- Joined
- May 30, 2007
- Messages
- 9,595
- Reaction score
- 2,739
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
caring more about others than your own is
Why should the government be a parent again?
caring more about others than your own is
What we have ain't broken, there's no need to "fix" it.
Sure, why not. Let's remove borders and educational requirements for jobs, too.
I think this is the best way to assure unity and allegiance.
I disagree - I think it is broken since citizens are being denied the equal chance to run for presidency purely on the basis of not being naturalized - regardless of how long ago that was [as in, while somebody who only recently became a citizen should have to wait a little bit longer before being able to, somebody who moved here,. and lived here for 10 years for example should have the full right to run].
We do not need to outsource our Presidency. There are plenty of natural born citizens capable of doing the job; we need not look elsewhere. The system is fine.
There are also immigrants that could do the job just as well, if not better. How is allowing people to duly elect someone who is just as much an American citizen as you or me "outsourcing"? I understand the original rule. The Founding Fathers did not want foreign governments using our head of government as a puppet like they did in Poland, but I do not see why haven't moved past this.
John Mccain was allowed to run...
I think when people are born in a foreign country, but adopted by American parents, they should be allowed to run too
We do not need to open ourselves up to rule by foreigners.
It's not necessary. There are enough people to draw from here to find someone who can do the best job. We haven't moved past that because it is still a concern. It's like asking why we haven't moved past gravity.
Ok, why do we need natural born citizens? If there is a qualified candidate, why should an accident of birth bar him as long as he is a United States citizen?
So you are saying that there is a realistic chance of an agent of another country coming here, being elected, and then allowing his homeland's government influence us?
really, any chance of that happening should be quashed.
Ok, why do we need natural born citizens? If there is a qualified candidate, why should an accident of birth bar him as long as he is a United States citizen?
So you are saying that there is a realistic chance of an agent of another country coming here, being elected, and then allowing his homeland's government influence us?
There are typically assimilation times necessary for immigrants to become "Americanized" for lack of a better term. I do not want to be beholden to the ideals and needs of other States. The POTUS needs to be concerned with American ideals and needs. Nothing prevents any given individual candidate from being able to know and understand it. Perhaps someone who is a first gen immigrant can understand that and uphold those ideals. But that's not a given. In fact if you look at the aggregated statistics you see that it is not the generalized case. Given this fail mode and the fact that we have plenty of individuals born and raised here whom are equally qualified, it seems unnecessary to me to open up the process to foreigners.
There is that off chance, but I'd be more willing to say that there is a time necessary for growing up in this country to become aware of all the American idiosyncrasies. Our ideals and values and what we wish to uphold. These sorts of ideals vary widely across nations. Someone "fresh off the boat" may not grasp those finer details (just as we may not be able to understand the ideals of other places). The idea of having natural born citizens only being allowed to run for POTUS is, in part, to isolate ourselves from some of those affects.
I see no reason why we should remove the interlock. We have plenty of qualified individuals already here who can do the job just as well; we do not need to open ourselves up to foreign influence.
And as shown by the hypothetical Obama example it is entirely possible that natural-born citizens will have the same handicap. "American Values" is a nebulous term that varies wildly from region to region. This reasoning means that a person is being barred from the Presidency due to what they might think instead of their qualifications. Should we ban FDLS Mormons or Amish from running, because their culture is so different from the American Mainstream?
As I stated, a person growing up in one part of the country may still be unable to understand the idiosyncrasies of the entire country. A person who has lived their entire life in Berkley, CA will have a difficult time adjusting the the culture of West Virginia.
I do not see it as a huge issue, and a Constitutional Convention on just this issue seems like a waste of time, but the restriction can hold out some well qualified candidates as well.
Anyone should be able to run for president. Just a matter of them getting elected.
Does being born in Texas exclude you from running for governor in... Alabama? New York? Rhode Island? Seems there'd be just as large a conflict of interest there as there would be between someone born in the UK/Australia/whatever running for President of the US.
Of course they should be able to.
The principle that the people should decide who is president seems to be a difficult one for some people.
Is that Tom Paine as your avatar? The man who was credited by several founding fathers as being the inspiration for the American Revolution was of course too "foreign born" for some and remains so today.