[AB AB AB]

hmmmm....... I have been swearing it'll be Cleland (see my previous comments pasted below), but this Clinton idea is diabolical enough to look like a realistic threat. It is more plausible than Hillary as VP, because, hey, what else is Bill gonna do anyway? He's a preacher without a pulpit at the moment.

And I'm not so sure the constitutional issue is as clear as my fellow FReepers seem to think. The question is whether someone who is ineligible to be ELECTED president again is "constitutionally ineligible to the office of President." Bill Clinton is, after all, a 35+ yr. old native citizen, etc. If you can't be ELECTED president, does that mean you can't possibly BECOME president? At the very least, there's an ambiguity there... which an aggressive candidate could try to exploit through the federal courts. But hopefully the Supremes would put a stop to any such nonsense.

So for now I'm sticking with my Cleland prediction (see below). Especially because the Bill Clinton scenario would give me nightmares until November.

-----
It's gonna be Max Cleland. I predicted this earlier tonight at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1089521/posts (see posts 7 & 21):

Why all the Kerry-promoting quotes from "former Senator Max Cleland" lately? He will be Kerry's VP candidate. Just picture it. A pair of wounded "war heroes" to attack the "wartime president." Don't forget -- you heard it here first.

It would be a bigger headline-getter and buzz-generator than Lieberman in 2000... nearly as much buzz as "first black candidate" or "first woman presidential candidate." All other issues would be sidelined for weeks.

Feb. 12 Boston Globe: “National security credentials are the most important assets that the Democratic presidential front-runner would use to choose a running mate, these [Kerry] aides said.”

[Texasforever]

Clelend brings nothing to the ticket at all.

[okie01]

"If you can't be ELECTED president, does that mean you can't possibly BECOME president?"

The language is clear. The Constitution doesn't say "elected". It says you can't "be". If you are ineligible to be President, you are ineligible to even be appointed Vice President. You cannot be put in a position where you might accede to the larger office by any circumstance.

But would that stop the Clintons and the libs? Of course not. When did any law or constitutional provision have any meaning to them, whatsoever?

[stylin19a]

Don't put words into the constitution that aren't the. The words of the 12th amendment are pretty clear...and it doesn't mention "elected".

I don't think Cleland is even close to being on the short list for Kerry's VP. Kerry needs fly-over states and i don't think Max can get him that.

Also, the old story about, if there had been TV when Roosevelt ran, he wouldn't have been elected, applies with Max Cleland.

[bobo1]

You very well may be right. It would be a mistake on Kerry's part, but for that I am praying.

Blessings, Bobo

[Terry Mross]

I think you're right. They can run Clelland around on his wheelchair and each time pont out that he left them limbs on the battle filed and the media will repeat it all facts. At the same time the press will point how this fine man was removed from office by war biggots. (That's a new word I made up to indicate race. Like the Jews, they need their own word. If you hate a Jew you're an antisemite. If you hate a warrier, you're a war racist. We must keep this things straingt for the upcoming election.

[Terry Mross]

Since when do you have to be elected to be president. Gerald Ford was never elected to veep or prez.