Are the next presidential candidates’ unconstitutional time bombers?
The framers of the US Constitution put a minimum age limit of thirty-five to qualify a person to become President in the United States. They did this to prevent an immature person from obtaining Presidential powers. So what is the problem and what has King Solomon have to do with this you may be asking. There are a number of problems to consider about the original intention and wise reasoning and the Twelfth Amendment of the US Constitution.
Life Expectancy Tables
To begin with, the life expediency of a man has doubled since this requirement was written just before 1800. If we were to use this chart graph HERE and adjust to 35, I estimate the minimum age of a presidential candidate today would be around 60 based on the original intention of the Constitution. Would it be lawful to adjust the Constitutional minimum age requirement? Based on previous laws passed to adjust on Social Security minimum age benefits, I would say yes. If we want to, we have to do it before the next election to be lawful.
Was this a wise law? If you use King Solomon as a model for this minimum age requirement, I would say yes. If you study his life accomplishments and failures you would see he was blessed with wisdom at an early age, and then admitted his folly in life in his Ecclesiastes when he was old and mature. One of his most profound advice was in regards to the right times and limitations of time we all will experience in life.
In his youth he built a great temple, accumulated great wealth, was admired for his wisdom. Yet when he died, he was criticized for being overbearing, overtaxing, overspending, and leaving behind a bankrupted country which led to his country’s strength of unity become divided and conquered in time. Does this sound somewhat familiar to the present state of affairs in our nation?
Three Most Admired Past Presidents Ages
In this Wikipedia article HERE, states the three most admired Presidents. In this chart HERE, their age when elected. Below is a listing and their inauguration ages in relation to the approximate minimum age adjusted 35 years over time.
President Age Date of Inauguration Time Equiv. Age
Abraham Lincoln 52 1861 40
Franklin D. Roosevelt 51 1933 50
George Washington 57 1789 35
In each of the above, these three Presidents were well over or very near the minimum age requirements in relation to the minimum age requirement implemented by the Constitution founders. Use this chart, and the age graph if you want to choose who you consider the best president(s) may have been in relation to their adjusted minimum ages and accomplishments and/or failures.
Time Bombers of Leadership
When I use this information in relation to the Presidents I have witnessed in my lifetime of 75 years, the Presidents who would have not qualified to be President in accordance to an adjusted minimum age of at least 60 would have been John F, Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama.
Makes me wonder in retrospect of their accomplishments and/or failures might have changed history if different Presidents had been elected. You decide if it makes you wonder too.
In my next post I will explain why we need wise and mature political leadership as well as why elected career politicians are wrong in my opinion. While someone may argue that we are mature at 35, or have an equivalent years of experience at 35, so why change the age, I will explain another aspect of age in relation to career politicians and the original intent of representative government as envisioned by our Constitutional founders.
In other words, perhaps we should end the term limits debate by setting an updated minimum age limits of 60 for all politicians. This would be e a natural way to insure a proven track record of reality of life experiences, character, maturity, and accomplishments for candidates.
This might also reduce political abuse, divisiveness, costs, and even folly we seem to be experiencing in our nation with uncompromising politicians, elite groups, bias, hypocrisy, that appears apparent to me as the result of having immature, and/or unproven track records of accomplishments, for candidates and propagation of long time career politicians.
We voters need to ask ourselves this question before we vote. Has any candidate a proven track record of character and accomplishments over a long period of time for me to respect and trust them to be worthy of the office they seek? Time usually tells us a lot more than word promises and political rhetoric.
Regards and goodwill blogging.