Ads Back Schwarzenegger for President

G

Gemtun

Guest
I saw the commercial this morning regarding this.

Ads Back Schwarzenegger for President


SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) - Californians will soon see advertisements urging them to help give Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and other foreign-born citizens the chance to run for president.

The cable television ads, set to being running Monday, are from a Silicon Valley-based group that wants to amend the U.S. Constitution, which limits the presidency to people born in the United States. Schwarzenegger was born in Austria but became a U.S. citizen in 1983.

``You cannot choose the land of your birth. You can choose the land you love,'' Lissa Morgenthaler-Jones says in the ads.

She is a San Francisco Bay area mutual fund manager and major Schwarzenegger campaign donor who is helping pay for the ads and created a companion Web site.

Schwarzenegger, 57, has said he would consider running for president if the Constitution allowed but hasn't pushed for a constitutional change.

The TV ads mark the first significant attempt to build public support for an amendment. While polls show Schwarzenegger remains popular with voters, the idea of a constitutional change is not.

Four proposed amendments are circulating in Congress, but none has advanced. Constitutional amendments require congressional approval and ratification by 38 states.
 
Sorry Arnold, but I can't support that amendment.

``You cannot choose the land of your birth. You can choose the land you love,'' Lissa Morgenthaler-Jones says in the ads.
Click to expand...
That's true, but it doesn't mean that the only way a person can show their love for their country is to become President. There are many other ways Arnold can serve his country.
 
Because I don't think the Constitution should be changed to accept foreign-born naturalized citizens as President. Nothing against Arnold personally. I am including all foreign-born naturalized citizens.
 
Reba said:
Because I don't think the Constitution should be changed to accept foreign-born naturalized citizens as President. Nothing against Arnold personally. I am including all foreign-born naturalized citizens.
Click to expand...

Why can't foreign-born naturalized citizens run for president? Arnold has been here since 1968 and he is an American citizen. I believe he should be entitled to run for president.

Clearly, the Americans who were born in the USA are superior to the foreign-born Americans as of now because of this law.

How is America truly the land of freedom if they aren't given the same rights as American-born citizens to run for president?
 
I agree with Reba.
First of all, Arnold is a CROOK. But that is another thread.
Second of all, when we start fiddling with our Constitution, other people will want to keep on fiddling and fiddling with it until it becomes unrecognizeable.
LEAVE THE CONSTITUTION ALONE!!!
It has worked for 228 years so far, and as my grandad would say, If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Surely your beloved Arnie could find it in his golden heart to make a personal sacrifice and find another way to serve this country without changing its blueprint.
 
Reba said:
Because I don't think the Constitution should be changed to accept foreign-born naturalized citizens as President. Nothing against Arnold personally. I am including all foreign-born naturalized citizens.
Click to expand...

:werd:
 
Banjo said:
Why can't foreign-born naturalized citizens run for president?
Click to expand...
That is the standard set by our Constitution.

Arnold has been here since 1968 and he is an American citizen. I believe he should be entitled to run for president.
Click to expand...
Actually, no one is "entitled" to run for President. The office of President is not set up as a job opportunity.

How is America truly the land of freedom if they aren't given the same rights as American-born citizens to run for president?
Click to expand...
The potential danger is that a foreign-born President might have divided loyalties to another country.

Like I said, I am not doubting Arnold's loyalty. The problem is, if the Constitution is changed, it opens the door for every possible candidate, from every country, with different circumstances.
 
Is it because he is not an American?


He is only human. Why can´t you give him the chance to try?
 
Run for prez!

I'd vote for him! :thumb:

It's certainly a lot better than having Bush as president!
 
Liebling:-))) said:
Is it because he is not an American?
Click to expand...
Arnold is a naturalized American citizen, not a natural-born citizen.

He is only human. Why can´t you give him the chance to try?
Click to expand...
Our Constitution does not allow it.
"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."
 
Reba said:
I am not doubting Arnold's loyalty.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are. You are doubting that he has the same love for America that you say "everyone else who was born here has." Bull. Even U.S. citizens can be more traitorous than U.S. non-citizens.

The potential danger is that a foreign-born President might have divided loyalties to another country.
Click to expand...

Any more than you do? Anyone can sell out this country for a million dollars, regardless of if they were born here or not. Get off your high horse and stop pretending that location of birth means anything more than character, morals, and intelligence.

The problem is, if the Constitution is changed, it opens the door for every possible candidate, from every country, with different circumstances.
Click to expand...

The constitution has been changed quite often since its inception. It's been considered "broke" before, we constantly change and refine it. But, since people like you have the idea that it isn't broken, we just have to word it as "making it better" so that you'll go for it. After all, the slaves used to be slaves, didn't they?

"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."
Click to expand...

I fully believe that portion in there was put in TO PREVENT BRITISH ROYALTY from gaining the highest office back in 1796! Natural born citizens of the United States did NOT EXIST back in 1796, except when people said that they were part of a territory that BECAME U.S. soil after that time.

Since there is ZERO threat of the British Empire coming after us again like before, and we have everything to gain from allowing people who BEST FIT THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES to take on that responsibility, I will say, yes, LET those foreign born who we trust to take on the office to compete for it. I would want them to have lived here for a certain amount of time as citizens, paying taxes, proving their loyalty to the country, but that's just what would satisfy me.
 
Last edited:
Reba said:
The problem is, if the Constitution is changed, it opens the door for every possible candidate, from every country, with different circumstances.
Click to expand...


Right, I would NOT want that door OPEN
toward Osama !!! That's just an example,
He and/or others could even become
foreign-born naturalized citizens,
who knows.... If you don't like the concept
of Osama become US President, then
you'd better off NOT to change that Constitution.

We USA already opened too many doors to these
foreign-born naturalized citzens while we should
give more opportunities for ourselves first.

This Constitution should NOT be changed at all.
 
And dear Arnie proved his loyalty by helping Enron steal nine billion dollars from the state of California?
 
Y said:
Right, I would NOT want that door OPEN
toward Osama !!! That's just an example,
He and/or others could even become
foreign-born naturalized citizens,
who knows.... If you don't like the concept
of Osama become US President, then
you'd better off NOT to change that Constitution.

We USA already opened too many doors to these
foreign-born naturalized citzens while we should
give more opportunities for ourselves first.

This Constitution should NOT be changed at all.
Click to expand...
Actually, the rights are still done by voting. Do you think people would want to vote for Osama?
 
Dennis said:
Yes, you are.
Click to expand...
You didn't read carefully. I do not support the amendment for anyone foreign born. It has nothing to do with Arnold. I am not picking on him. I think you have me confused with other posters.

You are doubting that he has the same love for America that you say "everyone else who was born here has."
Click to expand...
Where did you get that quote from? Those are not my words. Check my posts. I never said that. That is not even the way I write. I would never use the word "everyone" in a sentence that way. Please do not make up quotes.

Any more than you do? Anyone can sell out this country for a million dollars, regardless of if they were born here or not. Get off your high horse and stop pretending that location of birth means anything more than character, morals, and intelligence.
Click to expand...
Why are you so upset? Can we just exchange opinions without insult?

The constitution has been changed quite often since its inception.
Click to expand...
It depends on what you consider "quite often"; there have been 27 amendments in 216 years.

It's been considered "broke" before, we constantly change and refine it.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't call it broken. The original concept of the Constitution hasn't changed. It has had additions and changes made to improve it and make right the wrongs.

I fully believe that portion in there was put in TO PREVENT BRITISH ROYALTY from gaining the highest office back in 1796! Natural born citizens of the United States did NOT EXIST back in 1796, except when people said that they were part of a territory that BECAME U.S. soil after that time.
Click to expand...
"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...." Please note the bold phrase. That covered the recent non-native-born citizens of that era. As you say, many of the early Americans were born elsewhere, in areas that were not part of the United States at the time of their birth, but they were included, up to the year that the Constitution was adopted. Later, children that were born to pioneer families that traveled to new territories were included because their parents were American citizens.

Since there is ZERO threat of the British Empire coming after us again...
Click to expand...
But there will always be other countries that will be "coming after us".

I will say, yes, LET those foreign born who we trust to take on the office to compete for it. I would want them to have lived here for a certain amount of time as citizens, paying taxes, proving their loyalty to the country, but that's just what would satisfy me.
Click to expand...
OK. That is your opinion, and I respect it. I give my opinion without insulting you, and you give your opinion without insulting me or other people. That is fair, right?
 
VamPyroX said:
Actually, the rights are still done by voting. Do you think people would want to vote for Osama?
Click to expand...


Why cannot you just vote for USA-born citizens ?
 
Back
Top