Why Naturalized Citizens Should NOT be President

12/5/2004 | Ernie Miller

[Jaysun]

For one thing, it's hard to understand some of them. I heard Arnold say that the purpose of Christmas was to "celebrate the birth of cheeses" the other day. Cheeses? What the hell man?

[MadAnthony1776]

Biggest reason. Hitler was Austrian and look what he did for Germany. That's a risk you take when you allow a foreign born national to be president.

[Coldwater Creek]

Why should the constitution be changed for Arnold? We have plenty of natural born liberal Republicans already eligible to run for President.

[armymarinedad]

This is not an issue of loyalty to America. Many immigrants are just as loyal if not more loyal than some Americans. The question is more about why we need to do this. If we can't find a native born American capable of being President our Constitution is worthless anyway. The one tie we have with our history is our customs, traditions, and moral values. These three things are what create pride and patriotism. A person not born in the U.S. will probably not have been raised by parents with American customs and traditions. The left has already gained enough ground removing our customs, traditions, and moral values from our way of life. Let's not help them with an amendment that will allow them to put someone in the White House that was not raised as a traditional American.

[TomGuy]

If such an amendment ever passed, every enemy political society (socialist, communist, fascist, islamofanatical, etc.) would have people infiltrate, gain citizenship, and wait for some future time to try to get elected.

We would have 'Manchurian candidates' from every enemy political society infiltrated into our political system. (Some 2nd-plus generation citizens of immigrant-parents may already be positioned as legal citizens. We would be derelict in our reasoning to think enemy political societies haven't already been infiltrating our governmental institutions for years.)

[B4Ranch]

Given the choice to amend the Constitution I would place the following requirements on the Presidential Nominee and the same for VP or a member of the Presidential Cabinet.

Parents: Both US born, Christian, raised and educated,
Nominee: US born, Christian, raised and educated with four years active military service. (preferably one who has seen combat on the ground and the fighting from a foxhole when an enemy was trying to kill him.)

I want a President who knows and understands that America was founded under the Christian philosophy, not Hindu or Muslim.

I want a President who was raised amongst American children in American schools where the immigrants (or their parents) were accepted because they hadn't broken our laws.

Before a President sends our troops off to war, I want him/her to have a damn good idea of what they are doing. I want a President who gets angry about the numbers of dead soldiers climbing by 1, 2 or 5 each day, not one who needs 100 dead each day to have an idea what's happening.

I am not in favor of pilots who fought the war from 10 or 20 thousand feet and have never had the enemies blood on them or know what the smell of a firefight is.

No, I am not against war but I am against any type of appeasements while the troops are in the field. A guy or a gal who has been there would understand how I feel and why.

[B4Ranch]

>>We would have 'Manchurian candidates' from every enemy political society infiltrated into our political system.<<

We already have them. The Communist Party was protected from having to show who contributes to them again last year!

[thathamiltonwoman]

No, no, a thousand times no. I know foreigners who have been is this counry 25 years who are just here. When they say "my country" they really mean the country they came from. Too many are just here for the money and comfort. They're hearts are elsewhere. Besides, could we ever really trust a foreign born president? Would he be working for us or his motherland?

One more thing, let's not forget John Kerry. He spent many of his formative years in Europe and was privately more French in his beliefs and habits than American. That was one of the major reasons why he could not relate to normal Americans.

[festus]

Maybe because they aren't native americans.........

[Erik Latranyi]

It is not where you were born, but where you have lived that counts.

I disagree. I am the child of immigrants. I appreciate this country more than my peers who come from long lines of native Americans (pun intended).

There is a huge difference in growing up in the United States (during your formative years) and being exposed to our culture in the schools, from friends, etc than growing up in a foreign land, then emigrating to our great nation.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

Change the Constitution and then if a foreigner were appointed Secretary of State and the President, Vice President, etc were to resign we could have our Country run by an unelected foreign controlled puppet.

[Quinotto]

Your argument is so one-sided and childish, I am amused. You state that "No matter how long a person has been in the US, they could still possibly be loyal to another country". Take Kerry for example who's loyalty was towards the UN, take Clinton who's loyalty was towards a fast working zipper. Or better yet, read the Verona project and you shall see American born citizen betraying their country with ease. Or remember the last spies caught within the US government, all born in US. Birth doesn't guarantee one's loyalty towards a country, but one's character and morality does.

[Tennessean4Bush]

Last nigth was not an acception.

Perhaps, but was it an exception?

[MosesKnows]

even US citizens can be bought

There are three major requirements a person must satisfy to become the next President of the United States. After reading many of the responses to your post, I have concluded that many people do not fully realize the magnitude of all three requirements.

A nation of immigrants is obligated to consider an amendment permitting a naturalized citizen to become President.

Without a constitutional amendment:

A felon that satisfied the three requirements can become president.
A draft dodger that satisfied the three requirements can become President.
A rapist that satisfied the three requirements can become President.
A serial killer that satisfied the three requirements can become President.
A coward that satisfied the three requirements can become President.
A pedophile that satisfied the three requirements can become President.

I would think the nation could handle a naturalized citizen that satisfied the requirements to become President.

[Gritty]

Why do we need to change the Constitution? Are we that short of talent from native-born citizens, not to mention some of the inherent dangers as some previous astute posters have noted?

This proposed Amendment didn't start gathering steam until star-power Schwarzenegger showed up. The Democrats jumped on board because they figure Granholm would be a good pick.

This is a crazy, frivolous Amendment. When the likely suspects start blabbering on about "fairness", start checking your wallets and the fine print. That's what's happening here.

We should only amend the Constitution for compelling reasons. Temporary ones like qualifying the attractive politicians de jour for the highest office in the land aren't compelling reasons.

[conservative cat]

In fact, I would tighten the amendment so that not only must one be born a U.S. citizen, but that both parents must also be U.S. citizens at the time of birth.

That's a little bit excessive, doncha think? I have no aspirations to be president, but my mom was a German citizen when I was born. (She gained her US citizenship when I was a year old.) I am no less American than anyone else in this country and probably more so than a lot of blue staters who were born to 2 Americans. Many immigrants are proud to be Americans and appreciate the honor- and pass that to their children.

[staytrue]

Do not place a foreigner over you, one who is not a brother Israelite.

You are quoting the bible out of context and twisting it's meaning. Your quote specifically refers to Israelite's. For you to interpret the word of God and logically extend it's meaning so that you can change the word "Israelite" to "American" is totally wrong. Further, who said Arnold was a "foreigner". That is an absurd arguement and a bastardazation of scripture.

[staytrue]

"I certainly don't regard the statutes as some abstract rhetorical exercise..

The immigration restrictions are necessary and proper in my view and the illegal migrants who violate them should be returned to their point of origin."


The Laws of Man are in fact abstract rhetorical exercises.

Why is it that 70 mph is speeding and 65 mph is not. Currently some immigrants are "lottery" winners and others who entered the same lottery is not. The lottery winner is legal and the lottery loser is illegal.

I'm going to agree that immigration currently needs to be controlled for purely pragmatic reasons in this imperfect world. But the issue of who is legal and who is illegal certainly does not derive from the Laws of God or any reasonable sense of morality and hence is necessarily arbitrary, conflicted, and rhetorical.

[staytrue]

the Israelites were warned not to have a foreign-born king

I don't think it says that at all. It warns against "foreigners". Schwartzenneger is not a foreigner. He is 100% USA citizen. Did the Bible mean to say the "naturalized citizens = foreigners" ? I doubt you will find that in scripture. If the Bible did mean that, maybe by logical extension, naturalized citizens should be barred from voting or serving in the military or owning land since they are now "foreigners"