Is Arnold Schwarzeneger the next President?

posted by FlyersFan

Who are you, madnessinmysoul, to know what 'foresight' they had or didn't have? How do you know that they didn't foresee a security risk by allowing foreign born people to run this country. It doesn't matter what 'foresight' they had or didn't have - the law is a VERY GOOD one. It should stay. It is definately needed. [Edited by Don W]

I'm with madnessinmysoul on this one, Ms F/F. I OTOH take the view, that no one has real “foresight.” What we casually label as “foresight” is nothing more than carefully observing the past and applying lessons learned to the future. On those rare occasions when we get it right, we recall our earlier statement but we always forget all those times when we missed it al together. Hey, that’s not news.

No one on this planet had the foresight to put money on Street Sense in the recent 133rd Ky Derby viewed by Her Majesty, Queen Elisabeth II. Had they had the foresight, they could have collected $11.80 for each $2 bet. For 2 minutes worth of work. By a horse. Well, that’s not exactly true, a lot of people did “bet” on Street Sense, but they knew it was just a “bet” and not a sure thing. A real difference.

[edit on 5/11/2007 by donwhite]

Originally posted by donwhite
I Say Put Up or Shut Up, Nostradamus

I have no idea what that is supposed to mean.

I'm with madnessinmysoul on this one,

Oh, now THAT's a surprise. NOT!

no one has real “foresight.” What we casually label as “foresight” is nothing more than carefully observing the past and applying lessons learned to the future.

I'll accept that as a description of the term 'foresight' as used by many people today.

However, you said 'is nothing more than ...' That trivializes something important. They 'CAREFULLY OBSERVED' and applied lessons from those observations ... and they came up with laws in our Constitution for a VERY good reason.

Those laws were very important then and they are just as important now.

ff, a foreign born citizen becoming president is far from a security issue. hell, ben franklin was foreign born and he would have probably made a great president. i'm not saying everyone who is a naturalized citizen should be allowed to have a crack at the whitehouse, but if you've spent the majority of your life here and can't really remember life anywhere else, isn't that the same as being a natural born citizen?

and one more thing, not everyone that comes to this country knows the deal. i doubt everyone that comes to the USA reads over the constitution ahead of time.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
and one more thing, not everyone that comes to this country knows the deal. i doubt everyone that comes to the USA reads over the constitution ahead of time.

I'd have to disagree, part of the citizenship test deals with issues like that, so, unless you don't
have to take it, which I think applies if you're under 18, you'd most likely know it.


On a side note, most Americans probably could not pass the citizenship test, I tried and only
scored the equivalent of 70%.

posted by FlyersFan

I'm with madnessinmysoul on this one,

Oh, now THAT's a surprise. NOT!

I hope you enjoyed that dirty movie, BORAT! It caught me by surprise.


[edit on 5/11/2007 by donwhite]

Given how much scrutiny a candidate comes under in this day and age is basically inescapable. With respect, FF, I don't think security is all that much of an issue. Any real skeletons will come to light. In regards to Arnold Schwarzeneger being president, it's not likely. The feelings regarding him are almost as mixed as those regarding Ms. Clinton, if not to the same magnitude.

If not now, the time may come to rethink that particular part of the Constitution. Let the people decide. As it should be.

Oh. Don, it was a compliment. We agree on very little, but I know your a smart guy. So compliment it was.

Pardon me but why is this discussion even taking place, we all know American Presidents are bought men, they can put a man in a monkey suit in the white house and Americans wont do anything about it, oh wait they have already done that.

I'm sorry but American politics and its participants are now seen as no better than the best despot Goverment on the Planet, where those who can bid the most get to make the most profit on the next war.

US Politicians are the Whores of the Political World.

Originally posted by donwhite
I'm Surprised F/F About Your Choice of Movies
I hope you enjoyed that dirty movie, BORAT! It caught me by surprise.

Again .. I don't know what you are talking about.
What is a 'dirty movie Borat???'

We are totally disconnected here .... and I'm totally lost.

Originally posted by magicmushroom
US Politicians are the Whores of the Political World.

ALL politicians, all over the world, share the same stench.

Originally posted by iori_komei
I'd have to disagree, part of the citizenship test deals with issues like that, so, unless you don't
have to take it, which I think applies if you're under 18, you'd most likely know it.

i had to take the citizenship test as part of a civics class. my dad had to take it for his citizenship. one of the questions, this isn't bs, "what are the colors on the flag" and other things that you'd never see in the constitution. hell, you can find the questions ahead of time and memorize the answers.

On a side note, most Americans probably could not pass the citizenship test, I tried and only
scored the equivalent of 70%.

i took it and scored perfectly, even though i took it 5+ years after becoming a citizen.

and FF, there is no security threat to electing a foreign born citizen president. tell me, how would i pose a security threat?

no law against a non canadian being PM.
Come on up Arnold....PM of Canada

BORAT is a comedy about a Kazakhstan man who comes to America - I forgot why - and has one mis-adventure after another. All this is enhanced or exaggerated because he does not speak English very well. At one point he learns to express the negative by adding NOT to an affirmative statement. So when you said “ . . . NOT” I took it you had recently seen BORAT. It is funny, and rated R but it ought to be rated X. I will not elaborate. I viewed the movie at my rather prudish sister’s house along with 2 other mutual friends. I was appalled and made no bones about it, but she was attempting to be a gracious hostess. Her daughter who is a Nurse Practitioner had causally recommended it to my sister who got it from NexFlix. I am mean and crude but not in mixed company.

I also saw Little Miss Sunshine at my sister’s house - I’m going to have to rate her selections as X until I read the reviews in the future. Another movie that had excessive foul language - the “F” word over 2 dozen times - I began to count it for their benefit - and the flick gave tacit approval to snorting coc aine and humorously endorsed pushing children into the competitive performer setting as in Joan Benet Ramsey. Legion of Decency where are you when we need you?

[edit on 5/14/2007 by donwhite]

What happened? Are we completely denying this possibility? I still believe that this is quite possible...Constitutional ammendment might be difficult but it's not impossible. Just wanted to bring this thread to a fruitful ending.What say?

posted by FlyersFan

posted by donwhite
I Say Put Up or Shut Up, Nostradamus

I have no idea what that is supposed to mean.

I was making a disparaging remark directed towards those who claim Nostradamus could predict or foretell the future. Like “Hister” is supposed to be “Hitler.” If he was clairvoyant and could see the future, how come he could not spell? Just as in the ballyhoo-ing of the Bible Codes, so also Nostradamus cannot foretell the future, he can only loosely recite the past. And that with a lot of help.

OFFER: I will share my winnings equally with anyone here who can refer to Nostradamus (or Edgar Cayce) and give me the winner of the Preakness. We’ll both get right!

[edit on 5/17/2007 by donwhite]

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by AryanWatch
but looks like an amendment in the constitution might just be round the corner.

bite your tongue!

NO amendment to the Constitution! It's fine the way it is. We have 300 million Americans in this country. I'm sure that the native born Americans are talented enough that we don't have to use foreign born.

The framers put that in the Constitution for a very good reason. It's a safety measure and considering the world of terrorism we have today ... it HAD BETTER STAY!!

I agree the constitution does not need to be changed to accomodate one person.

so also Nostradamus cannot foretell the future, he can only loosely recite the past.

donwhite - I will have to disagree with that one. He has actually foretold the future...You will have to go through some of them to appreciate his genius. Not that I'am a big fan of his...but I looked at some of them as an sckepetic(miss-spelled)) and was really astonished...

Originally posted by Leyla
I agree the constitution does not need to be changed to accomodate one person.

so what about all the other naturalized immigrants to the united states that would make great presidents?

Honestly, if we can't find a single natural born citizen that is competent enough to be president, then we might as well pack up shop and give over our riches to Mexico.

There is no justification to change the Constitution for ANY non-US born citizen for any reason.

There are two simple reasons for this:

1) There are plenty of educated natural born citizens to choose from.

2) The Constitution should really only be changed if it really needs to be, and it really doesn't need to be.

posted by KrazyJethro

Honestly, if we can't find a natural born citizen competent enough to be president, then we might pack up shop and give over our riches to Mexico. There is no justification to change the Constitution for ANY non-US born citizen for any reason. [Edited by Don W]

I think a lot of people think it parochial of us in this cosmopolitan world to insist on “native” birth to hold our highest office. England’s William and Mary were from Holland. Their George I was from Hanover, Germany. In fact, the Royal’s family name was changed from “Hanover” to Windsor in the aftermath of World War 1.

Perhaps in the olden days when people practiced astrology and place of birth was as important as time, and in some instances, as in the case of Jesus of Nazareth, it was felt necessary to have him birthed in Bethlehem. But now, it is DNA that counts and DNA is not place determined.

[edit on 5/22/2007 by donwhite]

I don't think it's parochial at all. There are a few reasons to leave it as it is in my mind.

1) That's the way the Constitution reads, and without a strong case that it would lead to a positive impact on American's lives, their rights, etc, there is no need to change it.

2) It really has no detrimental effect to stay as is considering the average joe has a better chance of winning the lottery than being president.

3) I think people would be hard pressed to say that someone not naturally born could do a better job than all who are naturally born, and/or to provide a rational and logical case for it.

4) There is no need, pressing or otherwise.

5) I don't know many people who care much about non-American points of view on our internal requirements for office.

I just don't see the point.

[edit on 22-5-2007 by KrazyJethro]

posted by KrazyJethro

There are reasons to leave it as it is.

1) That's the way the Constitution reads, and there is no need to change it.
[Edited by Don W]

US Con. Art. 1, Sec. 1, Cl. 5. “No person except a . . . “ can be president. There is an exception but it no longer applies. George Washington asked the writers to permit persons who were citizens in 1789 to be eligible to the office of prez. It is said he did this so his “adopted son” Alexander Hamilton would be eligible. Vice President Aaron Burr dramatically ended that possibility in 1804.

2) It really has no detrimental effect as the average joe has a better chance of winning the lottery than being president.

If we had genuine campaign finance reform that would not be so. When the public pays for public elections - instead of selling elections to the high bidders - we would see great changes all the way around.

3) I think to say [the] naturally born could do a better job than all who are not naturally born [would be hard to prove].

On this modified #3 I agree.

4) There is no need, pressing or otherwise.

On that I also agree.

5) I don't know many people who care much about non-American points of view on our internal requirements for office.

Is this shorthand for jingoism?

I just don't see the point. [Edited by Don W]

I think it was meant to add Austrian born Cal. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to the GOP list of hopefuls.

[edit on 5/22/2007 by donwhite]