A Good Question For ALL Presidental Candidates;

[UnrepentantUnitarian]

"The Oath of Office for the Presidency of the United States swears/affirms (1) the faithful execution of the Office of President of the United States, AND, (2) to the best of his/her ability, 'to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.' Can you envision any possible circumstances where those two mandates may be seen as contradictory, and if so, WHICH OF THEM would you feel compelled to follow?"

Don't you think the public (you know, "We, the People") have a vested interest in knowing how these Presidential wanna-be's would handle that question? I think so.

(I obviously see the Constitutional mandate to be far superior to the first...for the "Office" is simply a provision and extension of it. Am I wrong about that?)

[Bigmack]

1. Additional questions...

1. How old is the earth?

2. Is Global Climate Change happening, and if so what can we do about it.

About your question: I've heard the shitweasels spew on and on about how they want to protect the Constitution, yet they are the ones who are fracturing the Constitution with domestic spying. "I will only execute the Office within the Constitution.... therefore, anything I do will be Constitutional....next question."