Schwarzenegger for president?

should the President of the United States be born in the United States?

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah says no and want to change the laws of the land!


anybody remember a stalone movie "demolition man". through the course of conversation sandra bullock mentions the "Schwarzenegger Libary", when sly is surprised at this she explained how arnold entered politics and an amendment was passed allowing forign born people to run for president and he was elected weeelll...you dont have to remember the movie. here it is:

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040222/D80SGGIG0.html

The Republican governor said anyone who has been a U.S. citizen for at least 20 years - as he has - should "absolutely" be able to seek the presidency. A constitutional amendment proposed by Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, would make that possible.

well it's your country Tedob - I'd say it's up to the people to decide what you want. If Arnie makes a good politician (and I'm not saying he does or doesn't) then I'd go with what works best. Sometimes it is right to change the process of how things work, but thats only something you guys can decide.

Don't immigrants to the US have to swear allegiance to the state etc or something when they get their green card (could be off base here so feel free to correct me)? If you do then I can't see why a non natural born american should be treated any differently from a natural born american.....

just my 2p

Z

Zone I feel the idea of having a president that is native born is for two reasons, one they care about the country, and two they have the countries best intrests at heart. Although this has not been the case with the current administration most previous presidents have cared and tried in the countries intrest. Would you like the UK to be run by an Australian or a South African? Maybe it is just tradition that makes it so strongly rooted, but either way, do not just do it for Arnold. Since I can not vote and therefor have no say I will be in a world of other peoples choices which pisses me off to no end. The other problem is it is really hard to undo a bad thing, no matter how bad... especially laws.

-Cheers-

A “republican” from Utah wanting to toss out the natural birth requirement for presidency? I would be inclined to leave the tradition alone. One could argue that it's politically correct to give every one who is a citizen in this country equal opportunity to lead it. One could also argue the sovereignty of this country is better protected by those born under the constitution whom they are charged to respect on protect. I will tend to align with our fore fathers on this one. To my knowledge constitutional amendments aren’t up for public vote. If they were I would vote no. The children of all those great citizens that hail from differing nations of the world will have the ability to make changes and lead the country. I think the authors of the constitution considered the world a very hostile place (politically), like it is now.

I don't see justification that a man or woman who lives in Israel or anyplace - let's just throw some countries out there.... India, Japan, Cuba, Argentina, etc - could live in that country for their entire young adult lives, let’s say 30 years of age and come here and run for president when they are 50. How can an American citizen know his history with accuracy and compare his political alignment in the home country with that of American politics? 30 years of age or even 40 would have some very powerful connections and opinions that may not align with the best nature of America as a country on it's own principal. I think the requirement for a nation's most powerful leader to be a natural born citizen is respectable.

I don't care who the candidate is or how long they have lived in the US, to change the rules is incredibly shortsighted. This particular part of the constitution helps to shield the US from political tampering by foreign nations and while Mr. Schwarzenegger may pose no particular threat, who is to say that by opening Pandora's box, that the next person that would run would not be a threat?

Just yet another example of how this once great republic is slowly falling apart under the weight of it having become a decadent empire.

lol Nebulus, people are just raising the subject. Have to wonder, what is the motivation for that move by Sen. Hatch?? America is filled with foreign nationals who may not see the implications of not limiting the nations most powerful position to those born on this soil. I tried to place it in perspective, but just thought of something else.... what if G.W. became Chancelor of Germany or Bill Clinton Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. Put that in perspective. :D

Quote:

---

I feel the idea of having a president that is native born is for two reasons, one they care about the country, and two they have the countries best intrests at heart.

---

Silver- I appreciate that but that was kind of my point about asking if when you get your green card you have to swear allegiance to the country - i.e. you forsake all other allegiences to other countries and agree to serve the best interests of the country you live in. I thought in the US you did have to swear allegiance to the country but I may be wrong....

Quote:

---

who is to say that by opening Pandora's box, that the next person that would run would not be a threat?

---

neb - thats very true... but who's to say that a natural born american is not going to try and screw up your country?? You gotta admit that the US has its fair share of folks with very weird ideas (not that you're alone in that respect!) They don't have to be born outside of the US to be able to do screw the country... incidentally are you familiar with Roman history and the fall of the republic then by any chance?? ;)

I'm not saying that you as a country should do this thing by the way....

Haven't got time to explain myself atthe moment but hopefully I'll come back to this later tonight....

Z

The Constitution allows a native born American to run for president, even if he moves abroad with his parents when he is 6 months old, moves back to the US when he is 40 and tries to run for president at 41. Bet the founding fathers didn't think about that :D

It's in the Constitution, and a constitution is what makes a country. Changing it is not done, imo.
Arnold will have to wait for Arnie Jr.
They should make an exception for Belgians, though...

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Zonewalker
Silver- I appreciate that but that was kind of my point about asking if when you get your green card you have to swear allegiance to the country - i.e. you forsake all other allegiences to other countries and agree to serve the best interests of the country you live in. I thought in the US you did have to swear allegiance to the country but I may be wrong....



neb - thats very true... but who's to say that a natural born american is not going to try and screw up your country?? You gotta admit that the US has its fair share of folks with very weird ideas (not that you're alone in that respect!) They don't have to be born outside of the US to be able to do screw the country... incidentally are you familiar with Roman history and the fall of the republic then by any chance?? ;)

I'm not saying that you as a country should do this thing by the way....

Haven't got time to explain myself atthe moment but hopefully I'll come back to this later tonight....

Z

---

True enough, someone from the US could run with less than altruistic motives (oh wait, they all already do :) ); however, having lived their entire life in the US, chances are alot higher, that should there be any major skeletons in the closet, they would all be common knowledge and that the risk of a foreign government's influence upon a candidate would be less if they were native citizens (although there is already a great deal of influence from other nations underneath the surface). With that being said, what Negative has said has a great deal of validity and I would have to think on that one a little harder :)

And yes, I am quite familiar with Roman history (hence the reference to the fall of a republic to the decadance of an empire).

Quote:

---

True enough, someone from the US could run with less than altruistic motives (oh wait, they all already do ); however, having lived their entire life in the US, chances are alot higher, that should there be any major skeletons in the closet, they would all be common knowledge and that the risk of a foreign government's influence upon a candidate would be less if they were native citizens (although there is already a great deal of influence from other nations underneath the surface). With that being said, what Negative has said has a great deal of validity and I would have to think on that one a little harder

And yes, I am quite familiar with Roman history (hence the reference to the fall of a republic to the decadance of an empire).

---

you make a fair point and certainly I'm not going to entirely disagree with you... but there are people not born in the US who would absolutely love to contribute to American society. If such people are willing to swear allegience to the US and do the best they can for the country then why not give them the chance to better the US. Strength can come from diversity and the ability to adapt quickly, US history itself is part proof of that, so why limit yourselves?

As I said earlier I'm not suggesting that you guys should make such a change to your constitution but on the other hand I don't think you should totally dismiss it (I'm not saying you should do it for Arnie either... but maybe someone else?).

As far as influence from other nations.. true, but every country is influenced by other countries ... thats part of being a global community and is not something you'll ever get away from unless America completely isolates itself from the world... and I really don't think that'd be in your best interests in the long run.

I had guessed you were familiar with Roman history - the comments about the Republic and the decadence of the empire were precisely what gave it away :)

Oh yeah... someone asked how I would feel if the UK was run by an Australian or South African... (Silver bullet it was you wasn't it).... well..... the UK monarchy is half German with Greek influence anyway so I think thats already happened to an extent (I realise we're not strictly a monarchy anymore but it illustrates my point). Actually apparently the true heir to the throne is actually an Earl who moved to Australia and is now a republican (I had to laugh when I found that one out).... anyway seriously.... how would I feel... if the person in charge was doing the right thing for the country and the people living in it I couldn't give a damn if they were from Mars - they could hardly do worse than previous or current governments.

Z

arnie for pres i dont know about. well actually i do. i dont think the law should be changed but its just too bad this restiction keeps him from having colin powells job. we could bombard an unfriendly counrty with terminator movies then send him in to talk.

Obviously an American issue, for Americans to decide, but I would comment:

1. The nationality of the head of state becomes more important in proportion to the amount of personal power that they hold. As I understand it, your President can authorise a nuclear war.....................our Prime Minister cannot?

2. The President is elected in his own right, so is not subject to the constraints of a cabinet and party, unlike a lot of Prime Ministers around the World?

Cheers

I am a native born citizen, my mother was not. I take a lot of things for granted. My mother didn't. My mother was more proud and caring of America than most native borns of my generation (I'm 45).

I would think at a certain point a naturalized citizen should be allowed the right to run for president.

It wouldn't involve changing the constitution entirely, there would have to be an ammendment. If we didn't change our constitution in the past only white men would be voting, amongst other changes.

Our constitution is a living document, times and issues change, ammendments can be made.

The guy hasn't even fixed California and he is already wanting to be president! That's certainly eyeing a long term goal. :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by RoadClosed
The guy hasn't even fixed California and he is already wanting to be president! That's certainly eyeing a long term goal. :)

---

I was just going to mention that! Most of the stuff he has proposed (besides the reduction in DMV fees - which I still havent recieved my check) is going to be on the ballot in two weeks.

just a little thought. Is it not also true that even if someone is born from amercian parents but outside the United states then they too are unable to run for president even thought they have been americian all their life. So the question is not even if the person is from americain parents but if they are phsyically born in the united states. As far as i know anyone born in the united states has the right to run for president it has nothing to do with nationality. I could be totally wrong but that is the impression I get from my girlfriend who is americain.

If someone is Born from American parents, even outside the USA, that baby IS a US Citizen. In some cases they may also be eligible for dual Citizenship in the host country. It happens all the time.

I may be wrong here. But I think that you cannot have held a dual citizenship and be elected president. I know this is true for US military members applying for a Security Clearance. Then again, if applied for under normal circumstances, Clinton would not have been eligible for a clearance high enough to clean the toilets in the White House.

Babies are born outside the US all the time but I think most parents elect forfeiture of dual citizenship and not many countries even offer it. I would guess you are correct about not being able to hold the office of presidency if you were a dual citizen, but then again by the time you reach that age, even the one's who do offer dual citizenship, set expiration dates on the privilege. To my knowledge it isn't forever in a lot of cases and I definitely remember some friends telling me they had to choose before the child reaches a certain age.

My question which wasnt very clear is to become president does the person have to be born on american soil? I am not sure that it is a question of dual citizenship. When that part of the consitution was written i dont think that was even a question. I think as has been mentioned above the idea was only someone who was born in the country could de trusted enough to become president.

AH I see your point. To my knowledge the baby does not have to be born on US soil. The instant the baby is born in a foreign country, he or she is a US citizen and his or her parents can go to the embassy and get a passport. Based on that, I would say there is not requirement to be born on the soil. For example, perhaps the child was born in England when his mother and father are there working at the state dept. Maybe his dad is a diplomat. That child would not be ineligable to be president in my understanding. I wonder if there was ever a president or an issue in the past that could clear it up. I bet Negative could find it. :)

edit// actually there are many resources. Heres is the first I found...

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-an...?msg_id=00A5Do

An interesting read and for once fairly clear. So apperantly the only real condition is to be a natural born citizen. Great we can start planning the political career of any children we have. :)

Quote:

---

AH I see your point. To my knowledge the baby does not have to be born on US soil. The instant the baby is born in a foreign country, he or she is a US citizen and his or her parents can go to the embassy and get a passport. Based on that, I would say there is not requirement to be born on the soil. For example, perhaps the child was born in England when his mother and father are there working at the state dept. Maybe his dad is a diplomat. That child would not be ineligable to be president in my understanding. I wonder if there was ever a president or an issue in the past that could clear it up. I bet Negative could find it.

---

State departments and such are considered part of the country that occupies it on loan from the country that it is in. It does qualify as US soil.

-Cheers-

Very true state departments are American soil, in fact you may still pay American income tax depending on the situation. But babies aren't born in state department buildings, they are born in local hospitals. :) The same rules apply to persons on vacations. And in a lot of places that baby has the option of citizenship of either country.

Arnold would make a good president bcuz he is against gay marriages, ecspically rosie o'donnel and her lesbian lover! send all the gays to canada so the future textbooks say "2005: gays sent to canada", and even "in 2089: canada's population dies out because of the gayness. thats y arnold would be a good president even though hes not american.