05-31-2024, 10:52 PM
(05-31-2024, 09:48 PM)Byrd Wrote: ....
BUT (here's the interesting thing) -- how do we prevent this situation in the future? What steps need to be taken to assure the public that the person they elect for president is not involved in criminal acts?
(if you hate Hillary/Obama/Bush/Biden/Carter/etc, what should be done to make certain that the person who becomes president has a clean record?)
Should the parties have some sort of vetting system?
On the national level, should there be a security clearance pass first before they can run for president?
What say you?
But, but... There is no way we can ever be certain that any politician isn't engaging in criminal acivity. You can't prove a negative. They may have done so, are doing so, or will do so... And obfuscating, hiding, or redefining, "crime" is a specialty of the political class. (Doubly dangerous when some citizens vote by the "flavor" of the politican.)
At this point, I would wager that ANY person targeted by a biased system will be found guilty of whatever offense they can conjure for the ritual of public court. Having some experiences in the justice system showed me just how brazenly the power can become skewed towards a single persons' bias. Guilt of anything is no longer a personal matter... it is now subject to the prevailing will of those in positions of authority which are cloistered or insular. (shades of Dostoyevsky)
I thought all along that the "whichever" party would be responsible for selecting 'worthy' individuals for candidacies... but recent history has proven that to be unrealistic.
I agree that a different approach appears to be necessary. But the wailing of the partisan (and professional victim activists) will make that difficult to achieve as long as the media is allowed to tell us "what we all think" without the checks and balances of fact and truth.
Whew! I need to think about this further.
