not exactly speaker, but i present to you. but you are correct the sitting president is able to choose, they then must go through a senate confirmation....
Major, I know the facts, but you can keep patting yourself on the back until your elbow pops out. Did I erroneously cite any Speaker of the House who had (not) become President? No. I know the facts, but the facts include the order of succession and while the odds are long that both the President and the VP would leave office simultaneously, it is not impossible. I'm not talking about your criticisms of Palin, just the ones in general that the Democrats are leading with: lack of experience at the national level, mocking her executive experience as a mayor and governor. Does Pelosi have even that at two heart-beats away from the presidency? Long shot though it be, why is it a criteria for one but not the other? Oh and speaking of experience, Obama.... a community organizer, a law professor, a state senator and less than 200 days as a US Senator. I'm not saying he should not run for president but I am thinking I won't vote for him. You guys are saying that Pelosi is unqualified to be the VP because there are some long odds that she might become the President. While admittedly the odds are longer, why didn't the same standard be held up to Pelosi at a time when impeachment was being considered and Cheney was having yet another heart episode?
