Posted on 08/13/2003 8:32:00 PM PDT by ClearBlueSky
Austrian born Arnold Schwarzenegger is still a long way from being elected California's Governor, but proposed Constitutional amendments that would allow foreign born citizens such as the action movie star to become President will be debated in Congress this autumm.
One of the proposals, by Schwarzenegger political friend, Senator Orin Hatch, Republican Utah, would allow anyone who has been a US citizen for 20 years, and has resided in the country for 14 years, to be elected President. Schwarzenegger was naturalized in 1983.
The other proposal, by a bi-partisan group in the house, whose ranks include conservative Representative Darrell Issa, Republican California- who spent more than 1.5 million to put the recall election on the October 7th ballot- would allow anyone who has been a naturalized citizen for 35 years to be eligible to become President. The House legislation, whose co-sponsors include liberal Representative Barney Frank, Democrat Mass., was proposed long before the recall movement in California.
Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution, drafted in 1787, says that only natural-born Americans at least 35 years old who have lived in the country for 14 years can serve as President.
Proponents of a change say the rule long ago outlived its usefulness. Hatch said figures such as former Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and Madeleine Albright or Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, the Canada native whom Democrats consider a rising star, couldn't be President. Nor could the 700 foreign born recipients of the Medal of Honor.
YEAH! Who cares about silly little traditions like safeguarding the nation from life-long tyrants, from electing those who have no allegiance to this nation, or Constitutional limitations, anyway? Those old notions are just worthless in these enlightened modern times! Why, with the great increase in the numbers of non-citizens voting, we could even see a Mexican citizen, a Chinese citizen, or even the Pope himself (herself?!?) elected President of the USofA! Wouldn't that be great, to express our fondness for diversity that way?
/venom-dripping sarcasm>
ClearBlueSky,
I could not agree with you more regarding changes to this. Proponents indicate this amendment is outdated - but it's with these same proponents that the Constitution itself is outdated.
If these proponents keep having their way - we won't have a Constitution, or an acknowledgement of God Who's behind our rights - Who once removed will leave little resistance toward rewriting all of the Constitution to say everything it doesn't say about what rights we have or don't have.
Thank you, Vin-B!
The fundamental truth behind accepting Islam as just one more religion is that it is the ONLY 'religion' that will- if it's goals are reached- elminate the Constitution. Islamic countries are ruled by the Koran. The followers of the Koran recognize NO law above Islam.
Cultural diversity and equanimity STOP with Islam. The world, and the news, is proof of that.
When you have people who will USE the Constitution to destroy the Constitution, you have a cunning enemy indeed. And when you have people too blind to that fact, who think they are upholding the Constitution by giving that enemy their opportunity, you have the death of a country and culture by stupidity.
That's how I see it.
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.