Full Version: Amend The Constitution?
OLD American Century / White Rose Society message boards > Political Discussion forums > Politics In General
Or is everyone here Canadian?
Arnold is scum of the highest order, so of course they will move mountains to make sure he gets to run. Not to mention destroy the US in doing so. Its a ridiculous situation where 2 people from the same secret society can run out of 290million people, so why they hell get someone from outside the US to do it. If they really want another actor in charge then "you" cant stop them! ( I was going to say "we" but I`m not in the US 
)..
Its a job for an actor thats very true, they dont do much else but read from a script but even so surely you need standards! Arnie is a bad actor to start with.
Having a 2nd Bush term might end up destroying the US, having Arnie would be apocalyptically bad. and I havent even started on the bad points
)..Its a job for an actor thats very true, they dont do much else but read from a script but even so surely you need standards! Arnie is a bad actor to start with.
Having a 2nd Bush term might end up destroying the US, having Arnie would be apocalyptically bad. and I havent even started on the bad points
The reason i am against this is exactly the reason on your poll, there are plenty of good "natural born" american citizens who could fill the position (but it seems like only the power hungry ones end up as choices..but anyway).
I asked my ten year old daughter if we should change the constitution so arnold could be pres. and she said yes, because he is a movie star! I wonder if that didn't play a huge role in his becoming governor!
Having this opinion does make me feel somewhat like a bigot. BUt it just seems to me that if we had someone not from here , we jumped over a lot of people. I don't know. How many other countries on the planet have a "leader" who was not from that country?
I asked my ten year old daughter if we should change the constitution so arnold could be pres. and she said yes, because he is a movie star! I wonder if that didn't play a huge role in his becoming governor!
Having this opinion does make me feel somewhat like a bigot. BUt it just seems to me that if we had someone not from here , we jumped over a lot of people. I don't know. How many other countries on the planet have a "leader" who was not from that country?
Well, look what happened the last time an Austrian became the leader of a country other than Austria...
I think you should have to be born here to be president or even to be a governor.
Jennifer Granholm, the Democratic governor of Michigan, was born in Canada. Is she also to be ruled out? She's way better than Arnie, from what I hear.
'Bina.
'Bina.
I think it comes down to the fact that it is not as if we don't have people within this country qualified to run for President. Hell, Bush has already proven that anyone is capable of being President no matter how intellectually inept. The real problem is that the current system we have makes it next to impossible for them to attempt to. That would not change with allowing foreign born candidates to run but it could very well bring into question their own fealty. I think for the office of the President we can continue to require you be born here.
the framers were a bit concerned that a president who was not natural born american might have less than noble motives... and other allegiances.
i think it is a good rule. we should stick to it.
RDB's point about austrians running other countries is a GOOD one.
-t-
i think it is a good rule. we should stick to it.
RDB's point about austrians running other countries is a GOOD one.
-t-
True...which is why I didn't cast a vote. I could understand where that came from. Austrians, especially the bad painters and actors, are just Bhad Nhews. 
'Bina.
'Bina.
| QUOTE (BinaBecker @ Sunday, 21 November 2004, 8:34 am) |
| Jennifer Granholm, the Democratic governor of Michigan, was born in Canada. Is she also to be ruled out? She's way better than Arnie, from what I hear. 'Bina. |
Yep.. In my opinion... she should never have been a candidate! Not that she isn't good, isn't making good decisions... but she did not grow up in this country... she did not feel the full effects of the country.
I feel anyone.... that is internationally born... should have no place in american politics... period. I wouldn't move to canada... and run for office, or mexico, or france, or anywhere. I am not familiar (totally with their policies...)
And what this leaves me with is a very very very sick feeling for american's! WTF! are american's doing... Why TF are we letting non national born.. americans have a say in our countries policies, structures... etc.
But then again, I also disagree that non nationals.... can be put in the US military... to fight our wars, our battles... right or wrong!
Arnie learned tooo many Nazie issues from his father... I mean.. damn look at bush... his grandfather supported the nazi's... and look where we are today. You don't think these are related?!?!
Second generation... fine.. you were raised under every policy we have.. right or wrong.. then run
But again... where the hell are american...everyday citizens that are running for elections? Where are our voices.
Ask yourself what more you as an american can do.
And arnie shoudl be dis-elected due to his nazi ties... his awol issues in the military. size of muscle and size of brain are two totally seperate issues. And how can the kennedies be tied to this meathead?!?!?
Well, seeing as I'm a Canuck here and all, let's look at it from a different perspective for a moment...
Canada is a nation of immigrants. Has been for a long time now. We don't have any laws debarring non-Canadian-born citizens from running for office. Even the Prime Minister's Office is theoretically open to someone who was once a foreigner, provided they have Canadian citizenship when they run for it. So far we've had at least one foreign-born provincial premier--Ujjal Dosanjh of British Columbia (on our west coast), who is a Punjabi Sikh by birth. Yep, that's right--he's from India! And now he's a rising star in the federal Liberal party, too--he's our health minister, in Paul Martin's cabinet, no less. There's been no indication that he's ever tried to impose foreign values in any way; he's a liberal in the true sense of the word. And, seeing as we're multicultural rather than monocultural, there's no way he could do it even if he tried; the outcry from all the other ethnicities would be deafening!
Anyhow, this is not America; we don't have the same risk of fascist domination you guys do. It all boils down to history, I think--you had slavery, we were the last stop on the Underground Railroad. We've dealt with refugees and foreigners for a long time, which is partly why we're so liberal. We've seen all kinds, and had to come to grips with all kinds. Since forced assimilation was a bad move in the past, it was scrapped. Other than a working knowledge of English and/or French, not much acculturation is expected of anyone. Nobody asks you to assimilate, melting-pot-style; you either do or you don't, or you do in some ways and don't in others, whichever works out best. You're pretty much accepted for who you are, wherever you are.
But once you have citizenship, it doesn't matter where you're from. Now you're from here, with all the rights and responsibilities that entails. And if you want to run for office--great! No one's stopping you. If you believe you can represent ALL the constituents in your riding and serve them fairly in Parliament, there is no reason why you shouldn't have a go at it.
And so far, no one's had a problem with that except maybe the odd silly neo-Nazis, who'd have a problem with that even if the brown or Asian person's relatives had been living here for four generations or more. Or if they're Aboriginal and their relatives have been here since the Ice Age.
Funny, eh?
'Bina.
Canada is a nation of immigrants. Has been for a long time now. We don't have any laws debarring non-Canadian-born citizens from running for office. Even the Prime Minister's Office is theoretically open to someone who was once a foreigner, provided they have Canadian citizenship when they run for it. So far we've had at least one foreign-born provincial premier--Ujjal Dosanjh of British Columbia (on our west coast), who is a Punjabi Sikh by birth. Yep, that's right--he's from India! And now he's a rising star in the federal Liberal party, too--he's our health minister, in Paul Martin's cabinet, no less. There's been no indication that he's ever tried to impose foreign values in any way; he's a liberal in the true sense of the word. And, seeing as we're multicultural rather than monocultural, there's no way he could do it even if he tried; the outcry from all the other ethnicities would be deafening!
Anyhow, this is not America; we don't have the same risk of fascist domination you guys do. It all boils down to history, I think--you had slavery, we were the last stop on the Underground Railroad. We've dealt with refugees and foreigners for a long time, which is partly why we're so liberal. We've seen all kinds, and had to come to grips with all kinds. Since forced assimilation was a bad move in the past, it was scrapped. Other than a working knowledge of English and/or French, not much acculturation is expected of anyone. Nobody asks you to assimilate, melting-pot-style; you either do or you don't, or you do in some ways and don't in others, whichever works out best. You're pretty much accepted for who you are, wherever you are.
But once you have citizenship, it doesn't matter where you're from. Now you're from here, with all the rights and responsibilities that entails. And if you want to run for office--great! No one's stopping you. If you believe you can represent ALL the constituents in your riding and serve them fairly in Parliament, there is no reason why you shouldn't have a go at it.
And so far, no one's had a problem with that except maybe the odd silly neo-Nazis, who'd have a problem with that even if the brown or Asian person's relatives had been living here for four generations or more. Or if they're Aboriginal and their relatives have been here since the Ice Age.
Funny, eh?
'Bina.
| QUOTE |
| Anyhow, this is not America; we don't have the same risk of fascist domination you guys do. It all boils down to history, I think--you had slavery, we were the last stop on the Underground Railroad. We've dealt with refugees and foreigners for a long time, which is partly why we're so liberal. We've seen all kinds, and had to come to grips with all kinds. Since forced assimilation was a bad move in the past, it was scrapped. Other than a working knowledge of English and/or French, not much acculturation is expected of anyone. Nobody asks you to assimilate, melting-pot-style; you either do or you don't, or you do in some ways and don't in others, whichever works out best. You're pretty much accepted for who you are, wherever you are. |
Great Response Bina...
I have heard many ex americans... now canadians saying the same exact thing...
Funny how things finally meld together .... much longer than america's mere 200 years...
And if they weren't looking at changing the constitution due to Arnold... perhaps my feelings would be different.... and perhaps if it wasn't bushco in office... perhaps my views would be different.
But I still think it is wrong that immigrants... who are not american citizens....but simply reside in this country... are taken into the armed forces... and are off fighting america's battles....
Also, there is too many companies, wealth... and military power at stake to have a non american born person assume power... ohh wait... hmmmm bad idea...
Let's change it to say anyone that is born in texas or Florida are exempt... they can not longer run! Anyone's family that supported the nazi's via money, arms, etc. can not run...
Awww hell... Anyone from Canada... want to come down and challenge bush.. be my guest... we need all the liberals and progressives we can get down here!
Anyone from
I believe Al Franken recently said the same thing...hang on a sec while I dig out the Maclean's article...
http://www.macleans.ca/culture/media/artic...122_93195_93195
http://www.macleans.ca/culture/media/artic...122_93195_93195
| QUOTE |
| What do you say to the Democrats who joke about escaping north to Canada? Canada's great, but I don't want us to lose those people. So you wouldn't lead that charge? No. I'd rather have Canadians move south. --EXCERPT-- |
Looks like they got a few already. Hollywood is chock-a-block with them.
Now, just imagine if it had been Jim Carrey running for governor of California!
'Bina.
It's not just Austrians though.
Hitler wasn't German
Napolean wasn't French
Stalin wasn't Russian
George III wasn't English
I don't know whether this is just my sampling bias, or if there really is a connection to national inferiority complices, or if foreign-born leaders are more willing to view their men as chess-pieces, or what.
Hitler wasn't German
Napolean wasn't French
Stalin wasn't Russian
George III wasn't English
I don't know whether this is just my sampling bias, or if there really is a connection to national inferiority complices, or if foreign-born leaders are more willing to view their men as chess-pieces, or what.
| QUOTE (happymisanthropy @ Monday, 22 November 2004, 12:28 am) |
| It's not just Austrians though. Hitler wasn't German Napolean wasn't French Stalin wasn't Russian George III wasn't English I don't know whether this is just my sampling bias, or if there really is a connection to national inferiority complices, or if foreign-born leaders are more willing to view their men as chess-pieces, or what. |
Hmmm...and Central/South American dictators have all had right-wing US backing. And a lot of help from the CIA.
Still, I get your point.
'Bina.
| QUOTE (BinaBecker @ Sunday, 21 November 2004, 9:33 pm) | ||
Hmmm...and Central/South American dictators have all had right-wing US backing. And a lot of help from the CIA. Still, I get your point. 'Bina. |
The fact that the American-born don't "value" the lives of people in other countries only strengthens my point.
| QUOTE (BinaBecker @ Sunday, 21 November 2004, 8:35 am) |
| Jennifer Granholm, the Democratic governor of Michigan, was born in Canada. Is she also to be ruled out? She's way better than Arnie, from what I hear. 'Bina. |
Granholm's tax increases are keeping Michigan from joining the country in recovery.
| QUOTE (Old Friend @ Tuesday, 23 November 2004, 12:52 am) | ||
Granholm's tax increases are keeping Michigan from joining the country in recovery. |
sorry, but which country are you talking about?
| QUOTE (Old Friend @ Tuesday, 23 November 2004, 12:52 am) | ||
Granholm's tax increases are keeping Michigan from joining the country in recovery. |
<smirk>...<sniff>...is it me or do I smell a freeper amongst us....
Doc
| QUOTE (happymisanthropy @ Tuesday, 23 November 2004, 1:27 am) | ||||
sorry, but which country are you talking about? |
He's a freeper trying to sneak in here, anytime now he'll be spewing his Right Wing Crap....shall we start a count down....
Doc
| QUOTE (Old Friend @ Tuesday, 23 November 2004, 3:52 am) | ||
Granholm's tax increases are keeping Michigan from joining the country in recovery. |
Actually, the Red States are the ones not joining in. They are the taker states.
Where did you say you learned poli-sci again?
'Bina.
| QUOTE (BinaBecker @ Tuesday, 23 November 2004, 10:00 am) | ||||
Actually, the Red States are the ones not joining in. They are the taker states. Where did you say you learned poli-sci again? 'Bina. |
Actually most of the states that are lagging behind passed tax increases. Most of those who chose fiscal discipline instead of tax increases, are doing well.
| QUOTE (Old Friend @ Tuesday, 23 November 2004, 12:59 pm) | ||||||
Actually most of the states that are lagging behind passed tax increases. Most of those who chose fiscal discipline instead of tax increases, are doing well. |
Name one, the states have to raise taxes, to cover the loss assistance from the federal government. Social programs have been cut, school funds have been cut, but we are paying Haliburton tons of money NOT to feed our soliders in Iraq...Hey all this guy is a Freeper, check his IP.
Doc
Chill, Doc. So far, I just see ignorance there. We can fix that.
'Bina.
'Bina.
| QUOTE (BinaBecker @ Tuesday, 23 November 2004, 4:05 pm) |
| Chill, Doc. So far, I just see ignorance there. We can fix that. 'Bina. |
You bet sweetie, and we will....
'Doc
| QUOTE |
| Arnold openly supported Kurt Waldheim, Former UN chief and a former Austrian politician who participated in Nazi atrocities during World War II. Schwarzenegger's name remained on Waldheim's campaign posters, even after allegations of Waldheim's war crimes were brought to light. Waldheim was even invited to Arnold's wedding. |
He's a republican with ties to the Kennedy family, has the elite ever created a more perfect puppet?
| QUOTE (rexateyfor @ Friday, 26 November 2004, 1:32 am) |
| http://www.arnoldexposed.com/ He's a republican with ties to the Kennedy family, has the elite ever created a more perfect puppet? |
Well, better the Kennedys than the Bushes...but still, he's Repug with old Nazi ties, and THAT should be a disqualifier right there.
'Bina.
| QUOTE (Old Friend @ Tuesday, 23 November 2004, 12:59 pm) |
| Actually most of the states that are lagging behind passed tax increases. Most of those who chose fiscal discipline instead of tax increases, are doing well. |
This one woman went to the beach every single day and laid in the sun for six hours while wearing sunglasses. After 15 years of doing this every day, she came down with skin cancer.
See? It proves that wearing sunglasses causes skin cancer!
| QUOTE (Old Friend @ Tuesday, 23 November 2004, 12:59 pm) |
| Actually most of the states that are lagging behind passed tax increases. Most of those who chose fiscal discipline instead of tax increases, are doing well. |
Link(s) please. Thanks.
| QUOTE (Panda @ Monday, 29 November 2004, 11:17 pm) | ||
Link(s) please. Thanks. |
He's been zapped, Panda...
'Doc
Yeah...blame the Troll Killa. 
'Bina.
'Bina.
| QUOTE (BinaBecker @ Tuesday, 30 November 2004, 1:14 pm) |
| Yeah...blame the Troll Killa. 'Bina. |
Love that Troll Killa....
Doc
| QUOTE (Dr. Left @ Tuesday, 30 November 2004, 1:27 pm) | ||
Love that Troll Killa.... Doc |
Me too! I've always been partial to warrior queens.
...and Bush is not from IRAQ...ok you get the picture.
Bina said:
Bina said:
| QUOTE |
| But once you have citizenship, it doesn't matter where you're from. Now you're from here, with all the rights and responsibilities that entails. And if you want to run for office--great! No one's stopping you. If you believe you can represent ALL the constituents in your riding and serve them fairly in Parliament, there is no reason why you shouldn't have a go at it. |
Once one becomes a citizen of the USA, they also must first learn of our customs, constitution, etc....see no problem with them being in local or state politics!
Anyhow, our first Prime Minister wasn't born here either. Sir John A. MacDonald was born in Scotland.
'Bina.
'Bina.
| QUOTE (BinaBecker @ Sunday, 21 November 2004, 8:35 am) |
| Jennifer Granholm, the Democratic governor of Michigan, was born in Canada. Is she also to be ruled out? She's way better than Arnie, from what I hear. 'Bina. |
And she's a babe too. Doesn't that count for anything?
What about American citizens who are born overseas, as for example, military families? Why shouldn't these Americans be able to run for president?
Frankly, I think we missed the train. The Constitution should have been amended right after the Civil War, with the carnage it caused and the assassination of President Lincoln still fresh in people's minds. If the Constitution had been amended to say that any citizen of the former Confederacy could not rise to the presidency, we'd never have Bush I and II.
Not Carter or Clinton or Johnson either, but maybe Teddy .... Hmmm.
Ah, what the hell, since most of this country's problems are caused by the xenophobic descendants of white slave owners, I say give ALL American citizens an equal shot, first, second, third, ad infinitum, immigrants. Arnold or not.
After all, what's in a name or an accent when the Mexican president is a guy named Fox, and the president of Peru was called Fujimori?
We're a nation of immigrants anyhow, and the children of immigrants, much to their parents' dismay, become acculturated Americans with such ease that it makes little difference.
| QUOTE (Count Jeronimo @ Tuesday, 30 November 2004, 11:48 pm) | ||
And she's a babe too. Doesn't that count for anything? What about American citizens who are born overseas, as for example, military families? Why shouldn't these Americans be able to run for president? Frankly, I think we missed the train. The Constitution should have been amended right after the Civil War, with the carnage it caused and the assassination of President Lincoln still fresh in people's minds. If the Constitution had been amended to say that any citizen of the former Confederacy could not rise to the presidency, we'd never have Bush I and II. Not Carter or Clinton or Johnson either, but maybe Teddy .... Hmmm. Ah, what the hell, since most of this country's problems are caused by the xenophobic descendants of white slave owners, I say give ALL American citizens an equal shot, first, second, third, ad infinitum, immigrants. Arnold or not. After all, what's in a name or an accent when the Mexican president is a guy named Fox, and the president of Peru was called Fujimori? We're a nation of immigrants anyhow, and the children of immigrants, much to their parents' dismay, become acculturated Americans with such ease that it makes little difference. |
those who are born to citizens are citizens, no matter where they are born.
-t-
I could apply for German citizenship, and I'm probably eligible (100% pure blood!) but I'm a Canuck, even if I don't have an accent in either language. I actually LIKE living in a country where the major highways have speed limits, believe it or not...
'Bina.
'Bina.
It's not citizenship that's the issue, it's what is meant in the Constitution by "no person except a “natural born citizen” shall be eligible to seek the Office of the President. It's unclear, but many scholars interpret it as a citizen born within U.S. borders.
| QUOTE (Count Jeronimo @ Wednesday, 1 December 2004, 12:28 am) |
| It's not citizenship that's the issue, it's what is meant in the Constitution by "no person except a “natural born citizen” shall be eligible to seek the Office of the President. It's unclear, but many scholars interpret it as a citizen born within U.S. borders. |
| QUOTE |
| If you're going to be involved in government in the United States, citizenship is a must. To be a Senator or Representative, you must be a citizen of the United States. To be President, not only must you be a citizen, but you must also be natural-born. Aside from participation in government, citizenship is an honor bestowed upon people by the citizenry of the United States when a non-citizen passes the required tests and submits to an oath. Natural-born citizen Who is a natural-born citizen? Who, in other words, is a citizen at birth, such that that person can be a President someday? The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps. Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. 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. Many parts of the world have law to provide them with special status, to allow children born in those places to be considered natural-born. This allows families with a long history of working in these areas without ever returning to the U.S. to be considered natural-born. For example, the Panama Canal Zone had been in U.S. possession for a full century, and some families lived there for generations. 8 USC 1403 handles the Zone specifically, stating that anyone born in the Zone on or after 2/26/1904, to at least one citizen-parent, is a natural-born citizen. Similar law is in place to handle the acquisition of territories, such as Puerto Rico, Alaska, and Hawaii. |
i knew that when i was in law school in con law we learned that a natural born citizen includes a child born outside the US with parents who are citizens- AND PARTICULARLY the law has decided that military brats are natural born citizens. the USC has decent definitions of natural born, though the supreme court would be the final authority on constitutional meaning should these definitions be challenged.
note: it states 'born within the united states or subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
any scholar who wants to argue about it can, but the law is pretty clear.
anyway, a small point, the above discusses it pretty quickly.
did you know that m van buren was the first
natural born
president?
-t-
| QUOTE (tamara @ Wednesday, 1 December 2004, 6:24 am) | ||
i knew that when i was in law school in con law we learned that a natural born citizen includes a child born outside the US with parents who are citizens- AND PARTICULARLY the law has decided that military brats are natural born citizens. the USC has decent definitions of natural born, though the supreme court would be the final authority on constitutional meaning should these definitions be challenged. note: it states 'born within the united states or subject to the jurisdiction thereof. any scholar who wants to argue about it can, but the law is pretty clear. anyway, a small point, the above discusses it pretty quickly. did you know that m van buren was the first natural born president? -t- |
Great posts -t- and yes I did know that Van Buren was the first Natural Born President....
'Doc
| QUOTE (Panda @ Tuesday, 30 November 2004, 1:52 pm) | ||||
Me too! I've always been partial to warrior queens. |
MMMMM, I'm picturing Bian in a Zena costume....wow...
'Doc
| QUOTE (tamara @ Wednesday, 1 December 2004, 6:24 am) |
| did you know that m van buren was the first natural born president? |
That's not correct. Every president of the United States has been a natural born citizen.
1. George Washington was born in Westmoreland County, Virginia.
2. John Adams was born in Braintree (now Quincy), Massachusetts
3. Thomas Jefferson was born in Shadwell, Virginia
4. James Madison was born in Port Conway, Virginia
5. James Monroe was born in Westmoreland County, Virginia
6. John Quincy Adams was born in Braintree (now Quincy), Massachusetts
7. Andrew Jackson was born in Waxhaw, South Carolina
8. Martin Van Buren was born in Kinderhook, New York
...and so on and so forth.
As the Constitution requires, we've never had a president who wasn't a natural born citizen.
Contrary to what a few sources (such as Wikipedia) claim, a "natural-born citizen", as used in the Constitution is interpreted as meaning simply "born on American soil."
Note that the Constitution was written in 1787 and ratified by the 13 states in March 1789. George Washington was sworn in as the first president on 30 April 1789. The Constitution was already ratified and in effect when Washington became president. This means every single president has had to meet the Constitutional requirement of being a natural-born citizen. If it were true that Martin Van Buren was the first natural-born citizen to become president, then that means Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, J.Q. Adams and Jackson were all ineligible to be president. But, in fact, they were all eligible; all were natural-born citizens as the Constitution requires.
It IS true that Martin Van Buren was the first president who was born after the Revolutionary War and the founding of the United States as a nation. But all presidents, including the first seven who were born before the Revolutionary War and the formation of the U.S., were natural-born citizens.
| QUOTE (Rev. Day-Bu @ Wednesday, 1 December 2004, 8:12 am) | ||
That's not correct. Every president of the United States has been a natural born citizen. 1. George Washington was born in Westmoreland County, Virginia. 2. John Adams was born in Braintree (now Quincy), Massachusetts 3. Thomas Jefferson was born in Shadwell, Virginia 4. James Madison was born in Port Conway, Virginia 5. James Monroe was born in Westmoreland County, Virginia 6. John Quincy Adams was born in Braintree (now Quincy), Massachusetts 7. Andrew Jackson was born in Waxhaw, South Carolina 8. Martin Van Buren was born in Kinderhook, New York ...and so on and so forth. As the Constitution requires, we've never had a president who wasn't a natural born citizen. Contrary to what a few sources (such as Wikipedia) claim, a "natural-born citizen", as used in the Constitution is interpreted as meaning simply "born on American soil." Note that the Constitution was written in 1787 and ratified by the 13 states in March 1789. George Washington was sworn in as the first president on 30 April 1789. The Constitution was already ratified and in effect when Washington became president. This means every single president has had to meet the Constitutional requirement of being a natural-born citizen. If it were true that Martin Van Buren was the first natural-born citizen to become president, then that means Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, J.Q. Adams and Jackson were all ineligible to be president. But, in fact, they were all eligible; all were natural-born citizens as the Constitution requires. It IS true that Martin Van Buren was the first president who was born after the Revolutionary War and the founding of the United States as a nation. But all presidents, including the first seven who were born before the Revolutionary War and the formation of the U.S., were natural-born citizens. |
Ahhhhemmm, while it is true that they were born in the "Colonies", -t- meant that "Van Buren" was the first born in the United States....but nice try RDB, nice try.
'Doc
| QUOTE (Rev. Day-Bu @ Wednesday, 1 December 2004, 10:12 am) | ||
That's not correct. Every president of the United States has been a natural born citizen. 1. George Washington was born in Westmoreland County, Virginia. 2. John Adams was born in Braintree (now Quincy), Massachusetts 3. Thomas Jefferson was born in Shadwell, Virginia 4. James Madison was born in Port Conway, Virginia 5. James Monroe was born in Westmoreland County, Virginia 6. John Quincy Adams was born in Braintree (now Quincy), Massachusetts 7. Andrew Jackson was born in Waxhaw, South Carolina 8. Martin Van Buren was born in Kinderhook, New York ...and so on and so forth. As the Constitution requires, we've never had a president who wasn't a natural born citizen. Contrary to what a few sources (such as Wikipedia) claim, a "natural-born citizen", as used in the Constitution is interpreted as meaning simply "born on American soil." Note that the Constitution was written in 1787 and ratified by the 13 states in March 1789. George Washington was sworn in as the first president on 30 April 1789. The Constitution was already ratified and in effect when Washington became president. This means every single president has had to meet the Constitutional requirement of being a natural-born citizen. If it were true that Martin Van Buren was the first natural-born citizen to become president, then that means Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, J.Q. Adams and Jackson were all ineligible to be president. But, in fact, they were all eligible; all were natural-born citizens as the Constitution requires. It IS true that Martin Van Buren was the first president who was born after the Revolutionary War and the founding of the United States as a nation. But all presidents, including the first seven who were born before the Revolutionary War and the formation of the U.S., were natural-born citizens. |
RDB- i'll let the van buren thing go- just a bit of worthless trivia- and we could make technical arguments about it, but it is pointless..
i DO think it is very important to note that RIGHT NOW a natural born citizen is not required by law to be born on american soil.
-t-
another interesting bit of trivia-
(NOTE: "SOME PEOPLE SAY" IS A QUALIFIER, SO I'D PREFER NOT TO ARGUE ABOUT WORTHLESS TRIVIA )
chester arthur was born in vermont, but some people say he was born on canadian soil. his parents were canadian subjects, and he would not have qualified as "native born" if born in canada.
SO BINA, WE MIGHT HAVE ALREADY HAD A CANADIAN PRESIDENT!!!! LOL
-t-
(NOTE: "SOME PEOPLE SAY" IS A QUALIFIER, SO I'D PREFER NOT TO ARGUE ABOUT WORTHLESS TRIVIA )
chester arthur was born in vermont, but some people say he was born on canadian soil. his parents were canadian subjects, and he would not have qualified as "native born" if born in canada.
SO BINA, WE MIGHT HAVE ALREADY HAD A CANADIAN PRESIDENT!!!! LOL
-t-
| QUOTE (Dr. Left @ Wednesday, 1 December 2004, 8:32 am) |
| Ahhhhemmm, while it is true that they were born in the "Colonies", -t- meant that "Van Buren" was the first born in the United States....but nice try RDB, nice try. |
"Nice try?" Lay back on the attitude a bit, Doc, and try reading what was written.
| QUOTE (tamara) |
| did you know that m van buren was the first natural born president? |
The fact is, he was not. Every president we've ever had came into office under the Constitution and was required to meet the provision that only a "natural-born citizen" is eligible to be president.
If, as Tamara said, Van Buren was the first natural born president, then you're necessarily arguing that the presidencies of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, J.Q. Adams and Jackson were all unconstitutional, illegal, and invalid! That would be an extraordinary claim, and certainly would not be mere trivia--it would require a massive rewriting of U.S. history to declare the first seven presidents unconstitutional, illegal, and invalid.
So don't give me that "but nice try RDB, nice try" crap. I'm completely fucking sick and tired of you assaulting me for EVERYTHING I say, claiming everything I say is wrong and yet never providing any proof, and constantly resorting to ad hominem like "grow up" and "pull your head out" and "moron."
I don't mind if you disagree and make a legitimate case using evidence, logic and persuasion, but I'm completely fucking fed up with you giving the contradictory, condescending "nice try" and "grow up" horseshit to everything I say.
| QUOTE (tamara @ Wednesday, 1 December 2004, 12:34 pm) |
| another interesting bit of trivia- (NOTE: "SOME PEOPLE SAY" IS A QUALIFIER, SO I'D PREFER NOT TO ARGUE ABOUT WORTHLESS TRIVIA ) chester arthur was born in vermont, but some people say he was born on canadian soil. his parents were canadian subjects, and he would not have qualified as "native born" if born in canada. SO BINA, WE MIGHT HAVE ALREADY HAD A CANADIAN PRESIDENT!!!! LOL |
Heh...cool. That means the way could be clear for Jennifer G....
| QUOTE (Rev. Day-Bu @ Wednesday, 1 December 2004, 11:49 am) | ||
"Nice try?" Lay back on the attitude a bit, Doc, and try reading what was written.
The fact is, he was not. Every president we've ever had came into office under the Constitution and was required to meet the provision that only a "natural-born citizen" is eligible to be president. If, as Tamara said, Van Buren was the first natural born president, then you're necessarily arguing that the presidencies of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, J.Q. Adams and Jackson were all unconstitutional, illegal, and invalid! That would be an extraordinary claim, and certainly would not be mere trivia--it would require a massive rewriting of U.S. history to declare the first seven presidents unconstitutional, illegal, and invalid. So don't give me that "but nice try RDB, nice try" crap. I'm completely fucking sick and tired of you assaulting me for EVERYTHING I say, claiming everything I say is wrong and yet never providing any proof, and constantly resorting to ad hominem like "grow up" and "pull your head out" and "moron." I don't mind if you disagree and make a legitimate case using evidence, logic and persuasion, but I'm completely fucking fed up with you giving the contradictory, condescending "nice try" and "grow up" horseshit to everything I say. |
whoa.
chill out.
you sound insane.
actually, you were contradicting ME. and doc defended me- since all of the other presidents were actually born as british subjects.
it was trivia- and trivial.
you are the one who loves to jump on and contradict everything i say. period.
you did it just a bit ago in the 'palestinian child plays violin' thread. i didn't respond because you obviously hadn't read the story or you wouldn't have posted what you did about the holocaust.
if you'd think before you post, you might find a way to sound less combative.
and get off my ass- it gets old. find somebody else to contradict everytime they open their mouth. and do'nt get mad at doc when he defends me over something so stupid-
you overreact like crazy lately. WTF is wrong with you?
PLEASE leave me alone.
-T-
| QUOTE (Rev. Day-Bu @ Wednesday, 1 December 2004, 9:49 am) | ||
"Nice try?" Lay back on the attitude a bit, Doc, and try reading what was written.
The fact is, he was not. Every president we've ever had came into office under the Constitution and was required to meet the provision that only a "natural-born citizen" is eligible to be president. If, as Tamara said, Van Buren was the first natural born president, then you're necessarily arguing that the presidencies of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, J.Q. Adams and Jackson were all unconstitutional, illegal, and invalid! That would be an extraordinary claim, and certainly would not be mere trivia--it would require a massive rewriting of U.S. history to declare the first seven presidents unconstitutional, illegal, and invalid. So don't give me that "but nice try RDB, nice try" crap. I'm completely fucking sick and tired of you assaulting me for EVERYTHING I say, claiming everything I say is wrong and yet never providing any proof, and constantly resorting to ad hominem like "grow up" and "pull your head out" and "moron." I don't mind if you disagree and make a legitimate case using evidence, logic and persuasion, but I'm completely fucking fed up with you giving the contradictory, condescending "nice try" and "grow up" horseshit to everything I say. |
Now RDB I really don't give a rat's ass whether you like it or not if and when I disagree with you or not. I didn't call you a moron, and I don't remember recently telling you to grow up even though you really should, but when you are wrong, you're wrong, and RDB in this case you are. All the President's prior to Van baby were born under the "Crown", the British Colonies, therefore they were NOT Natural born Americans, so yes NICE TRY.
'Doc
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.