Pelosi is the best argument in favor of removing every member of Congress from the presidential line of succession. She never served another purpose in her misdirected life:

And it’s the right thing to do from a good-government perspective. It’s always been a mistake to insert members of Congress into the presidential line of succession; it’s contrary to the entire structure of the constitutional system, which separates legislative from executive institutions and forces them to share powers.

It also violates the basic partisan arrangements of U.S. elections. Once the political parties evolved, it became essential for the president and vice president to be political allies to guarantee that voters on the winning side of presidential elections would be getting their way, at least in terms of party, even if the president died or needed to be replaced. That wasn’t guaranteed at first by the Constitution, which simply took the candidates with the top two electoral-vote totals and made them president and vice president, and which also had no procedure for filling a vacancy in the vice presidency.

XXXXX

This isn’t just about, or even mainly about, impeachment. The possibility that the deaths or departures of two people could award the presidency to the party that lost the most recent election is an unacceptable risk. The law also sets up a perverse incentive during times of divided government for Congress to play constitutional hardball and refuse to confirm anyone to a vice-presidential vacancy in order to leave the speaker next in line.

Even with members of Congress removed from the line of succession, there’s still one more step needed to get the system right. Under current law, 15 cabinet officers follow the Senate president pro tem, from the secretary of state at the top of the list to the secretary of homeland security at the bottom.

I cannot imagine any Democrat member of Congress voting to scrap the current line of succession that tilts in their favor with their bureaucrats, least of all voting for the good of the country:

After nuclear weapons were born the entire line of succession could be wiped out because they could be found in one city. So years ago I suggested changing the line; replacing the bureaucrats with state governors.

Cabinet secretaries who once held elected positions are no exception when it comes to the line of succession.

XXXXX

Bureaucrats in the line of succession should be eliminated because nobody votes for them after the first three elected officials; the vice president, the speaker of the house, and the president pro tempore of the Senate.

And have you noticed that liberals scream the loudest about the public’s sacred Right to vote for the people who govern them, yet nobody votes for the bureaucrats that might end up president.

It got worse in 2011

The Presidential Line-of-succession Act of 2011 added ambassadors to the line if the others are wiped out. I looked for a complete list of everybody in the current line and could not find one list that included the ambassadors first proposed by the 109th Congress. I wonder why it is such a secret?

H.R. 1943 and S.920

Those bills were introduced in the 109th Congress (2005-2006). Their provisions included adding the following positions to the the line-of-succession.

Secretary of Homeland Security.

Ambassador to the United Nations. (How does President Suzy Five Shows, President Samantha Power, and President Nikki Haley grab you?)

Ambassador to Great Britain.

Ambassador to Russia.

Ambassador to China.

Ambassador to France.

Parenthetically, think about one of the bureaucrats who joined Hillary Clinton and Obama in betraying this country becoming president:

Hillary Clinton: Uranium One Stories "Debunked Repeatedly"
Posted By Tim Hains
On Date October 23, 2017

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...epeatedly.html

Hillary does not tell us that decisions must go through the Committee on Foreign Investment which includes executive members of the cabinet, the secretaries of the Treasury, Defense, Homeland Security, Commerce and Energy, and the secretary of state [Hillary Clinton at the time of the sale].

Try this scenario: One of those bureaucrats in the line-of-succession who sold Uranium One to Russia becomes president after a nuclear bomb made from our own uranium destroys Washington.

XXXXX

Finally, in 2016 my wife and daughter were talking about a TV show they were following. I learned that a variation of my nuclear scenario was the plot in a TV show called DESIGNATED SURVIVOR.

In the TV show the Capital Building is destroyed while the president is delivering a State of the Union Address opening the door for a low level bureaucrat to become president. I do not know who paid to produce that crapola, but they owe me a few bucks for stealing my idea.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...47#post2830747

The Continuity in Government Commission’s recommendation lost me:

As the Continuity in Government Commission recommended after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, only the four most important cabinet posts should be included. After that, the president should designate, and Congress confirm, a handful of distinguished individuals, preferably living anywhere but Washington, D.C., to serve in case of a full-blown disaster. Retired high-ranking politicians, former secretaries of state or defense, or former White House chiefs of staff would be natural choices. Instead of a “designated survivor” who might be unknown to the nation and whose service in a lesser cabinet post might be poor preparation for the White House, such a scheme would provide more reliable leadership in the unlikely event it was ever needed.

Oust Pelosi From the Presidential Succession Line
Jonathan Bernstein
October 04, 2019

https://outline.com/4FrnUG

I will stick with my original suggestion:

. . . years ago I suggested changing the line; replacing the bureaucrats with state governors.

[deadcatbounce]

"Pelosi’s Only Purpose For Existing". Is to show the importance of birth control.

[Cancel 2020.2]

Incidentally, months before the 2016 election I speculated on the odds against the next president surviving in office:

William Henry Harrison [1841] Died in office

Zachary Taylor [1849-1850] 9 years after Harrison

Abraham Lincoln [1861-1865] 15 years after Taylor

James A. Garfield [1881] 16 years after Lincoln

William McKinley [1897-1901] 20 years after Garfield

Warren G. Harding [1921-1923] 22 years after McKinley

Franklin D. Roosevelt [1933-1945] 22 years after Harding

John F. Kennedy [1961-1963] 18 years after FDR

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...74#post3157074

Nancy Pelosi is the best argument in favor of removing every member of Congress from the presidential line of succession. She never served another purpose in her misdirected life:

And it’s the right thing to do from a good-government perspective. It’s always been a mistake to insert members of Congress into the presidential line of succession; it’s contrary to the entire structure of the constitutional system, which separates legislative from executive institutions and forces them to share powers.

It also violates the basic partisan arrangements of U.S. elections. Once the political parties evolved, it became essential for the president and vice president to be political allies to guarantee that voters on the winning side of presidential elections would be getting their way, at least in terms of party, even if the president died or needed to be replaced. That wasn’t guaranteed at first by the Constitution, which simply took the candidates with the top two electoral-vote totals and made them president and vice president, and which also had no procedure for filling a vacancy in the vice presidency.

XXXXX

This isn’t just about, or even mainly about, impeachment. The possibility that the deaths or departures of two people could award the presidency to the party that lost the most recent election is an unacceptable risk. The law also sets up a perverse incentive during times of divided government for Congress to play constitutional hardball and refuse to confirm anyone to a vice-presidential vacancy in order to leave the speaker next in line.

Even with members of Congress removed from the line of succession, there’s still one more step needed to get the system right. Under current law, 15 cabinet officers follow the Senate president pro tem, from the secretary of state at the top of the list to the secretary of homeland security at the bottom.

I cannot imagine any Democrat member of Congress voting to scrap the current line of succession that tilts in their favor with their bureaucrats, least of all voting for the good of the country:

After nuclear weapons were born the entire line of succession could be wiped out because they could be found in one city. So years ago I suggested changing the line; replacing the bureaucrats with state governors.

Cabinet secretaries who once held elected positions are no exception when it comes to the line of succession.

XXXXX

Bureaucrats in the line of succession should be eliminated because nobody votes for them after the first three elected officials; the vice president, the speaker of the house, and the president pro tempore of the Senate.

And have you noticed that liberals scream the loudest about the public’s sacred Right to vote for the people who govern them, yet nobody votes for the bureaucrats that might end up president.

It got worse in 2011

The Presidential Line-of-succession Act of 2011 added ambassadors to the line if the others are wiped out. I looked for a complete list of everybody in the current line and could not find one list that included the ambassadors first proposed by the 109th Congress. I wonder why it is such a secret?

H.R. 1943 and S.920

Those bills were introduced in the 109th Congress (2005-2006). Their provisions included adding the following positions to the the line-of-succession.

Secretary of Homeland Security.

Ambassador to the United Nations. (How does President Suzy Five Shows, President Samantha Power, and President Nikki Haley grab you?)

Ambassador to Great Britain.

Ambassador to Russia.

Ambassador to China.

Ambassador to France.

Parenthetically, think about one of the bureaucrats who joined Hillary Clinton and Obama in betraying this country becoming president:

Hillary Clinton: Uranium One Stories "Debunked Repeatedly"
Posted By Tim Hains
On Date October 23, 2017

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...epeatedly.html

Hillary does not tell us that decisions must go through the Committee on Foreign Investment which includes executive members of the cabinet, the secretaries of the Treasury, Defense, Homeland Security, Commerce and Energy, and the secretary of state [Hillary Clinton at the time of the sale].

Try this scenario: One of those bureaucrats in the line-of-succession who sold Uranium One to Russia becomes president after a nuclear bomb made from our own uranium destroys Washington.

XXXXX

Finally, in 2016 my wife and daughter were talking about a TV show they were following. I learned that a variation of my nuclear scenario was the plot in a TV show called DESIGNATED SURVIVOR.

In the TV show the Capital Building is destroyed while the president is delivering a State of the Union Address opening the door for a low level bureaucrat to become president. I do not know who paid to produce that crapola, but they owe me a few bucks for stealing my idea.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...47#post2830747

The Continuity in Government Commission’s recommendation lost me:

As the Continuity in Government Commission recommended after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, only the four most important cabinet posts should be included. After that, the president should designate, and Congress confirm, a handful of distinguished individuals, preferably living anywhere but Washington, D.C., to serve in case of a full-blown disaster. Retired high-ranking politicians, former secretaries of state or defense, or former White House chiefs of staff would be natural choices. Instead of a “designated survivor” who might be unknown to the nation and whose service in a lesser cabinet post might be poor preparation for the White House, such a scheme would provide more reliable leadership in the unlikely event it was ever needed.

Oust Pelosi From the Presidential Succession Line
Jonathan Bernstein
October 04, 2019

https://outline.com/4FrnUG

I will stick with my original suggestion:

. . . years ago I suggested changing the line; replacing the bureaucrats with state governors.

Wow, thanks for the info! Flanders, you are a GENIUS, a true rarity on this site.

[Flanders]

Wow, thanks for the info! Flanders, you are a GENIUS, a true rarity on this site.

To Steven VanderMolen: And thank you in the words of:

Kasper Gutman to Sam Spade: “You are a man of nice judgement.”

[Cancel 2020.2]

To Steven VanderMolen: And thank you in the words of:

Kasper Gutman to Sam Spade: “You are a man of nice judgement.”

You're QUITE welcome. We need more people like you on this site.

[Mason Michaels]

You're QUITE welcome. We need more people like you on this site.

Can you guys suck each other off!elsewhere!

[Guno צְבִי]

Wow, thanks for the info! Flanders, you are a GENIUS, a true rarity on this site.

Thankfully you never spawned

[Cancel 2020.2]

And with those last two comments from profane and STUPID loony libs, you can see why this site needs more people like Flanders. They are truly a shining jewel among the sea of dung of the loony libs on these threads.

[Blackwater Lunchbreak]

Thankfully you never spawned

rambam gives good head.

[Flanders]

Nancy Pelosi is the best argument in favor of removing every member of Congress from the presidential line of succession. She never served another purpose in her misdirected life:

"Pelosi’s Only Purpose For Existing". Is to show the importance of birth control.

To deadcatbounce: Tax dollar abortions is incidental to transforming this country’s form of government into a democracy.

Just once I would love to hear a television mouth interviewing Pelosi remind her that the government will always take a Right away from people who will not fight to defend their Rights.

In short: Cowards have no Rights in a democracy. That is why Diarrhea Mouth never misses an opportunity to praise “democracy” the Founders hated:

I do not say that democracy has been more pernicious on the whole, and in the long run, than monarchy or aristocracy. Democracy has never been and never can be so durable as aristocracy or monarchy; but while it lasts, it is more bloody than either.” Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. It is in vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less selfish, less ambitious, or less avaricious than aristocracy or monarchy. It is not true, in fact, and nowhere appears in history. Those passions are the same in all men, under all forms of simple government, and when unchecked, produce the same effects of fraud, violence, and cruelty.” John Adams

Democracy will soon degenerate into an anarchy, such an anarchy that every man will do what is right in his own eyes and no man's life or property or reputation or liberty will be secure, and every one of these will soon mould itself into a system of subordination of all the moral virtues and intellectual abilities, all the powers of wealth, beauty, wit and science, to the wanton pleasures, the capricious will, and the execrable cruelty of one or a very few. John Adams, An Essay on Man's Lust for Power, August 29, 1763

The experience of all former ages had shown that of all human governments, democracy was the most unstable, fluctuating and short-lived. John Quincy Adams

We are a Republican Government, Real liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of democracy...it has been observed that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity. Alexander Hamilton

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...39#post3008239

Diarrhea Mouth always speaks highly of the Constitution whenever it buttresses a Socialism talking point. That is the same Constitution Pelosi and the Democrat Party have been working to abolish since 1945:

On Tuesday, when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced the beginning of impeachment proceedings, she invoked the nation’s founding ideals—and the need to defend and protect them. “In the darkest days of the American Revolution, Thomas Paine wrote, ‘The times have found us.’ The times found them to fight for and establish our democracy,” Pelosi said. “The times have found us today not to place ourselves in the same category of greatness as our Founders but to place us in the urgency of protecting and defending our Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic.”

How Trump Could Further Erode Democracy During Impeachment
By Michael Luo
September 30, 2019

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily...ng-impeachment

Note that abortion was decriminalized by seven lawyers on the Supreme Court; whereas, the Right to bear arms is a constitutional Right. A cynic might conclude that this country has become a nation of lawyers rather than a nation of laws:

If you listen to Democrat gun-grabbers talk about the unconstitutional laws they pass you have to conclude the Second Amendment has already been repealed.

Tragically, there are so many cowards in this country who agree with disarming a free people the government is now in position to kill anyone who does fight to defend their Second Amendment Right:

Shortly after 5 a.m. on November 5, 2018, two police officers arrived at Gary Willis' house in Glen Burnie, Maryland. They were there to take away his guns. They ended up killing him instead.

According to the Anne Arundel County Police Department, the 61-year-old man, who at that hour presumably had just been awakened by the officers' knocking, answered the door with a gun in his hand. He put it down when he saw who was there. Upon learning that the two officers had come to serve him with an "extreme risk protective order" (ERPO) that barred him from possessing firearms, police said, Willis became "irate" and picked up the weapon again. As one officer tried to wrestle the gun away from Willis, it went off, whereupon the other officer shot him.

Police Chief Timothy Altomare subsequently argued that the incident illustrated the need for Maryland's ERPO law, which had taken effect barely a month before. "If you look at this morning's outcome," he told the Annapolis Capital, a newspaper whose headquarters had been the site of a mass shooting the previous June, "it's tough for us to say 'Well, what did we prevent?' Because we don't know what we prevented or could've prevented. What would've happened if we didn't go there at 5 a.m.?"

Well, for one thing, Gary Willis probably would still be alive.

States Are Depriving Innocent People of Their Second Amendment Rights
Jacob Sullum
From the November 2019 issue

https://reason.com/2019/10/06/states...ndment-rights/

[Gonzomin]

Rightys hate her because she is very good at her job. She is a great organizer and vote counter who knows how to sway fence walkers. The right pushed hard when the Dems got the house to convince the left to vote in somebody younger. They feared her as they should. They knew how good she was at her job and anyone else would have had to learn what she already knows.
She is third in the line of succession because the founders made it that way. She would do a really good job if Trump and Pence got what they deserve..

[Loving91390]

Pelosi’s purpose is to make liberals look .... as stupid as they are .

She’s doing a fine job !

[Gonzomin]

Pelosi’s purpose is to make liberals look .... as stupid as they are .

She’s doing a fine job !

Oh please give an example of your warped and twisted belief. She has done exactly what the reds feared. She is in control and acting like an adult in this insane red clown party.

[archives]

Pretty funny, usually the Trumpkins supposedly swear to upholding the Constitution, strict Constructionists, no one can alter what the Founding Fathers assembled, but what we have here now is a Trumpkin who now wants to radically alter the Constitution cause he doesn't personally like the person third in line

Telling

[Blackwater Lunchbreak]

Oh please give an example of your warped and twisted belief. She has done exactly what the reds feared. She is in control and acting like an adult in this insane red clown party.

lol. aoc goaded her into it, and then said she was bored, leaving pelosi alone, pissing into the wind with her lovely she-penis.