A modest proposal regarding the US president

[Nithavela]

Hello!

I've been thinking, and I had an idea that I'd like to present to you, and which might shed some new light on the role of the US president.

In his current role, the US president has many duties, including commander in chief of the military, a leading figure in policy making and acting through executive actions, as well as a prominent role in foreign politics.

I know that past presidents have stuck to that mold, but considering the fact that the US president can commit crimes without being charged, and then can retroactively pardon himself from those crimes, perhaps you all have it backwards and that is not the role the founding fathers originally intended for the president.

I'd like to suggest that from now on, the US president is chosen not based on his policies, but on who he will kill. This of course includes both his willingness to kill certain targets, as well as his physical fitness and overall combat abilities. Since only the president can commit all crimes with impunity, he'd of course have to kill personally. This would also put a stop to the current trend of only chosing old people as president, since combat effectiveness drops sharply after middle age.

Who do you think would make the best killer in chief, and who should be his targets? (Please don't name movie stars unless they have actual experience. Also, Keanu Reeves is 60, so probably too old for that stuff).

 

[Fervent]

Is...is this satire? I really hope you're being farcical.

 

[durangodawood]

Hello!

I've been thinking, and I had an idea that I'd like to present to you, and which might shed some new light on the role of the US president.

In his current role, the US president has many duties, including commander in chief of the military, a leading figure in policy making and acting through executive actions, as well as a prominent role in foreign politics.

I know that past presidents have stuck to that mold, but considering the fact that the US president can commit crimes without being charged, and then can retroactively pardon himself from those crimes, perhaps you all have it backwards and that is not the role the founding fathers originally intended for the president.

I'd like to suggest that from now on, the US president is chosen not based on his policies, but on who he will kill. This of course includes both his willingness to kill certain targets, as well as his physical fitness and overall combat abilities. Since only the president can commit all crimes with impunity, he'd of course have to kill personally. This would also put a stop to the current trend of only chosing old people as president, since combat effectiveness drops sharply after middle age.

Who do you think would make the best killer in chief, and who should be his targets? (Please don't name movie stars unless they have actual experience. Also, Keanu Reeves is 60, so probably too old for that stuff).

This is too reasonable and plausible to wither away in Kitchen Sink. It belongs in American Politics.

I dont see how physical fitness is really an issue. The murders would really have to be untraceable. Not the executive himself blowing people away - or else no one would ever be in a room with him. Im thinking the President hires hitmen, who for the right capital incentive would take the risk.

So basically we dont want a fit president. We want a rich one. Or one with a generous set of donors who'd contribute to this particular fund.

 

[Nithavela]

This is too reasonable and plausible to wither away in Kitchen Sink. It belongs in American Politics.

I dont see how physical fitness is really an issue. The murders would really have to be untraceable. Not the executive himself blowing people away - or else no one would ever be in a room with him. Im thinking the President hires hitmen, who for the right capital incentive would take the risk.

So basically we dont want a fit president. We want a rich one. Or one with a generous set of donors who'd contribute to this particular fund.

No, that would defeat the entire point of the presidential immunity. Any rich guy can hire some killers, but only the president can kill without fear of legal repercussions.

 

[durangodawood]

No, that would defeat the entire point of the presidential immunity. Any rich guy can hire some killers, but only the president can kill without fear of legal repercussions.

No it wouldnt. The pres is immune from hiring killers just as much as from doing killing himself.

 

[Nithavela]

No it wouldnt. The pres is immune from hiring killers just as much as from doing killing himself.

Hm.. and of course the president could then pardon them. (Those would be acts of terrorism, so easily federal crimes). So, not much need for untracability.

I like your thought process. Though a president who does the actual killing would be more interesting.

 

[durangodawood]

Hm.. and of course the president could then pardon them. (Those would be acts of terrorism, so easily federal crimes). So, not much need for untracability.

I like your thought process. Though a president who does the actual killing would be more interesting.

Yes way more interesting.

I'm just trying to keep it realistic tho, as befits a CF discussion.

 

[jayem]

Who do you think would make the best killer in chief, and who should be his targets? (Please don't name movie stars unless they have actual experience. Also, Keanu Reeves is 60, so probably too old for that stuff).

The best kill operation I can recall was OK'd by Pres. Obama. Which successfully took out Osama bin Laden in 2011--almost 10 years after 9/11. Of course, Obama didn't fire the kill shots himself. But he gave the orders to the Navy Seals to do so.

 

[durangodawood]

The best kill operation I can recall was OK'd by Pres. Obama. Which successfully took out Osama bin Laden in 2011--almost 10 years after 9/11. Of course, Obama didn't fire the kill shots himself. But he gave the orders to the Navy Seals to do so.

I think that was covered by the open ended congressional "war on terror" authorization. Personal immunity for actual crimes was not an option like it is now. You had to have a legal rationale.

 

[Chesterton]

Obama had 16 year old U.S. citizen Abdulrahman Anwar al-Awlaki killed, and also gave us the Disposition Matrix.

 

[durangodawood]

Obama had 16 year old U.S. citizen Abdulrahman Anwar al-Awlaki killed, and also gave us the Disposition Matrix.

Immunity not required. It was legal (for better or worse) under congressional authorization. Personally I think congress should keep a tighter rein on its war authority and not delegate it away the potus. But I can also see the rationale for operational flexibility in an era where armed conflict is rarely big armies or navies squaring off anymore.

 

[Chesterton]

Immunity not required. It was legal (for better or worse) under congressional authorization. Personally I think congress should keep a tighter rein on its war authority and not delegate it away the potus. But I can also see the rationale for operational flexibility in an era where armed conflict is rarely big armies or navies squaring off anymore.

I could be wrong, but I don't believe the Matrix has congressional authorization. And it was devised by some of the same people who think it's okay to torture people. I don't think the government should be killing people who are not officially enemy combatants. If they can just declare someone an "enemy" because they pose a danger, wouldn't that apply to people like Ted Bundy and Jeffery Dahmer? Why bother to arrest them and give them their day in court with due process? Just kill them. No, that's not good.

 

[Nithavela]

The best kill operation I can recall was OK'd by Pres. Obama. Which successfully took out Osama bin Laden in 2011--almost 10 years after 9/11. Of course, Obama didn't fire the kill shots himself. But he gave the orders to the Navy Seals to do so.

Sadly, Obama has already served three terms, including the one where he remoted-controlled Joe Biden. I don't think he's elligible.

 

[jayem]

Sadly, Obama has already served three terms, including the one where he remoted-controlled Joe Biden. I don't think he's elligible.

A robotic Joe Biden wearing adult diapers, and living in a memory care facility would still be a better President than the wanna-be dictator we have to deal with for the next 4 years. But there's a higher power than Joe, Donald, or even Barack himself waiting behind the scenes. Her name is Michelle Obama. She's a Chicago native, and a Princeton and Harvard Law grad. Among other positions, she became an associate dean at the Univ. of Chicago, and served as a VP at the Univ. of Chicago medical center. It can't be denied that she gave the best speech by far at the Democrats' pseudo-convention in August. Michelle is truly a force of nature. Her time is coming.

 

[Nithavela]

A robotic Joe Biden wearing adult diapers, and living in a memory care facility would still be a better President than the wanna-be dictator we have to deal with for the next 4 years. But there's a higher power than Joe, Donald, or even Barack himself waiting behind the scenes. Her name is Michelle Obama. She's a Chicago native, and a Princeton and Harvard Law grad. Among other positions, she became an associate dean at the Univ. of Chicago, and served as a VP at the Univ. of Chicago medical center. It can't be denied that she gave the best speech by far at the Democrats' pseudo-convention in August. Michelle is truly a force of nature. Her time is coming.

You think she has it in her to take out the people her constituents want dead?

 

[jayem]

You think she has it in her to take out the people her constituents want dead?

I think Michelle is fundamentally benevolent. High ranking undesirables would firstly have their citizenships revoked, and be expelled from the country. But if they continued to make trouble--even from their divergent locations--then more drastic measures would be needed.

 

[Landon Caeli]

Hello!

I've been thinking, and I had an idea that I'd like to present to you, and which might shed some new light on the role of the US president.

In his current role, the US president has many duties, including commander in chief of the military, a leading figure in policy making and acting through executive actions, as well as a prominent role in foreign politics.

I know that past presidents have stuck to that mold, but considering the fact that the US president can commit crimes without being charged, and then can retroactively pardon himself from those crimes, perhaps you all have it backwards and that is not the role the founding fathers originally intended for the president.

I'd like to suggest that from now on, the US president is chosen not based on his policies, but on who he will kill. This of course includes both his willingness to kill certain targets, as well as his physical fitness and overall combat abilities. Since only the president can commit all crimes with impunity, he'd of course have to kill personally. This would also put a stop to the current trend of only chosing old people as president, since combat effectiveness drops sharply after middle age.

Who do you think would make the best killer in chief, and who should be his targets? (Please don't name movie stars unless they have actual experience. Also, Keanu Reeves is 60, so probably too old for that stuff).

Not sure if this is more childish or weird. Either way, it's a fantasy most normal people, thankfully, won't share.

...But hey, to each his own. Have your fun in la-la land, if that's where you like to be. I'm gonna go hang out with the grown-ups now. Bye.

 

[Landon Caeli]

Yes way more interesting.

I'm just trying to keep it realistic tho, as befits a CF discussion.

I remember when I was a kid. Maybe just let him have his fun.

 

[Landon Caeli]

You think she has it in her to take out the people her constituents want dead?

I remember when I was young, though I don't remember being so fascinated by murder.

BTW, I also youtubed the video "you're in charge you can do it just get louis" and it had foul language and was one of the dumbest videos I've ever seen.

 

[Nithavela]

I remember when I was young, though I don't remember being so fascinated by murder.

BTW, I also youtubed the video "you're in charge you can do it just get louis" and it had foul language and was one of the dumbest videos I've ever seen.

I can look for some dumber videos for you if you'd like.