NPR tries to set stage to justify foreign born President - Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest

Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

Politics, Government, or Religion Chat Bring your flamesuit!

greatlakes4x4.com is the premier Great Lakes 4x4 Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old July 22nd, 2009, 06:13 PM   #1
techman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 09-04-06
Location: SE MI
Posts: 689
iTrader: (7)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default NPR tries to set stage to justify foreign born President

Let's rewrite the Constitution... Notice the reference to Jenny

Foreign Policy: Born In The U.S.A. : NPR


Foreign Policy: Born In The U.S.A.
by Joshua Keating
AP

NPR.org, July 17, 2009 The weirdly persistent belief held by many Americans that President Barack Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States has been back in the news lately thanks to Major Stefan Cook, the "birther" soldier who was granted conscientious objector status because he refused to fight for a president he believes is illegitimate. There's also a bill gathering some support in the House that would change election law to require candidates to prove their citizenship.

The birther phenomenon is predictable form of paranoia given the president's unusually exotic (for a president, anyway) background. But isn't the larger scandal that the anachronistic natural-born citizenship requirement in Article II of the constitution still even exists?

Let's imagine that Barack Obama had been born in Indonesia or Kenya or anywhere else for that matter, and hadn't become a citizen until moving to Hawaii to live with his grandparents. Is there one good reason why that would make him less fit to be president?

Put another way, is there one good reason why foreign-born governors Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jennifer Granholm can't legally run for president but Mark Sanford and Sarah Palin can?

Naturalized citizens like Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and Madeline Albright have been allowed into the highest positions in the U.S. national security establishment without anyone questioning their loyalty. Why shouldn't voters be allowed to decide whether a foreign-born candidate is American enough to be president? New York voters didn't mind the fact that Hillary Clinton had never lived in the state before running for its senate seat.

The fact that children of immigrants like Barack Obama, Bobby Jindal, Colin Powell and Rahm Emanuel were born in the United States rather than their parents' home countries seems like a pretty arbitrary distinction. A person can't help where they were born any more than they can help the color of their skin or their gender.

The last election saw the first person of color elected president and a woman get closer than ever before. Pretty soon, more than 15 percent of the U.S. population will be foreign-born. It's time that they had same shot.
techman is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old July 22nd, 2009, 06:28 PM   #2
GreaseMonkey
Senior Member
 
GreaseMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-04-05
Location: Madison Heights, MI
Posts: 17,989
iTrader: (22)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

Fuck the Constitution...we shouldn't use it anyways. I mean, it's over 200 years old!

I personally don't think you should be able to serve under any government position if you are not born here.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerryann View Post
I am not a lesbian but if I was I would do her.
GreaseMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2009, 06:33 PM   #3
jeepinRRT
Senior Member
 
jeepinRRT's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-13-08
Location: Grand Rapids,MI
Posts: 3,627
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

^ I agree, but the trend is to american exceptionalism. Thats why were going down the tubes...... no american pride left
jeepinRRT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2009, 06:36 PM   #4
XXXJ
Desert Rat
 
XXXJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-09-07
Location: Memphis, Mi
Posts: 5,630
iTrader: (13)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Obama birth certificate found!!!!
__________________
If I didn't think with my penis, I wouldn't think at all

I hope I am not a racist, I mean I drive fast, But I am not specialized at it.
XXXJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2009, 07:20 PM   #5
steveo
In the band!
 
Join Date: 03-30-07
Location: montana/wyoming
Posts: 20,293
iTrader: (6)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GreaseMonkey View Post
Fuck the Constitution...we shouldn't use it anyways. I mean, it's over 200 years old!

I personally don't think you should be able to serve under any government position if you are not born here.
Or vote, or collect any form of government aid....
steveo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2009, 07:21 PM   #6
PeteC
Get Up and Go
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Oak Park, Michigan
Posts: 2,561
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GreaseMonkey View Post
Fuck the Constitution...we shouldn't use it anyways. I mean, it's over 200 years old!
The constitution was written to be a living breathing document that can change to the needs of the nation.

Quote:
I personally don't think you should be able to serve under any government position if you are not born here.

Did you know that Resident Aliens are required to register for selective service and they can be drafted without the need for citizenship?

As a foreign born person I agree that only natural born citizens should be eligible to become the President.
I also believe the documents of live birth produced by the state of Hawaii are official enough for any American citizen born there.

As far as no foreign born in any government position, well, you have just thrown out a lot of goo people that are complete loyal to this country.

Think about it, a naturalized citizen makes a deep personal decision to become a U.S. citizen while a natural born citizen often takes it for granted.
I know a lot of foreign born that know more about U.S. laws, constitution and government than a lot of natural born I know. Because they are required to.

Last edited by PeteC; July 22nd, 2009 at 07:30 PM.
PeteC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2009, 07:22 PM   #7
PeteC
Get Up and Go
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Oak Park, Michigan
Posts: 2,561
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeepinRRT View Post
^ I agree, but the trend is to american exceptionalism. Thats why were going down the tubes...... no american pride left
Go to a swearing in ceremony and you will see American Pride on every face there holding up his or her right hand.
PeteC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2009, 07:24 PM   #8
PeteC
Get Up and Go
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Oak Park, Michigan
Posts: 2,561
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steveo View Post
Or vote, or collect any form of government aid....

At some point your family moved to the U.S. (unless you are 100% American Indian). I don't think they would agree to coming here, becoming an American and then being told they can not participate in on of the most fundamental freedoms enjoyed in this country. The inability to vote would make a naturalized U.S. citizen a second class citizen.
PeteC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2009, 07:29 PM   #9
PeteC
Get Up and Go
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Oak Park, Michigan
Posts: 2,561
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by techman View Post
...............................

Put another way, is there one good reason why foreign-born governors Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jennifer Granholm can't legally run for president but Mark Sanford and Sarah Palin can?

..................................

Before all of you self righteous right wing, conservative, start blaming this idea on the and liberal, Schwarzenegger was a Republican when first elected Governor of California and it was the Republicans, including many in the RNC, who first floated the idea of a constitutional change to allow Arnie a chance to run. If that change were to take place for Arni, it would also make Jenny eligible.
PeteC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2009, 07:32 PM   #10
steveo
In the band!
 
Join Date: 03-30-07
Location: montana/wyoming
Posts: 20,293
iTrader: (6)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteC View Post
At some point your family moved to the U.S. (unless you are 100% American Indian). I don't think they would agree to coming here, becoming an American and then being told they can not participate in on of the most fundamental freedoms enjoyed in this country. The inability to vote would make a naturalized U.S. citizen a second class citizen.
My family moved here and killed off those lazy redskin bastards. I dont know what kind of an education dutch schools give their kids, but indians are non native also. They just arrived here earlier than the europeans.
steveo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2009, 07:32 PM   #11
jeepinRRT
Senior Member
 
jeepinRRT's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-13-08
Location: Grand Rapids,MI
Posts: 3,627
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteC View Post
Go to a swearing in ceremony and you will see American Pride on every face there holding up his or her right hand.
You know what I agree. I have never been to a ceremony, but I think this is close enough.

- Last year just after we moved to GR My fiance got her nails done at a local shop. It was owned by a lady who was from some sort of Asian Descent. After I did some of my own shopping next door I went into the nal place to see if Rachael was ready yet (lol ya right). Well one of this owners frequent customers brought her a gift. It was a flag arrangement in a fishbowl, full of red white and blue, stars and stripes. Something you would get at a florist. I didnt get it at first then someone asked what it was for. She said that she had jsut became an official US citizen the day before. She was so happy not only that someone got her a gift like this to celebrate, but that she passed her test and everything. You could see a genuine sense of pride and joy in her face when she was talking about it. You could see how big of a deal it was for her, something that everyone else takes for granted.

So, I still stand by my prior statement that american exceptionalism is dying but at least some people appreciate what a lot of others do not.
jeepinRRT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2009, 07:40 PM   #12
jeepinRRT
Senior Member
 
jeepinRRT's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-13-08
Location: Grand Rapids,MI
Posts: 3,627
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteC View Post
Before all of you self righteous right wing, conservative, start blaming this idea on the and liberal, Schwarzenegger was a Republican when first elected Governor of California and it was the Republicans, including many in the RNC, who first floated the idea of a constitutional change to allow Arnie a chance to run. If that change were to take place for Arni, it would also make Jenny eligible.
I honestly dont care who came up with it I am still against it. It just goes to show that both side are ass clowns. but anyone who dosent know that is truly sipping some good juice.
jeepinRRT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2009, 08:23 PM   #13
traveller
Senior Member
 
traveller's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-01-09
Location: williamston mi
Posts: 536
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteC View Post
The constitution was written to be a living breathing document that can change to the needs of the nation.

Pres. Woodrow Wilson was the first to pull this B.S. line. fact is the meaning of the Amendments DO NOT CHANGE WITH TIME. There is a way to amend the Constitution which is how it SHOULD be done. Not claiming the meaning has changed with time.


Did you know that Resident Aliens are required to register for selective service and they can be drafted without the need for citizenship?

As a foreign born person I agree that only natural born citizens should be eligible to become the President.
I also believe the documents of live birth produced by the state of Hawaii are official enough for any American citizen born there.

As far as no foreign born in any government position, well, you have just thrown out a lot of goo people that are complete loyal to this country.
Granholm was born in Canada Gov. Swatzanager was born in Europe. Need I go on.
Think about it, a naturalized citizen makes a deep personal decision to become a U.S. citizen while a natural born citizen often takes it for granted.
I know a lot of foreign born that know more about U.S. laws, constitution and government than a lot of natural born I know. Because they are required to.
I wonder how much on loves the Constitution when they think the meanings of the Amendments change with political climate not by Constitutionally changing them.
traveller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2009, 09:14 PM   #14
ovrlnd
HURL SCOUTS
 
ovrlnd's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-23-07
Location: Westland, Michigan
Posts: 10,003
iTrader: (14)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to ovrlnd
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteC View Post
Before all of you self righteous right wing, conservative, start blaming this idea on the and liberal, Schwarzenegger was a Republican when first elected Governor of California and it was the Republicans, including many in the RNC, who first floated the idea of a constitutional change to allow Arnie a chance to run. If that change were to take place for Arni, it would also make Jenny eligible.


arnie is not cut out for govt.
ovrlnd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2009, 09:49 PM   #15
PeteC
Get Up and Go
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Oak Park, Michigan
Posts: 2,561
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by traveller View Post
I wonder how much on loves the Constitution when they think the meanings of the Amendments change with political climate not by Constitutionally changing them.
I stand by what I said. The Constitution is a living breathing document. The fact that amendments can be added and stricken proves this, plain and simple.

The founding fathers knew that what they knew in their day would not equal what the future would bring. Aside from fundamental truths and rights, everything else was left to the possibility of change. This change requires an act of Congress and agreement of the "many" states, but it is the possibility of change, nonetheless. Hence living and breathing.

Amendments have contradicted other amendments over time. Prohibition, ending of prohibition. End of slavery. Women's right to vote, etc.

The articles of the constitution themselves left room for interpretation and change as well. Not the exact words written, but how the tenets of the articles were perceived and treated. Take the census for instance. Congress shall conduct a census every 10 years. But, how the census is conducted shall be determined by congressional act, not constitutional decree. Living, breathing document.
PeteC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2009, 10:02 PM   #16
traveller
Senior Member
 
traveller's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-01-09
Location: williamston mi
Posts: 536
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteC View Post
I stand by what I said. The Constitution is a living breathing document. The fact that amendments can be added and stricken proves this, plain and simple.

The founding fathers knew that what they knew in their day would not equal what the future would bring. Aside from fundamental truths and rights, everything else was left to the possibility of change. This change requires an act of Congress and agreement of the "many" states, but it is the possibility of change, nonetheless. Hence living and breathing.

Amendments have contradicted other amendments over time. Prohibition, ending of prohibition. Amendment 18 - Liquor Abolished. Ratified 1/16/1919. Repealed by Amendment 21, 12/5/1933. History

1. After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.

2. The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.
Amendment 21 - Amendment 18 Repealed. Ratified 12/5/1933. History

1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

2. The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.

3. The article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.
Not contradicting its repealing as for slavery was never Constitutionally protected.


End of slavery. Women's right to vote, etc.

The articles of the constitution themselves left room for interpretation and change as well. Not the exact words written, but how the tenets of the articles were perceived and treated. Take the census for instance. Congress shall conduct a census every 10 years. But, how the census is conducted shall be determined by congressional act, not constitutional decree. Living, breathing document.
I still don't buy the living breathing liberal we can unconstitutionally change the constitution. If we learn our history the meaning and intent of ALL the amendment are very clear. The living breathing argument is nothing more then those who want to constrain Constitutionally PROTECTED(the Constitution gives no one any right it affirms right given at birth) rights.
Yes the founders knew the Constitution would have to be amended with time and made provisions to do so, but that does not mean the meaning of the amendments change with time, as the theory of a living breathing Constitution goes.
traveller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2009, 10:12 PM   #17
Nuggets
I fix stuff!
 
Nuggets's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-15-06
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 13,438
iTrader: (13)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Default

We're doomed.
Nuggets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2009, 10:27 PM   #18
traveller
Senior Member
 
traveller's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-01-09
Location: williamston mi
Posts: 536
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteC View Post

The founding fathers knew that what they knew in their day would not equal what the future would bring. Aside from fundamental truths and rights, everything else was left to the possibility of change. This change requires an act of Congress and agreement of the "many" states, but it is the possibility of change, nonetheless. Hence living and breathing.
Just curious but would it be fundamental right to say have an import ban on firearms without amending the Constitution with this theory. Or say have a "fairness doctrine" for political talk shows?
traveller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2009, 11:12 PM   #19
brewmenn
Grumpy old man.
 
brewmenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Inkster, MI
Posts: 10,498
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

This is what I find most upsetting:

Quote:
Originally Posted by techman View Post
There's also a bill gathering some support in the House that would change election law to require candidates to prove their citizenship.
You mean to tell me that our election law does not require a person to prove that they are eligible for the office for which they're running for???? WTF?

I see this as a failure to uphold the Constitution of the United State of America.
brewmenn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2009, 11:32 PM   #20
GreaseMonkey
Senior Member
 
GreaseMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-04-05
Location: Madison Heights, MI
Posts: 17,989
iTrader: (22)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brewmenn View Post
This is what I find most upsetting:



You mean to tell me that our election law does not require a person to prove that they are eligible for the office for which they're running for???? WTF?

I see this as a failure to uphold the Constitution of the United State of America.
x2
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerryann View Post
I am not a lesbian but if I was I would do her.
GreaseMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:10 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright 2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Page generated in 0.38720 seconds with 80 queries