Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Do you support amending the Constitution so Arnold can run for President?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Lone_Gunman, Nov 17, 2004.

?

Should foreign-born individuals be able to run for U.S. President?

  1. Yes, non-native citizens should be eligible for the office of President.

    9 vote(s)
    4.9%
  2. No, presidents should be native U.S. citizens.

    173 vote(s)
    95.1%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Lone_Gunman

    Lone_Gunman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,056
    Location:
    United Socialist States of Obama
    Just curious what everyone thinks about this... I am pretty skeptical myself. For one thing, Arnold should be a Democrat, not Republican. Our present system requiring Presidents to be naturally born citizens has worked out pretty well, why change it?

    Check out this site...

    http://amendforarnold.com/

    I think there is going to be a bigger push for this over the next couple of years...
     
  2. El Rojo

    El Rojo Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    2,541
    Location:
    The People's Republik of **********
    If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it. I like Arnold in California, but we don't need him nation wide.
     
  3. molonlabe

    molonlabe Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2004
    Messages:
    873
    Location:
    Mountaineer country WV
    Maybe California will vote for a movie star. I doubt the rest of the red states will.
     
  4. Tag

    Tag Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Messages:
    599
    Location:
    Marquette, Michigan
    How long has Arnold been living here? That "OR a Citizen of the United States" bit has me thinking he's already eligible... I'm sure there is more to it though.

    I wouldn't vote for him
     
  5. 41mag

    41mag Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,021
    Location:
    western mi
  6. Kaylee

    Kaylee Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,749
    Location:
    The Last Homely House
    Absolutely not. Changing the constitution for one man is just.... silly.

    And Tag... that line only means someone not born a Citizen WHO WAS A CITIZEN AT THE TIME OF RATIFICATION could hold the office. I don't think Arnold was around then. :)
     
  7. redhead

    redhead Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    278
    Location:
    Pleasant Hill, CA
    No. I think it's a bad idea. If Arnold can run, then so can George Soros. And how foolish is it to tinker with the Constitution for one man? What an ego.
     
  8. 2nd Amendment

    2nd Amendment member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,929
    Location:
    Indiana
    No! And did I mention HELL NO!
     
  9. cslinger

    cslinger Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    4,435
    Location:
    Nashville, TN
    Ummm I'm going to lean towards Hell No. Nothing against Ah'nold but I don't like tinkering with the Constitution, especially for one man.

    Chris
     
  10. OF

    OF Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    2,988
    No.
     
  11. FPrice

    FPrice Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    3,380
    Location:
    People's Commonwealth of Massachusetts
  12. Henry Bowman

    Henry Bowman Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    6,717
    Location:
    Cincinnati, Ohio
  13. Dave R

    Dave R Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    3,628
    Location:
    Idaho
    No way.
     
  14. George S.

    George S. Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,117
    Location:
    Western WA
    Absoultely not! It would be too easy for some group to move a person into this country and build some sort of political power base around him and portray him as being good for the country and then come to find out that foreign power brokers are behind him.

    It would, of course, require amending the Constitution to allow this to happen. IMHO, the Founding Fathers clearly intended the country to be run by its native sons. Too many years of rule by the English who sent their people over to control the country was the basis for requireing that the President be native born.
     
  15. WT

    WT Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,985
    No.

    The Founding Fathers put that requirement into The Constitution for a reason. They knew what they were doing.
     
  16. TimRB

    TimRB Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    Messages:
    922
    Location:
    CA
    "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

    How long has Arnold been living here? That "OR a Citizen of the United States" bit has me thinking he's already eligible... I'm sure there is more to it though."

    -------------

    The clause "at the time of the adoption of this constitution" modifies the "or a citizen..." part. Some of the founding fathers were not born here, so they had to put in a provision that would allow them to be president.

    Tim
     
  17. HankB

    HankB Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    5,211
    Location:
    Central Texas
    No.

    The Constitution was written the way it was in order to check undue foreign influence. It's a good provision.

    The more I think about it, the more I think I want to change my answer.

    HELL NO!
     
  18. mtnbkr

    mtnbkr Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    3,108
    Location:
    Manassas, Va
    NO!!! on Ahhnold and NO to amending the Constitution for any other non-natural born citizen.

    Chris
     
  19. MikeK

    MikeK Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    607
    Location:
    MD
    Absolutely NOT!
     
  20. Outrigger

    Outrigger Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    60
    Location:
    Vermont
  21. SMLE

    SMLE Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2003
    Messages:
    1,399
    Location:
    Albuquerque New Mexico
    NO! NO! NO!

    I just went to the link in the first post and voiced my opposition. We need to bury these twits in protest e-mails. :cuss:
     
  22. dav

    dav Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    535
    Location:
    San Diego, PRK
    No. Absolutely No.

    Um, molonlabe, what do you think Ronald Reagan was, besides a California movie star, I mean...
     
  23. Hkmp5sd

    Hkmp5sd Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    6,513
    Location:
    Winter Haven, FL
  24. Silver Bullet

    Silver Bullet Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,335
    Location:
    Arizona
    Hmmm, looks like we're kinda split on this issue.

    Half say "NO!", and half say "Absolutely Not!".

    I'm going to go with "Of Course Not!"

    It would be first Arnie :uhoh:, then Kofi Annan :cuss: .

    The concept of tinkering with the Constitution is scary; the whole thing could unravel if you get enough politicians who think they have more vision than the Founding Fathers.
     
  25. Waitone

    Waitone Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    5,406
    Location:
    The Land of Broccoli and Fingernails
    No.

    Ahnuld is mistaken if he thinks he is a viable presidential candidate. His RINO ways may be necessary for political survival in Cali, but it ain't gonna flush in the confederacy.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page