49 replies to this topic

[JadziaDax]

See here

I'm...speechless.

Edit: I posted before I read the whole thing...I like the constitution the way it is, thanks.

Edited by JadziaDax, 22 February 2004 - 12:38 PM.

[Rov Judicata]

The amendment itself is a good idea; restricting the office to native-born citizens seemed like a good idea at the time, but is hopelessly outdated today.

I actually watched Meet the Press, however, and this article's take is misleading. Russert brought the issue up, and Arnold's answer was, essentialy, "Maybe someday, but I'm focusing on my current job right now.".

Arnold has been in elected office for less than 100 days. Any talk of him seeking higher office is hopelessly premature.

EDIT: BTW, I don't buy for a minute that Bush can carry California. What he *can* do is make a surprisingly strong showing in the polling, and force the Democrats to commit more resources to it than they otherwise would... but actually win it? I'm extremely skeptical.

Edited by Javert Rovinski, 22 February 2004 - 12:44 PM.

[Shalamar]

I don't want a constitutional ammendment on that either. I like it just the way it is in regards to who can be president.

And Arne for President...ah...I have grave doubts.

[Nick]

^I didn't realize Madeline Albright was born in Europe.  Question--since she was secretary of state and in "line of sucession" for the presidency should something have happened to those ahead of her, would she have been able to serve or would the line simply skip her?

-Nick

[Rov Judicata]

Nick, on Feb 22 2004, 10:44 AM, said:

^I didn't realize Madeline Albright was born in Europe.  Question--since she was secretary of state and in "line of sucession" for the presidency should something have happened to those ahead of her, would she have been able to serve or would the line simply skip her?

-Nick

I don't think it's ever come up; however, I recall hearing in class that it would skip over her, which is the logical extension of the language in the Constitution.

[DWF]

I guess he's seen Demolition Man too many times.

[G1223]

Personally I do not want the constitution changed.

[Christopher]

On the one hand, I don't think the constitution should be amended lightly.  On the other hand, this is a nation of immigrants; that's always been part of what's defined American culture and identity, however much certain people would like to deny it.  It's a fundamental American principle that being American isn't just about where you're born, it's about what you believe in and what you aspire to.  And often the people who come here from elsewhere and do the work they have to do in order to earn citizenship are more committed to what America means than many of those who are automatically citizens by virtue of birth.  So who says they wouldn't make good presidents?  (Well, I'm not talking about Schwarzenegger specifically here....)

[Rhys]

Javert Rovinski, on Feb 22 2004, 12:45 PM, said:

Nick, on Feb 22 2004, 10:44 AM, said:

^I didn't realize Madeline Albright was born in Europe.  Question--since she was secretary of state and in "line of sucession" for the presidency should something have happened to those ahead of her, would she have been able to serve or would the line simply skip her?

-Nick

I don't think it's ever come up; however, I recall hearing in class that it would skip over her, which is the logical extension of the language in the Constitution.

I read about this sort of thing somewhere (I think it was on an urban legend site, related to a "so-and-so was president for 24 hours" legend).  I'm not sure (not even being American), but I think I recall that the "line of succession" thing, especially beyond the VP, only gives you an "acting president", not an actual president, whereas the constitutional laws on eligibility only affect the actual office of the president.

Under this, Albright could serve as acting president if something happened to those ahead of her in the "line of succession", but would not be sworn in as the de facto president, she would only serve until things could get straightened out as to who would be the next president and they were sworn in.

Rhys

[Nureek]

I'm curious. For those of who are against a foreign born person becoming president, can I ask why?

[Norville]

Quote

The amendment itself is a good idea; restricting the office to native-born citizens seemed like a good idea at the time, but is hopelessly outdated today.

Why? What if there are still some Americans who like the rule as it is and don't want to have foreign-born leaders? I'm afraid I'm one of those. I guess we're hopelessly insular, outdated, prejudiced in some manner.

Of course, if Americans get so dumbed-down that we can't field better native-born politicians, maybe we'll *have* to get some fresh blood to save us... but I don't want it to be Arnold!!

Quote

Arnold's answer was, essentialy, "Maybe someday, but I'm focusing on my current job right now.".

Well, thank God for that. But he didn't marry into the Kennedy family just for fun. I'm pretty sure he thought that if he had enough ambition, and married into the right family, he could go straight to the top. I still don't want him as President.

[Rov Judicata]

Christopher-- Exactly. If the best person for the job happens to have been born in Italy, or England, or Canada, what of it?

Rhys-- That's intriguing. I'll have to look into it some more.

Quote

Norville: Why? What if there are still some Americans who like the rule as it is and don't want to have foreign-born leaders? I'm afraid I'm one of those. I guess we're hopelessly insular, outdated, prejudiced in some manner.

As always, my commentary was my opinion. People are a lot more mobile now, and move-- even across country borders-- much more often. If somebody didn't move here until they were 6, what difference does it make? What about 15? 20? 25? Further, repealing the language gives more choices to the voters, which is always a good thing.

Quote

Norville: Well, thank God for that. But he didn't marry into the Kennedy family just for fun. I'm pretty sure he thought that if he had enough ambition, and married into the right family, he could go straight to the top. I still don't want him as President.

Wow. And I thought I was cynical. . Maybe he, like, fell in love? Or something? And I have serious doubts that Arnold will be president. I'm not even sure he'll manage to get a second term as CA governor.

[G1223]

Nureek  the reasoning is this. The president is born in France  France has a civil war the President has family on the side that a majority of americans does not support and the President sends direct US aid to this side.  Or may be seen as having a bais.

Where if he is an American born preisdent he might do the same thing but not becasue of his feelings for one side or the other. He has no perieved bias.

[Kimmer]

I don't care what the ammendment is -- making changes to the US Constitution should not be taken lightly. I'm of the opinion that if it isn't broke, then don't fix it.

I agree with Rov, I don't think Bush can carry CA. But then I didn't think so many would agree with me on the recall of Davis.

[Norville]

Quote

Wow. And I thought I was cynical. .

Politics does that to me. I see no reason *not* to be cynical when political debate goes along the lines of constant mudslinging and playground name-calling, things like "If you don't adore our President, you're an unAmerican traitor", or the eternal flinging of "liberal!!" if you don't trust Bush, or the constant "And Clinton was so much better?" attacks when I, for one, didn't even like Clinton and don't bring him into the discussion because I'm not interested in defending him. (It's astonishing, yes, but it's possible to dislike *both* Clinton and Bush. )

Quote

Maybe he, like, fell in love? Or something?

That's possible. Everything I've read about him details his intense ambition to be the best at whatever he does, so if he's got into politics, why shouldn't that include an attempt to be President? How convenient that he fell in love with someone from a big-name political family. (Yes, how *very* cynical of me.)

Quote

And I have serious doubts that Arnold will be president. I'm not even sure he'll manage to get a second term as CA governor.

Oh, I'm sure that the Hollywoodites and celebrity worshippers will find some reason to vote him back in.

[G1223]

Actually Kimmer the part about who can hold high office is the document it's self there is no amedment. It would take a amendment tio change it.

[Nureek]

G1223, on Feb 22 2004, 01:44 PM, said:

Nureek  the reasoning is this. The president is born in France  France has a civil war the President has family on the side that a majority of americans does not support and the President sends direct US aid to this side.  Or may be seen as having a bais.

Where if he is an American born preisdent he might do the same thing but not becasue of his feelings for one side or the other. He has no perieved bias.

Ok, good point, but then what about first generation americans or even later who are still very tied to their country of origain and would show the same bias you talk about?

[Rhys]

^

Yeah, being born in the US does not preclude having family outside the US.

Rhys

[Kimmer]

G1223, on Feb 22 2004, 11:13 AM, said:

Actually Kimmer the part about who can hold high office is the document it's self there is no amedment. It would take a amendment tio change it.

I think you misunderstood what I said. I was talking about the proposed ammendment and that I was not in favor of it. I'm aware of the original language of the constitution - just quoted it on another board.

Quote

Article. II.

Section. 1.

Clause 5:  No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States. 

[G1223]

Then we cross that bridge when we get to it.