Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bubba Clinton's [3rd Term] for Arnold?
US News and World Report ^ | January 31, 2005 | Paul Bedard

Posted on 01/23/2005 12:32:40 PM PST by gopwinsin04

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-55 last
To: gopwinsin04

Brain-damaged Clinton could never win again. He is half the man he was since before his heart attack. It is pretty pathetic to behold.


41 posted on 01/23/2005 2:36:31 PM PST by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Archangelsk

That's the truth.


42 posted on 01/23/2005 3:01:16 PM PST by 383rr (Those who choose security over liberty deserve neither-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: RockAgainsttheLeft04

The only reason I could see to support this would be to watch Bill and Hill at each other's throats. They'd ditch their marriage in a heartbeat if no longer deemed an asset just to have an opportunity at the W.H. They'd both enter the primary and would be cause for much amusement.

I do think Dems are insane. This means they could nominate Bill again. He'd never win again, but they seem to have this habit of living in the past. They are still fighting 2000, 2002, 2004 as well as the Great Depression. I would also say the same folks that thought G.W. would never win, will still be of same mind in 2008. Eltitist liberal star struck Republicans in D.C. seem to believe Arnold could win the Rep primary so they would vote for this, only to be surprised when the base shuts them down. The people ultimately preventing this from occuring are the American people. We don't want Saddam eligible to run.


43 posted on 01/23/2005 3:07:58 PM PST by Soul Seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: gopwinsin04

Hatch better figure it out quickly - the public sentiment about foreigners being allowed to be President is N0!!


44 posted on 01/23/2005 3:27:55 PM PST by CyberAnt (Where are the dem supporters? - try the trash cans in back of the abortion clinics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ALOHA RONNIE
Ever since their leaving the White House the CLINTONS have had in their cross-hairs just two things:

The Repeal of the Electoral College

Yup, makes it easier to cheat and (fraudulently) WIN without that pesky Electoral College . . . geez, that couldn't be the reason why the dems want to get rid of it, could it?

45 posted on 01/23/2005 4:21:38 PM PST by gop_gene
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: ExtremeUnction

Living in California is probably why you think Arnold would win in a landslide. If he ran as a Democrat, there's a good chance he would get the nomination. As a liberal Republican, he would never get out of the primaries let alone be elected. Hypothetically speaking, of course.


46 posted on 01/23/2005 5:17:51 PM PST by penowa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: NorCalRepub

Nixon was a conservative on anything? News to me.


47 posted on 01/23/2005 5:22:43 PM PST by penowa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: gopwinsin04

He's been a fool for a long time.


48 posted on 01/23/2005 5:42:40 PM PST by Pelham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: gopwinsin04

No way. And I think Arnold would be a lock to win the White House over Bill Clinton. The Dems are NOT that stupid.


49 posted on 01/23/2005 8:25:23 PM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExtremeUnction

He has a 70% approval rating. The Dems know if Arnold got the GOP nomination, they'd be toast. No way would they want to run a nobody against a superstar actor. Rest assured, it will never happen.


50 posted on 01/23/2005 8:27:57 PM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: gopwinsin04
when US Senator Orrin Hatch re-introduces his plan to let naturalized citizens run for president after 20 years.

No way will American people want this. We have many times more natural born citizens eligible to run for president now than were eligible when the Constitution was ratified.


I always thought naturalized citizens relinquished their previous country's citizenship, but I seem to have been wrong.

Recently I read that a liberal Austrian politician advocated the revocation of Arnold Schwarzenegger's dual citizenship with Austria (because of a silly reason: Schwarzenegger didn't stop the execution of a death row convict a few days ago, and Austria doesn't support the death penalty). Does the CA governor claim dual citizenship, or is he simply powerless against a country claiming him as a citizen?

I also saw pictures in the news of US (naturalized or born) citizens with US passports registering to vote in the upcoming Iraqi election.

Why does the US allow naturalized citizens to retain dual citizenship with their former countries, and why does the US allow naturalized citizens to vote in foreign elections? By reclaiming one's former citizenship (through the renewal of passports, registering to vote, or other claims of foreign citizenship), shouldn't one also lose his status naturalized US citizen?

If not, then allowing naturalized citizens to run for president could result in someone with dangerously compromised loyalties as a serious candidate. How perilous it would be if a dual citizen became president and then his home/former country declared war on us.


Here's the naturalization oath. I thought "renounce and abjure" meant that naturalized citizens couldn't claim citizenship with a foreign country.
"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the armed forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."

51 posted on 01/24/2005 5:31:27 PM PST by heleny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gopwinsin04

first off, I have no doubt that President Bush is looking forward to completing his duty 4 years from now, and returning to his ranch. The man is working some long days, putting every ounce into protecting the US, and he'll help set the stage for another American patriot to take the reins in '08.


52 posted on 01/24/2005 5:37:42 PM PST by ilgipper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gopwinsin04
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

No Arnold. No Granholm. No Soros. No Klinton.

53 posted on 01/24/2005 5:38:24 PM PST by Dan from Michigan ("We clearly screwed up on the communications," Detroit Mayor Kilpatrick - after caught in a lie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gopwinsin04
It's not about Arnold, it's about Granholm. Arnold is the bait.

-PJ

54 posted on 01/24/2005 5:41:41 PM PST by Political Junkie Too (It's still not safe to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: heleny

This crazy idea will never become reality, although it does show that the Democrats don't think they have any viable candidates for 2008. What would Hillary do if Bill were able to run for a third term?

As for dual citizenship, voting in foreign elections used to be taken to be a forfeiture of US citizenship. In Perez v. Brownell (1957) the Supreme Court upheld this law based upon the Congress's "implied power" to deal with foreign affairs. In Afroym v. Rusk (1967) the Supreme Court overruled Perez v. Brownell and ruled that citizenship was a right granted persuant to the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment. So voting in the Iraqi elections can not be grounds for losing US citizenship.


55 posted on 01/30/2005 2:30:16 PM PST by Repeal 16-17 (When Are The Liberals Going Move To Canada?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-55 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson