Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Politics
 Should Only Natural Born Americans be President?
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 4

Wendy
SFN Regular

USA
614 Posts

Posted - 11/12/2004 :  07:54:47   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Wendy a Yahoo! Message Send Wendy a Private Message
I wonder if, before they bother to amend the Constitution (again), they will make the argument that since Bush wasn't elected by popular vote the first time, he should be eligible for another term.

Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do on a rainy afternoon.
-- Susan Ertz
Go to Top of Page

Siberia
SFN Addict

Brazil
2322 Posts

Posted - 11/12/2004 :  09:02:47   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Siberia's Homepage  Send Siberia an AOL message  Send Siberia a Yahoo! Message Send Siberia a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by furshur

I don't think we have to worry about Arnie, I would imagine that the republicans are already moving to over turn the 22nd amendment to the constitution so that we can have Bush in there for life.


That's a thought to give anyone nightmares.
Anyway, I'd pick Arnie anyday. I don't doubt he could get elected, either.

"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa

"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
Go to Top of Page

beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard

USA
3834 Posts

Posted - 11/13/2004 :  04:24:22   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send beskeptigal a Private Message
I'd love to see Clinton be able to run again, but thank goodness Bush can't. As far as Arnold, I suppose it isn't wrong for him to run. But he'd get votes for being the Terminator instead of how he does as California's governor.

I almost think Arnold's quotes about admiring Nixon and his cultural experience as a foreign born American make him inherently different than a native born person. OTOH, I'm sure there are foreign born citizens that are essentially like native born persons. I guess my prejudices about Arnold are interfering with my judgment about who should be eligible for Pres.

I have no doubt the GOP would like to have Arnold on the 2008 ticket in order to keep themselves in power. That should not be the reason for changing the law. It should be changed if it is no longer relevant instead. If you change it for Arnold, you'll be stuck with it for others. If we change it for cause, then it would be acceptable regardless of who the foreign born citizen was that might come along.
Go to Top of Page

Starman
SFN Regular

Sweden
1613 Posts

Posted - 11/15/2004 :  02:09:41   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Starman a Private Message
This is an interesting rule. Is Arnold real a US citizen or are there different ranks of citizenship?


A more rational approach is that the Chief Of State should be a descendant from one of Napoleons field marshals.

"Any religion that makes a form of torture into an icon that they worship seems to me a pretty sick sort of religion quite honestly"
-- Terry Jones
Go to Top of Page

Wendy
SFN Regular

USA
614 Posts

Posted - 11/15/2004 :  05:39:37   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Wendy a Yahoo! Message Send Wendy a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Starman

This is an interesting rule. Is Arnold real a US citizen or are there different ranks of citizenship?


Yes, Arnold is indeed a real naturalized citizen, but he is not a natural-born citizen as he was born in Austria. Valiant Dancer concisely stated the basic reason the rule was made early in this post. There are those who think is has become obsolete. Some even go so far as to say the distinction is "un-American".

Here's a link that goes into a little detail for anyone who is interested:
http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/20031112-093409-8265r.htm

The one I posted in my first reply has even more info, and some pretty racy pictures as well.

Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do on a rainy afternoon.
-- Susan Ertz
Go to Top of Page

Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie

USA
4826 Posts

Posted - 11/15/2004 :  06:55:14   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Valiant Dancer's Homepage Send Valiant Dancer a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Starman

This is an interesting rule. Is Arnold real a US citizen or are there different ranks of citizenship?


A more rational approach is that the Chief Of State should be a descendant from one of Napoleons field marshals.




The only distinction in rights between natal citizenship and naturalized citizenship is who can be President. Otherwise, there is no difference.

Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils

Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion
Go to Top of Page

Wendy
SFN Regular

USA
614 Posts

Posted - 11/15/2004 :  07:57:16   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Wendy a Yahoo! Message Send Wendy a Private Message
A naturalized citizen can't be Vice-President either, for obvious reasons.

Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do on a rainy afternoon.
-- Susan Ertz
Go to Top of Page

Doomar
SFN Regular

USA
714 Posts

Posted - 11/18/2004 :  21:59:30   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Doomar's Homepage Send Doomar a Private Message
Perhaps we could have a national poll with this question on the ballot so someone could rig the vote like they did the last election. That would decide it, right?

Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”

www.pastorsb.com.htm
Go to Top of Page

Dude
SFN Die Hard

USA
6891 Posts

Posted - 11/18/2004 :  23:31:20   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Dude a Private Message
There is nothing wrong with requireing people to be natural-born citizens of this country in order to be president.

There were very good reasons, at the time, for including the requirement in the constitution. While they may not be as valid today, there is still some concern there... imo.


Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson

"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin

Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth
Go to Top of Page

filthy
SFN Die Hard

USA
14408 Posts

Posted - 11/19/2004 :  04:21:33   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send filthy a Private Message
I could be wrong, but I don't think the Republicans will try to repeal the 22nd any time soon simply because it would open the door for Clinton. Clinton could concievably win it in a walk-away. Slick Willy and Wes Clark would be an act tough enough to give Rove the gibbering fantods.

Hell, they don't need to repeal it to keep power -- they got Bush in twice, didn't they? If they can do it with that pathetic dipshit, they can do it any other, pathetic dipshit.

I seem to recall the same buzz going around during Nixon's mercifully abbreviated, second term.


"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres


"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude

Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,

and Crypto-Communist!

Go to Top of Page

furshur
SFN Regular

USA
1536 Posts

Posted - 11/19/2004 :  08:50:02   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send furshur a Private Message
Filthy, that is a good point. I bet the rabid conservatives probably do not think it is possible for Clinton to get reelected so they might do it anyway. I can't think of anything that would be funnier than having the republicans repeal the 22nd ammendment and then have Clinton take the election. The weeping and nashing of teeth by the fundies would be priceless...





If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know.
Go to Top of Page

filthy
SFN Die Hard

USA
14408 Posts

Posted - 11/19/2004 :  09:29:59   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send filthy a Private Message
A veritable symphony of sanctimonious agony, music to the ear and a soothing balm for the soul.


"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres


"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude

Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,

and Crypto-Communist!

Go to Top of Page

Wendy
SFN Regular

USA
614 Posts

Posted - 11/20/2004 :  13:08:49   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Wendy a Yahoo! Message Send Wendy a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Doomar

Perhaps we could have a national poll with this question on the ballot so someone could rig the vote like they did the last election. That would decide it, right?

Oh, man! You just gave me the creeps!

quote:
Originally posted by filthy
Clinton could concievably win it in a walk-away. Slick Willy and Wes Clark would be an act tough enough to give Rove the gibbering fantods.

If I ever doubted that, I don't now. I just got back from the dedication of his library. I have never seen so many people (or so much rain) in my life. The support was overwhelming.


Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do on a rainy afternoon.
-- Susan Ertz
Go to Top of Page

Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist

USA
4955 Posts

Posted - 11/22/2004 :  07:48:15   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Cuneiformist a Private Message
Well, Wendy, looks like the New York Times' own word-wonk/conservative echo-chamber mouth piece Bill Safire has added his two cents in his op-ed for today (you'll need to log in (it's free) to the paper's website to read the piece).

His stance is clear:
quote:
It's time to end discrimination based on place of birth that denies the equal right of every citizen to run for president.
He argues that Article II of the constitution
quote:
makes all naturalized citizens - including taxpayers, voters, servicemembers - slightly less than all-American.
He's right to some extent, though the assertion that
quote:
this has caused pregnant women to race back to our shores to make certain their children's political potential is not somehow beclouded.
is absurd. (In fact, I have anecdotal examples of the opposite-- or at least the place of their child's birth was not determined by the desire not to ruin her or his chance of being President.)

Of course, as Wendy already noted, all of this talk didn't spring up out of nowhere. Instead, as Safire makes clear, this is all a slow-but-sure attempt to try and change things so that there will be as many viable Republicans eligible for the office of President as possible. Indeed, Safire concludes be suggesting that
quote:
After ratification of the 28th Amendment in 2007, I envision a G.O.P. ticket the next year with Rudy Giuliani or John McCain on top and Schwarzenegger as running-mate. For Democrats, Evan Bayh or Hillary Clinton for president, Peter Jennings (Canadian-born) for v.p.


In typical Safire fashion, he offers a plausible Republican ticket, but then counters it with a laughable Democratic one, but suggests that they're both equally viable.
Go to Top of Page

Siberia
SFN Addict

Brazil
2322 Posts

Posted - 11/22/2004 :  08:21:52   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Siberia's Homepage  Send Siberia an AOL message  Send Siberia a Yahoo! Message Send Siberia a Private Message
... Hillary Clinton is not American? As in... born in US?

"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa

"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 4 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.12 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000