Bernie Sanders for U.S. President

Next, I will introduce a few definitions and sources. All references are footnoted at the end of this post. If Pro wishes to contest my definitions or my sources, he is welcome to do so. 1) I referred in my acceptance post to the role or responsibility of POTUS. I take my understanding and definition of that role from the oath of office, to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. "1 2) I will be, over the course of my argument, making reference to the Constitution of the United States of America. For the purposes of this debate, all references to this document shall be sourced from . http://constitutionus.com.... I choose this article because it was the highest-ranked, non-Wikipedia source readily available on Google, and it appears to be complete, and contains all Amendments. 3) "Should" - the word should is key to Pro's contention, and is most appropriately defined per this debate as "must; ought (used to indicate duty, propriety, or expediency). In this instance, I interpret Pro's use of "should" as referring to the most expedient/best option.2 I will be arguing on this premise. 4) All definitions of common vernacular that are quoted, and all definitions used as synonyms are sourced from the website www. dictionary. com, and in the interests of being fair, I shall be using the definition most favourable to the argument to which it applies. All numbers appearing randomly inserted within the argument refer to footnotes at the end of the argument. I am not certain how to effectively footnote in RTF. I will refrain from rebutting Pro's arguments until the next session. Bernie Sanders is a sitting Senator of the United States, who, upon his election, is sworn to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. "3 This is similar in text and meaning to the Presidential Oath of Office. I contend that Bernie Sanders, in proposing the "Democracy is for the People" Constitutional amendment in order to overturn a decision by the United States Supreme Court violated his oath of office. Per Article III (1) of the Constitution, the judicial power of the United States is vested in one supreme court, and in other inferior courts as Congress chooses to establish. In other words, per the Constitution (that Mr. Sanders, as a sitting United States Senator, had sworn to support and defend), the Supreme Court holds supreme power to interpret the law " including the Constitution itself. Mr. Sanders holds a different viewpoint from the Supreme Court as to the definition of "free speech" - as is his right. However in introducing a Constitutional amendment (Democracy is for People) for the express (and stated) purpose of overturning the Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court,4 Mr. Sanders undermined the very function of the Supreme Court of the United States as defined by the aforementioned section of the Constitution. Mr. Sanders, while a United States Senator, swore an oath to uphold5 the Constitution, and subsequently sought to undermine one of its tenets by seeking to undermine the Constitutionally defined role of the Supreme Court, thus violating his oath of office. Not only did Mr. Sanders, as a United States Senator, violate his oath to "support and defend" the Constitution of the United States of America, but he did so proudly, and is campaigning to become President in part on the basis of this fact. As such, he cannot be trusted not to violate a similar Oath of Office as President of the United States " to "preserve, protect, and defend" the Constitution of the United States of America. Mr. Sanders, therefore, should NOT be President of the United States. ---------------------------------------------------------------- References as follows: 1) . http://americanhistory.si.edu... 2) . http://dictionary.reference.com... 3) . http://www.senate.gov... 4) . https://berniesanders.com... 5) . http://dictionary.reference.com...