Constitutional Amendment on Foreign Born Citizens running for President

[in_cog_ni_to]

On C-SPAN's Washington Journal....Orrin Hatch is taking this to the Senate today. It's called the "Arnold Schwarzenegger" amendment. Hatch wants to change the number of years a person should be a citizen, before running for prez...to 14 years instead of 35 years so Arnold can run.

I find this EXTREMELY frightening! Do we really know that Ahhhhnold isn't a spy? Ahhhnold's father was a Nazi! :scared:

What the HELL is Hatch doing bringing this up for debate NOW??? What, the invasion of Iraq isn't enough to worry about? The war in Afghanistan isn't more important? What about the 45 million Americans without health care? Or the millions of people without jobs? Or our Seniors who can't afford their medicine? How about worrying about our Veterans and their benefits being cut??? WHAT THE FUCK ARE THESE PEOPLE IN CONGRESS DOING BRINGING THIS UP FOR A DEBATE NOW?????!!!!! GEEZUSKRIST! :grr: I don't think the American people will EVER go for this. What do you think?

[BlueEyedSon]

1. Don't we really have more important issues in this country?

What are we paying those idiots for!?!?!

[in_cog_ni_to]

5. I honestly don't know

what we're paying them for. I lost faith in our congress people when they kowtowed to this administration and voted for the IWR, the Patriot Act, passed the Medicare bill, and were weasels about being called unpatriotic and lost the mid-term election. We need to clean house in Congress and start anew! They're USELESS!

[slojim240]

52. This is a dangerous, dangerous precedent.

A constitutional amemdment for such frivoulous shit. We have enough qualified Americans to run for office. Fuck Arnie. He is not what you think he is.

[Still_Notafraid]

2. The possibility

Of Arnold becoming president scares me just as much as a Bush re-election,Arnold is not that bright and a bad Governor much like the resident now,on top of the sexism and calling Democrats commies along with his involvement in a white supremacist group for 16 years,this guy is unfit for command even more scary America is dumb enough to elect him.

You will hear things like Arnold becoming president cool!lets elect him this will be fun even some uninformed Dem's would vote for Arnold,I like some of his movies but being president no way!

[Booster]

45. I have seen pictures of Arnold on the internet that no one

would condone much less Pat Robertson and his ilk. I'm no prude and I found these pictures to be embarrassing, so unless a bunch of people change their "values" to the left of liberal, I really don't think Arnold could swing it, adding in the fact that he's not too bright, etc. But I agree that Orin Hatch needs to be working on more important things right now.

[mopaul]

3. fucking nazis are pushy aren't they

karl rove, the two bush presidents, and arnold all have nazi relatives. arnold's dad was one of hitler's ss officers for christ's sake. is this the fucking twilight zone?

[in_cog_ni_to]

14. What the hell are they thinking???

That's what I want to know! Surely they know Arnold's background? He was/is close friends with Kurt Waldheim...

<snip>
A little refresher course may be in order. Kurt Waldheim, a widely esteemed former secretary general of the United Nations, was running for president of Austria in March 1986 when it came to light that he had participated in Nazi atrocities during World War II. Waldheim had always maintained that he had served in the Wehrmacht only briefly and that after being wounded early in the war, he had returned to Vienna to attend law school. In fact, Waldheim had resumed military service after recuperating from his injury and had been an intelligence officer in Germany's Army Group E when it committed mass murder in the Kozara region of western Bosnia. (Waldheim's name appears on the Wehrmacht's "honor list" of those responsible for the atrocity.) In 1944, Waldheim had reviewed and approved a packet of anti-Semitic propaganda leaflets to be dropped behind Russian lines, one of which ended, "enough of the Jewish war, kill the Jews, come over." After the war, Waldheim was wanted for war crimes by the War Crimes Commission of the United Nations, the very organization he would later head. None of these revelations prevented Waldheim from winning the Austrian election, but after he became president, the U.S. Justice Department put Waldheim on its watch list denying entry to "any foreign national who assisted or otherwise participated in activities amounting to persecution during World War II." The international community largely shunned Waldheim, and he didn't run for re-election. (This information comes from the1992 book Betrayal: The Untold Story of the Kurt Waldheim Investigation and Cover-Up, by Eli M. Rosenbaum and William Hoffer.)

One month after these revelations began to splash across the front pages of newspapers worldwide, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Maria Shriver held their wedding reception* at the Kennedy compound in Hyannisport, Mass. Schwarzenegger, a native of Austria, had invited Waldheim to the wedding, which of course can't be held against him because the invitations surely went out well before the war crimes story broke. (Schwarzenegger, who held dual citizenship in Austria and the United States, had also endorsed Waldheim.) Waldheim didn't attend, but he sent a gift—a statue of Arnold, in lederhosen, bearing off Maria, who wore a dirndl. Admiring it, Schwarzenegger offered a tribute that stunned the assemblage into shocked silence (this is reported in Arnold: An Unauthorized Biography, by Wendy Leigh):<snip>


http://www.slate.com/id/2086742/


Schwarzenegger even made a point of mentioning him in his wedding speech, telling his guests: "My friends don't want me to mention Kurt's name because of the recent Nazi stuff - but I love him."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1014601,00.html

[BOSSHOG]

4. Be careful what you ask for Orin

Republicans altered the constitution so a POTUS was limited to two terms (because they hated FDR). Their selfish move limited both IKE & Reagan from seeking 3RD terms. Hatch must believe the GOP has no one born in America whom the citizenry would accept as POTUS (outside the bush family). I can (almost) feel their pain since the GOP hasn't won a presidential election in 16 years.

My prediction: A foreign born liberal democrat will be elected to the presidency in the not too distant future (Governor Grantholm), thanks to such an amendment and the event will be met with howls of derision and patriotic chest pounding by hatchlings from sea to shining sea. Conservatives just can't help having sex with themselves.

[Dookus]

6. Not quite...

currently, NOBODY who isn't born a citizen of the US can run for President, no matter how long they've been a citizen. The current limit on bieng 35 years old to run for President is a different restriction altogether.

I think the amendment is a good idea - it's a silly prohibition. There are plenty of people who have become citizens who should be able to run for President. Forget the individual (Schwarzenegger) and consider the principle - people like Jennifer Granholm and Madeline Albright could also benefit from this.

The restriction is archaic and discriminatory, and should be done away with on principle.

[Quetzal]

8. I concur with Dookus

If Sen. Hatch were a smart politician, he wouldn't name the bill the "Arnold Schwarzenegger" amendment.

[fugue]

12. The restriction even was petty from the start

It was introduced specifically to keep Alexander Hamilton out of the White House. (Hamilton was born in the West Indies.)

[Art_from_Ark]

31. The restriction would not have kept Hamilton out of the White House

First of all, he was a citizen at the time the Constitution was ratified in 1787. Only those born after ratification had to be "natural born" citizens to qualify. Second of all, he was close with James Madison, the "Father of the Constitution", and the two worked closely to get the document ratified. Hamilton was also good friends with George Washington, who was instrumental in having the Constitutional Convention gain acceptance by the public.

The restriction was put in because the founding fathers did not want a repeat of the "musical monarchs" game that was being played in Europe in which, for example, King George I, former Elector of Hanover, was invited to become King of England even though he spoke no English and had only a distant connection with the country.

[fugue]

49. Have you got a reference for that?

It's just that I've been told what I posted by several history teachers. That doesn't mean it isn't wrong, but I'd like something a little more solid than an internet post before I discard it as erroneous. ^_^

[Art_from_Ark]

86. Here's a biography of Hamilton to get you started

http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/B/hamilton/hamilxx.htm

Hamilton, one of three delegates to represent his state of New York, was quite a luminary at the Constitutional Convention. That doesn't mean that he was universally popular, as exemplified by the fact that his Hamilton Plan was rejected in favor of the Virginia Plan (in large part because Hamilton favored a sort of President-for-life, which smacked too much of a monarch in different clothing). However, he was very close to George Washington and James Madison, two people who were extremely instrumental in getting the Constitutional Convention started, getting the Constitution hammered out, and getting it ratified. It is extremely doubtful that they would have agreed to a clause that was put in specifically to keep one man-- their friend and colleague-- out of the running for the presidency.

Of course, there has been some debate about that mystical comma in Article II, which states "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." However, the historical information I have found on this generally interprets this clause to mean that if one was a citizen of a State at the time of ratification, one was eligible to serve as president if the other conditions were met. Persons born after ratification, when the United States emerged in its present form, would have to be "natural born".

If there was a question about the nature of his citizenship, Hamilton, whose exact birthplace (or birth-date, for that matter) has never been ascertained, could easily have said that he had been born in, say, Georgia, and moved to the West Indies in his early childhood, and none would have been the wiser. Regardless of the nature of his birth, however, he was, at the time of the convention, a citizen of New York, and would have been able to fulfill the residency requirement.

And, as I have mentioned before, it would have been doubtful that either Washington or Madison would have allowed a clause aimed at disallowing Hamilton from becoming President, into the Constitution.

What is a much more logical explanation is the anti-monarchy mood that was in evidence at the Convention. The monarchs of Europe were notorious for intermarrying, and conducting affairs of State that were not necessarily in the best interests of their subjects. King George III himself was actually King of England and Elector of Hanover, and his wife was a German princess, Charlotte of Mecklenburg. George III used his offices and influence as absentee Elector to obtain Hessian soldiers for his war against the colonies. What would happen if a member of a European royal family decided to come to America and win the Presidency only about a third of Americans at the time actually detested King George III, after all)? Not doubt it would result in some sort of alliance with one European monarchy or another, with the possible result of Americans being sent overseas to fight in in a war that had nothing to do with their country. Washington warned about this indirectly in his Farewell Address, and Jefferson warned against starting "entangling alliances" with other countries http://www.amforeignpolicy.bravepages.com/AFP14.html . What better way to start an "entangling alliance" with another country than to have royalty from that country govern the United States?

[fugue]

88. Thanks!

I do want to have my facts right. Thanks much for helping me get it straight!

[DavidDvorkin]

13. Right you are, Dookus

As an immigrant myself, I've always found that prohibition absurd and offensive.

[shoelace414]

19. and...

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.

you can be born in US, leave to go to France for 20 years, and come back
for 14 years and become pres.

[MADem]

68. You actually CAN be born overseas

...if your parents were abroad on official business. If your parent was working at an embassy or on active duty in the Armed Forces, you are considered born in the US. If however, your family was on holiday, you do not qualify.

[Gore1FL]

81. Are you sure?

If however, your family was on holiday, you do not qualify.

I don't think this is accurate -- If both parents are citizens you are natural born no matter where the water breaks.

I may be wrong, but it is my understanding the parent citizenship counts the same as being within the national borders.

[RivetJoint]

82. No, it does not

In fact the law was changed within the last twenty years to allow for children of service members born overseas to be eligible for the Presidency, and it was NOT retroactive. I have two good friends, both children of American citizens (Dads were in the military), who were born overseas in US military hospitals in 1960 (one in Japan and one in Libya) who can never be President.

[Art_from_Ark]

87. Title 8 of the U.S. Code

Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"

* Anyone born inside the United States
* Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
* Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
* Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
* Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
* Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
* Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
* A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.


Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President. These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example.

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html

[SoCalDem]

46. I would subcribe to it if it was a 45 yr residency

The place you "grow up" forms a lot of who you are and what you think. For someone who grew up in a foreign country, learned foreign history and customs, it would be diffivult to fully "understand" all there is about America that makes us different.

A person who was born elsewhere, but attended junior high, high school and college here, would be a very different American than someone who came here as an adult, learned the test, and became an American..

45 year residency should cover it. There has been only one (Kennedy??) president who was under 45, anyway..

[deadmessengers]

54. Presidents under 45.

Teddy Roosevelt was 41 when he became President following the death of William McKinley.

Also, wasn't Bill Clinton 45 when he took office?

[MADem]

67. I'd maybe go for a 35 year residency

After all, natural born Americans cannot take office unless they are at least 35 years of age. If we have to spend 35 years getting the picture, so should everyone else!

But I am conflicted about the issue, I have to admit. We are sometimes too quick to screw with the Constitution. I'd like to see a long, drawn out discussion of all the issues before I flat out made up my mind. My biggest concern is divided loyalty.

[Forkboy]

89. What Dookus said

:thumbsup:

[sam sarrha]

7. trading jobs for foreign Politicians.. it is only right..they own us..they

lead us..

[fugue]

9. It's not just 35 years of citizenship

Currently, you must be born in the US and be at least thirty-five years of age to be president. If you were born elsewhere, came here at the age of one, and became a citizen at eight, you still couldn't run for president at forty-three. You could never be president, not unless there is a Constitutional amendment to change that.

[cheezus]

35. well, that should be the change

35 years of citizenship, born here or not.


seems fair to me

[unblock]

10. point out we could have a mexican-born prez and the repugs will drop it

or "worse", an AFRICAN-born prez!

[mopaul]

17. hevvin ferBID

we cain't have that!...............(sarc.)

[teryang]

11. Oral Hatch wants Schwanzenegger n/t

[Booster]

47. We should find all of the pictures of Arnold in orgies, etc

and send them to Hatch - Hell, I can hear the gasping now.

[fishface]

15. Won't happen...

this assclown should retire while he can still talk without drooling.
It's just the morons trying to capitalize in Auuunaulds popularity.

[OneTwentyoNine]

16. Honestly ,is Arnold Schwarzenegger the GOP best bet in the coming years??

Then their in trouble anyway. The groopanator got elected in California in a flim-flam ,get rid of Davis at all costs election. So what? Do Repukes really think that Schwarzenegger is Presidential material?? Bawhahhaa.....


David

[NewJeffCT]

36. Arnold is still very popular in California

Be careful what you wish for - Arnold is still very popular in California on both sides of the aisle. Yes, it was an Enron induced flim-flam to get Davis out. But, Arnold was elected in a landslide in a state that has a large Democratic majority.


If Bush wins this year, Arnold may be their best shot at beating Hillary in 2008, though I don't think the amendment could pass that quickly. Doesn't it have to first pass the Senate & House and then go to state legislatures?

[OneTwentyoNine]

40. It can take years to fully ratify even if it gets 2/3rds

Take a look at how long it took for all 50 states to finally repeal Prohibition. But...I'd find it very hard to believe that they could get 2/3rds on letting someone not born in the US run for President.

I just don't see this happening.

David

[NewJeffCT]

50. I agree

2/3 of the people in the Senate want to run for President - do you think they'd vote to allow somebody else to do it, too?

[bobbyboucher]

91. Hardly a landslide. You cannot use "traditional" descriptions when

talking about that clusterfuck that was our last election. So "landslide" doesn't really qually. More like shitslide.

[noiretextatique]

93. he is not "very popular" here, and he was not

elected in a "landslide."

[Wright Patman]

18. Schwarzenegger

was pictured at an English country estate of one of the Rothschilds sometime in the spring of 2002, IIRC. He is the puppet-in-waiting for the power elite and has enough money himself that he is an honorary member of that same elite.

At times I think they should just bring back royalty rather than the sham contests between "competing" bluebloods that we have every four years.

If people constantly heard it referenced that "King George" was ruling over us in the White House, it might bring on the revolution. Worked the first time.

[olddem43]

20. Let's make this change and also remove the 2-term limit.

That way we can have Swartzenegger against the Big Dog. No contest.

[in_cog_ni_to]

21. I LIKE that!

The Big Dog would be our Prez forever! I could live with that!

[bloom]

37. We might just get Bush, Bush and more Bush...n/t

[progressivejazz]

22. One simple alteration would change this debate.

We should demand that the amendment not apply to anyone alive at the time of the its passage. Then both the Republicans and Democrats could talk about it without the distraction of Arnold or anybody else.

Of course, they wouldn't talk about it at all then. And could get around to doing some real business for the American people (as if the Republicans would let that happen).

[neebob]

23. I thought it was extremely frightening

when Hatch first brought it up, not long after Arnold announced his candidacy.

As for what the American people will go for, look what they've already gone for.

[CornField]

24. Wait... wait ... wait... Didn't Pickles say

That our Constitution is a "perfect document"? I swear I heard that... right there at the RNC... in between the neocons bouncing off the backs of our nation's dead.

Tell me, if our Constitution is so freaking perfect, why all the rush to go changing it?

[Dorian Gray]

33. Oh, God... I may be defending her

But, I also think that it's a perfect document. Primarily because it DOES allow for change.

Whether she meant it that way or not, God only knows. But, it's how I see it...

[AngryAmish]

25. I think it would be a good idea

But not for anyone currently eligible under the new rules.

For example, if someone comes here at age six and lives here the entire time, the "born in" rule would seem unfair. The provision was to keep pro-British folks from getting in power and returning us to colonial status.

Just rig it so Arnold can't run.

[Cheswick2.0]

26. I like the constitution exactly the way it is

There are plenty of people who can't run for President for whatever reason, people who were born and lived here all their lives. There are people who have lost their rigth to vote due to racism and class warfare. I have no problem with people not born in this country not being able to run either. Life sucks and I could care less of Granholm, Ah-nold or joe blow down the street gets to run for President.

[Jose Diablo]

27. When is Hatch up for reelection, he needs to be dumped n/t

[yella_dawg]

28. Are we so desperate for Presidential material

that we have to look to naturalized citizens to find a decent prez? This is a dumb reason to amend the Constitution. Let's save amendments for something important, and not go making changes every time a swell new idea pops up. Screw Arnold anyway.

[trapper914]

29. Is George Soros a U.S. Citizen?

nt

[onecitizen]

30. Actually, this issue has been ongoing for

some time now. Orin started this thing about 2 years ago. We commented then "what's he up to?" because at that time, arnold hadn't been mentioned at all for Gov. It was before the recall and all.

But doncha think it was good to see that only one or two calls in favor, the rest were against it? The article Cspan was reading from though did mention that Pelosi was sort of OK with it but stated she thought the person should be here for 35 years as opposed to the 14-20 year pre-requisite that is being suggested now. Thanx Nanc!

[in_cog_ni_to]

32. I WAS relieved to hear the callers.

For once I agreed with most of them.

[TexasSissy]

34. Because if the Dems get Senate or the W.H., it'll never become law.

They have to do it now.

[bloom]

38. I think as long as the Republicans rule

...it could pass.


I think it's quite a bad idea - just because they like one guy - to change the constitution.

I think he fits the Republican marketing scheme (pleasure, arousal, domination) - the manly man (who doesn't care if he abuses women).

:puke:

[Cat Atomic]

39. Talk about cynical and insulting.

They're saying two things with this proposal:

1. Changing the Constitution is no big deal. We'll do it whenever it's convenient for the Republican Party- even if it isn't necessary.

2. The American public is so intensely stupid that we need only run shallow, plastic, charisma-bots like Arnold Schwarzeneggar.

I can't stand the way Republicans just walk all over the Constitution whenever it's convenient. The proposed Gay Marriage Ammendment, this "Scwarzeneggar Ammendment"... it's just insulting.

[Vickers]

41. I'm all for it, with one exception: they are disqualified if you are able

to locate photos of their genitals on the internet.

:spank:

[Democracy Died 2004]

42. God people don't be Moran's

Every time they are in trouble it's more constitutional amendments. This is a topic that shouldn't even see the light of day.
"Ignore that man behind the curtain"

[Jim Sagle]

43. This amendment ain't nuthin' but Nazi filth.

Those of you who support it should snap out of it. To fquote Randi, your "principles" are too expensive.

[Dookus]

59. snap out of what?

I've supported such amendment for decades. It has nothing to do with the people involved.

What I find bothersome is so many people decide how they feel on the POLICY according to the individuals involved.

It's an archaic, unnecessary form of discrimination. There's no need for it anymore.

[Jim Sagle]

62. If Ahnold runs he wins and America dies. Your principles take second place

to that.

[Dookus]

70. nonsense

My principle doesn't take into account the individuals involved. This kind of archaic and petty discrimination is wrong.

[Jim Sagle]

71. I rate our survival over your opinions any day of the week.

[Dookus]

72. A bit overly dramatic, no?

I think Alan Keyes, if elected, would hurt my country. Does that mean we should outlaw African-Americans from running for President?

Discrimination is wrong. This clause is archaic and unnecessary.

[Jim Sagle]

73. This is basic nationalism, not discrimination. I'm all for it.

[Dookus]

74. Well

it seems to me you're not looking at all at the principle of this, and only looking at one possible outcome: a Schwarzenegger presidency.

Do you honestly believe, in your heart, that NO person who is not a natural-born citizen of the US is capable of being a good President?

On edit: Further, I find "nationalism" one of the most horrible attributes of mankind.

[Jim Sagle]

75. Your principle is not the same as mine.

"There ain't no good guy, there ain't no bad guy, we just disagree."
Ahahhh...there's nothing like good old 70s shlock.

[RivetJoint]

83. Yeah, but you are wrong...

[Jim Sagle]

85. Opionion, not fact. I wouldn't stake our national existence on it.

[Forkboy]

90. "Your principle is not the same as mine."

Well,that's obvious :eyes:

[Jim Sagle]

76. self-delete - dupe

[TankLV]

78. I totally disagree.

I will never agree to change the constitution.

It's a good rule.

You are wrong on this one.

[slaveplanet]

92. This whole exercise

is just a ruse to get a Con Con going so they can rework the Constitution ...the same reason they'd love to get a Con Con started over flag burning...any way you slice it , this is dangerous and COMPLETELY unnecessary, we the citizens will be the losers once again - Wake the F up!...If we can't find a qualified individual from the crop of Natural born US citizens then we don't deserve a President or Constitution at all.....

[beyurslf]

44. I personally see nothing wrong with requiring someone to be a natural born

citizen. (By the way, that is what the Constitution requires, not 35 years of citizenship like this post says.)

It bars Arnold and it bars Gov Granholm. So be it though. There are plenty of qualified people on both sides who are natural born citizens who can run.

And the prohibition on temrs is an EXCELLENT idea. I would have loved to see Clinton run again. But would anyone here have wanted Reagan again? Or Bush for 12 or 16 years? The power to nominate SC Justices and other Federal Judges for life is too great for someone who is in power for more than 8 years.

[Cleita]

48. I read about this back during the Davis recall.

I really don't know what it is about Arnold that he wants him as President. And yes, he specifically said he was bring up this ammendment so Arnold could be President.

I mean Arnold is a Catholic. Orrin is a Mormon. Orrin was up in the forefront of the Monica's stained blue dress impeachment of Clinton because of his lack of morals. Arnold is far more immoral in the Christian biblical sense than Clinton ever was.

I really do fear what they are up to. Could it be it is their way of telling us proletariats that they can do anything they want to and we have no power to stop them?

[Beam Me Up]

51. Son of Nazi head of FIFTH LARGEST ECONOMY IN THE WORLD

*AND* he was PLACED in power by manipulations from the energy companies. What does this tell you, folks?

This MUST be stopped.

[dave123williams]

53. BILL CLINTON VS AAAAAHNOLD!

We'll give up the 22nd ammendment, if they give up Article 2.

[deadmessengers]

55. (snif)

We can only dream. 4 more years of peace and prosperity? Bring it on.

[Cleita]

56. Fantastic idea.

Let's do it. Cancel out the 22nd ammendment.

[dave123williams]

57. Not mine,unfortunately...

I heard it on Maher last week, but thought it pretty brilliant. Mostly because the Governator is a Liberal in Conservative clothing...

[Cleita]

64. He's only liberal where his penis is concerned.

Other than that he treats his wife like a child and other women as toys. He's not an environmentalist and he's very fascist in many of his ideas like saying stuff that people need to be told what is good for them.

Not only that he's dumber than shit about a lot of history and science, I do think he doesn't know whom he has thrown his allegiance to. Never, ever confuse being crafty with being intelligent.

[autorank]

58. The constitution is now just fine. Leave it alone!

The framers, in their infinite wisdom, anticipated that a 'major league asshole' would cross the Atlantic from Austria one day and try to become President of these great United States of America. The specifically placed this language in the Constitution to keep that anticipated asshole from ever being elected. Their acuity in judgment and prescience must be respected. No to any change. A* can just go back to Austria, where is is no longer well regarded, and run for mayor of
Forchtenstein.

[Morning Dew]

60. We can talk about that amendment and the marriage one after

we pass the ERA.

I'm just sayin', yanno?

[Columbia]

61. No, we should never even entertain an anti-gay marriage amendment

[Morning Dew]

63. Oh, you're absolutely right...

But passing the ERA before even discussing anything else would make a repuke's head explode.

[ibegurpard]

65. I MIGHT be convinced to support something like this

in a different political climate, where the politicians have respect for tradition and the system of checks and balances built into our government. No way will I support it right now and I can't see any time in the near future where I would change my mind.

[dave502d]

66. The way it looks to me we already have bunch of Foreign ruining are country

[Steelangel]

69. In any case,

I prefer to not let Arnold to be a president. he is the worse governor in history, IMHO.

I am a hardcore Californian and I HATE him. as some people here stated that he is a moron and I agree on that.

in_cog_ni_to, I believe people will go for this due to Reagan. And as you can notice, many people practically are ranting about how wonderful and how so-called manly Arnold is. *vomits*

[tjwash]

77. In the meantime the smoke and mirrors continues.

We are being blasted by commercials by Arnie on the "evil Indian casinos", while in the past month he has vetoed the minimum wage increase, the outsourcing bill, two pieces of gun control legislation, a prescription drug disclosure bill, a bill to limit car dealer markups, and a bill to increase access to lower-cost Canadian drugs.

And those are just off the top of my head...

[Julien Sorel]

79. Those of you who think Hillary or Granholm or Edwards

could beat Arnold should look at an electoral map, and then put California in the red column -- then tell me how easy it would be for someone to beat him. Take away some of the funding Democrats get from Hollywood and the movie industry, then tell me how easy it would be for someone to beat him. Imagine the number of Hollywood people who would be out campaigning for him, then tell me how easy it would be to beat him.

It's perverse that Republicans, the party of the strict Constitutionalists like Scalia, are trying to change that document for the sake of one man with a checkered past. It sets a bad precedent. If they want the change, then they should want it for its own sake, not because of Arnold or any other individual. Take away their payoff, make it non-retroactive, then see how hot they are for this amendment. They would drop it in 10 seconds flat. This is simply gross political opportunism, and the Constitution should be above that.

The country has taken enough shocks in the past few years; it doesn't need a constitutional fight, followed by the ugly spectacle that would certainly be a Schwarzenegger campaign, what with his womanizing, his harassment, his lack of experience and education, his drugs, his nude pictures -- it would be a circus. Leave that shit to Italy, please. This country should be above it.

[Zero Division]

80. I find it hard to believe Arnold would make it past the Repub primaries

All that needs to be done is to stir up the Christian Right and Arnold's chances would be finished. California Republicans may be capable of choosing a socially liberal Repub, but it's hard to imagine on the national level.

This particular Constitutional requirement for President makes no sense in America today.

[ProfessorGAC]

84. I'm Opposed

I don't find the requirement of being a native born American a burden to political amibition. There are gigantic barriers to 99% of all folks to getting into any form of political life, mostly the cost, however.

This is a minor impediment to becoming president compared to the huge economic ones faced by 250 million other americans.

It's not worth considering. It's not worth changing.
The Professor

[venus]

94. This is probably the scariest thing going on

right now; and that's sayin' something. If the Dems give in this time ..... I just don't know what I'll do.

[K-W]

95. They really think Arnold is Reagan dont they?

Ammending the constitution just so the man can run... they think he is the second coming of the gipper.