News Foreigners’ presidential eligibility

[Ivan Seeking]

WASHINGTON (AP) - Arnold Schwarzenegger, making his Sunday talk show debut as governor, said that he and other foreign-born citizens should be eligible to run for the White House...

A constitutional amendment proposed by Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, would make that possible. [continued]

http://www.showmenews.com/2004/Feb/20040223News017.asp

I think this is a terrible idea - incredibly dangerous!. This is a good way to lose a country... I really can't believe Hatch would support this. I think everyone - including 1st generation [born] US citizens - should write to their representatives and denounce this with extreme bias. I like some of what I hear from California, but given this, please send Arnold back to Hollywood before he hurts himself. I don't think he knows what a can of worms this is. I can gaurantee that this issue runs very deep for many Americans.

 

[JohnDubYa]

You would be all in favor of it if Arnold was a Liberal.

San Francisco was even trying to allow illegal aliens the right to vote in public school elections. How do you feel about that? What about allowing them the right to drivers licenses?

Frankly, I agree. Arnold should not be allowed to run for President. But don't you worry your head off, the amendment has 0 chance of going anywhere and Arnold, the Republican, won't win the Presidecy.

 

[Bystander]

Twenty years' citizenship? Make it thirty-five (minimum age for natural born citizen), and it doesn't sound too outrageous. Kissinger? Albright? Scare the livin' daylights outa me. On the other hand, there has never been a qualified individual in the office --- or any other public office --- so, what the hell --- why not?

 

[HAVOC451]

Terrible idea. If there is any change at all it should be that a candidates parents should have been born here too.

Hell, make that grandparents.

 

[Smurf]

Xenophobia is a terrible thing.

 

[Gokul43201]

But so is Xenon...

 

[Ivan Seeking]

You would be all in favor of it if Arnold was a Liberal.

You know, that hardly even deserves a comment. Quit lowering the quality of the discussion with your absurd accusations. These sorts of comment cause me grave doubt about your objectivity. This is also what caused to to blow up at you the last time. You take cheap shots. You can do better.

San Francisco was even trying to allow illegal aliens the right to vote in public school elections. How do you feel about that? What about allowing them the right to drivers licenses?

I oppose all of the above greatly. I think Plato even warns that losing control of the borders is to lose the nation.

Frankly, I agree. Arnold should not be allowed to run for President. But don't you worry your head off, the amendment has 0 chance of going anywhere and Arnold, the Republican, won't win the Presidecy.

I hope you're right. Up until now I found Arnold amusing, but now he's scaring me.

Xenophobia is a terrible thing.

This is not xenophobia. This is a legitimate concern about essential loyalties. One also needs to have a deep understanding of our many cultures and beliefs. This is a very large and complicated nation.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

On the other hand, there has never been a qualified individual in the office --- or any other public office --- so, what the hell --- why not?

If one can get elected one can't be a good choice for office.

Well, maybe Washington and Linlcoln were okay.

 

[JohnDubYa]

I oppose all of the above greatly.

Fair enough. I retract my earlier statement that you opposed Arnold's presidential candidcy based on his party.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Thank you. I'm really not that shallow.

 

[Bystander]

(snip)This is a legitimate concern about essential loyalties. (snip)

Raises a question: who is more loyal to the principles upon which the country was founded; the run of the mill party hack grabbing the money and running, or the immigrant who finally made it to the "promised land?"

 

[JohnDubYa]

Bystander has a good point. But I think Arnold would have a problem dealing with Austria in an objective manner. While I am reasonably certain he would place the US' interests above that of Austria, I don't think we can always count on that from future candidates.

 

[Smurf]

Please, enlighten me as to how Arnold is less loyal to the nation than anyone else?
I for one would not be upset if at an immigrant as Prime Minister of my country simply because he was not born here. If someone has lived in your America for 20 years, 20 freaking years (and made hella money doing it) why is he any less eligible than someone who's parents were born in America.

 

[JohnDubYa]

I don't think Arnold is less loyal to the US than any other country. But that is because he is a standup guy. Future candidates, however, may not be so Arnish.

Amazing. A few years ago everyone considered Arnold nothing more than a hack actor, and now everyone is arguing over whether or not he should be able to run for President.

 

[wasteofo2]

I don't get what the whole fuss is about. Maybe I'm just a fluke and haven't been instilled with the same sense of nationalism/xenophobia the rest of the population has, but I don't see what's so bad about people not born in the USA to be president. If Arnold wants to be president, fine, let him run, it'd be awesome to see something like Arnold Vs. Hillary in the future.

 

[Mercator]

Amazing. A few years ago everyone considered Arnold nothing more than a hack actor, and now everyone is arguing over whether or not he should be able to run for President.

PLease don't generalize. The majority of people outside the US still think it is some kind of a joke. The introduction of steroids in politics.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Raises a question: who is more loyal to the principles upon which the country was founded; the run of the mill party hack grabbing the money and running, or the immigrant who finally made it to the "promised land?"

I thought about that. In fact many immigrants here today would almost certainly be better than the choices at hand [Bush Kerry]. The problem is that we have an entirely new dimension of concern - one that supersedes virtually all other modes of corruption. We have much less certainty about person’s true loyalties. I worry that Bush really represents Texas oil money; but at least we are talking about Texas and US corporations; not Chinese or Austrian interests [as random examples]. The chance of insidious and implicit, or even explicit foreign influence at the highest level of the US government is just too dangerous to allow.

 

[Smurf]

PLease don't generalize. The majority of people outside the US still think it is some kind of a joke. The introduction of steroids in politics.

I refute that statement, I don't believe that.

 

[Smurf]

I thought about that. In fact many immigrants here today would almost certainly be better than the choices at hand [Bush Kerry]. The problem is that we have an entirely new dimension of concern - one that supersedes virtually all other modes of corruption. We have much less certainty about person’s true loyalties. I worry that Bush really represents Texas oil money; but at least we are talking about Texas and US corporations; not Chinese or Austrian interests [as random examples]. The chance of insidious and implicit, or even explicit foreign influence at the highest level of the US government is just too dangerous to allow.

aka xenophobia.

If Arnold wanted to help Austria, he'd run for president of Austria. He's not, he's running for President of the US, so unless you think this is part of an elaborate conspiracy about Austria trying to take over the US in revenge for ending the First world war I'm at a loss as to why Arnold shouldn't run for president.

 

[Mercator]

I refute that statement, I don't believe that.

Fair enough. I would vote for De Niro though, or Al Pacino. And they have better connections too I would guess. Boy, what a good team they would be. And Harrison Ford as the head of the new centralized intelligence. Denzel Washington, isn't he born to become Powell's sucessor? So much unused talent...

 

[wasteofo2]

I thought about that. In fact many immigrants here today would almost certainly be better than the choices at hand [Bush Kerry]. The problem is that we have an entirely new dimension of concern - one that supersedes virtually all other modes of corruption. We have much less certainty about person’s true loyalties. I worry that Bush really represents Texas oil money; but at least we are talking about Texas and US corporations; not Chinese or Austrian interests [as random examples]. The chance of insidious and implicit, or even explicit foreign influence at the highest level of the US government is just too dangerous to allow.

Kinda sounds like what people were saying about why a Catholic shouldn't be President before JFK came along.

I think the American public is hateful enough towards people different than them that we don't have to worry about some cunning Japanese operative getting more votes than some American Senator/Governor at this point in time, or any time in the near future.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

You all seem to see the world with rosy colored glasses here. This is not about hate. This is about cultural ideologies and cultural identity.

This is nothing like JFK since any candidate has religious beliefs - even if atheism.

 

[Smurf]

I agree, they have to have a woman president first, then we can start thinking about someone from another country!

 

[JohnDubYa]

Arnold is very much a businessman in addition to being an actor. He has tremendous political clout in California. Even the President of the California Teachers Association (usually very hostile to Republicans) praised his handling of the last budget. He is certainly not a shrill, celebrity lightweight.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

One very simple example of culture that comes to mind is that of my college German Professor. He had been in the US for about forty years - since Hitler took over Germany...he was German Jew. He was obviously a professor of language. Yet he still did not "get" many idiomatic expressions. One that he often said was "now we have that under our belts", instead of behind our belts. Granted this is trivial but that's the point. I hardly think this is more complex an issue than deeply rooted cultural beliefs and perspectives; expectations, and loyalties. Much of these are formed very early in life.

I think Bystander is effectively arguing that these can be acquired [or learned] in thirty years or so. I don't think so. Consider that once past age five the "native" language is set. After this a person will always think [primarily] in this language regardless of one's comfort with languages learned later in life. It is also known that language affects our thinking processes.

I will never think like a German any more than a person raised in Germany can think like a born and bred Californian American. So, just for consistency, even though I have strong family roots in Germany, I promise to never run for Chancellor of Germany.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Here's something else to consider. In fact, this is a clear example of why the right scares me so much these days.

Article. II.
Section. 1.
Clause 5: No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Constitution.html

We are talking about changing the U.S. Constitution in order to get one man elected. Is there some reason why this shouldn't scare the heck out of me?

 

[Smurf]

Yes, the government's going to **** anyways, who cares what accent it has.

 

[Mercator]

Arnold is very much a businessman in addition to being an actor. He has tremendous political clout in California. Even the President of the California Teachers Association (usually very hostile to Republicans) praised his handling of the last budget. He is certainly not a shrill, celebrity lightweight.

Yes, we should evaluate everyone on his own merits. It can be that Schwarzie is doing well, he's certainly not an idiot. Still, I think that the danger is that people who were movie stars all their working life, consider their political carreer just as another role and they play it like their preferred one. Arnold's "girlie men" was picked right out of a screenplay. On the other hand it's refreshing to hear politicaisn say what's on their minds (if it was not a movie character he was emulating)

 

[Mercator]

One very simple example of culture that comes to mind is that of my college German Professor. He had been in the US for about forty years - since Hitler took over Germany...he was German Jew. He was obviously a professor of language. Yet he still did not "get" many idiomatic expressions. One that he often said was "now we have that under our belts", instead of behind our belts. Granted this is trivial but that's the point. I hardly think this is more complex an issue than deeply rooted cultural beliefs and perspectives; expectations, and loyalties. Much of these are formed very early in life.

I think Bystander is effectively arguing that these can be acquired [or learned] in thirty years or so. I don't think so. Consider that once past age five the "native" language is set. After this a person will always think [primarily] in this language regardless of one's comfort with languages learned later in life. It is also known that language affects our thinking processes.

I will never think like a German any more than a person raised in Germany can think like a born and bred Californian American. So, just for consistency, even though I have strong family roots in Germany, I promise to never run for Chancellor of Germany.

Though I don't object to the "born in the USA" rule, your argument is not very strong. Isn't the whole concept of "being an American", that anyone with any background (with the exception of the French of course for those suffering of French-o-phobia) can become an American if he has the right spirit? Arnold's english language skills may not be perfect, but besides the accent they may be better than Bush's. He certainly personifies America better than Bush or Kerry do. But I would still prefer De Niro. ( YOU talking to ME?)

 

[Mercator]

This is nothing like JFK since any candidate has religious beliefs - even if atheism.

Mmmm... is there anywhere else where we can discuss this?

 

[Mercator]

It is also known that language affects our thinking processes.

I do agree with this though. I'm not sure if a German upbringing prohibits someone to become a fuctioning member of an English speaking country. (BTW, why governor yes, but prez no?) What I DO know, after several years in China and studying the language, is that a language as different from our European languages as Chinese, forms completely different minds. It makes it very difficult to really understand each other, even if you have all the words and the grammar right. It takes the Chinese much longer and takes much more effort to master their language and it affects their thinking, habits, skills and so on. I would go so far as to state that the use of the Chinese characters is a serious handicap in the reform, modernisation and democratisation of China. In our alphabet, the letters have no meaning on their own, they are completely abstract. New words are easily formed and are not necessarily linked to old concepts. If they are, the original concepts are easily disconnected from the new meaning, like nobody will think about fishing nets when using the word internet. Reading Chinese however, you literaly see the old concepts graphicaly, there is no escaping. A woman is a kneeling person. A woman with a child means "good" etc... it is in fact an ideal indoctrination instrument.
So, coming back to the thread, yes, I think Chinese should not be allowed to become president of the US

 

[JohnDubYa]

Mercator, do you know how they typeset Chinese? How many keys would you need?

 

[GENIERE]

… I would go so far as to state that the use of the Chinese characters is a serious handicap in the reform, modernisation and democratisation of China…

The examples you cited certainly seem to support your position. However the Japanese only took about 70 years to go from the Iron Age to the Nuclear Age. With a little persuasion they went from despotism to democracy in about 5 years. Hong Kong, Taiwan? I admit it seems to take external pressure to initiate the change but afterwards rapid progress is made.

I’ve read that I “think” (no comment please) in English because it’s my native language. Would a Chinese person’s thought process be different from mine; think in pictures rather than words? I’ve also read that the Chinese (average) IQ is higher than western cultures. Has their language given them an advantage in reasoning at the expense of individuality?

 

[Bystander]

(snip)an issue than deeply rooted cultural beliefs and perspectives; expectations, and loyalties. Much of these are formed very early in life.

I think Bystander is effectively arguing that these can be acquired [or learned] in thirty years or so. I don't think so. (snip)

Not in so many words --- more a matter of requiring a minimum of 35 years experience with the culture --- what the "candidate" makes of the 35a is his/her business. Mastery of idiom, customs, and what not? Again to the trivial cases --- anybody here know the exact meanings of "rare, medium, and well done" for every state in the union? If you like your yolks hot but still liquid, do you order "sunny side up" or "over medium?" What parts of the country do you have to specifically state, "HOLD the mayo," to get a palatable burger?

Getting back to the theme of the thread, more mucking with the Constitution? Hatch must be nuts. Well, maybe it ain't such a bad idea to open things up a little. Overseas manipulation of the government? When haven't foreign powers been manipulating the government?

The Constitution isn't what keeps us from winding up with an Arafat for prez --- it's the electorate. The office isn't empowered to ratify treaties, make laws, levy taxes, or do much of anything beyond breathe air and take up space. Executive orders can be overturned by congress, the supreme court, and popular thumbing of the nose --- FDR did not inter Japanese without a lot of help --- he could have been overturned by the public and press in a heartbeat.

Appointments, congressional seats, benches? If you're concerned about foreign influences, these are the public offices most easily and likely to be abused --- stop and think how many homegrown occupants are in the employ of Medelin.

 

[Mercator]

Mercator, do you know how they typeset Chinese? How many keys would you need?

John, Chinese typewriters did exist, but they were a complicated affair. Essentialy it was a box that contained the characters (some 2.000 to 3.000 depending on the use) in a logical order (classification by "radicals" which are 256 basic elements of Chinese characters). So you had to choose every character in the box, then a special handle took it out and printed it on the paper.
Nowadays, using computers, there are several systems. As far as I know there are no Chinese character keyboards. So they use pinyin, which is a romanisation of Chinese characters. F.e. you type "ma" and then a series of characters will appear (ranked according to frequence in the language) that have the pronounciation "ma" there are many characters representing the sound "ma" that all have different meanings (mother, horse, ? ...) Although they have the same pronounciation, they may have a different tone when pronounced. So you choose the character that you meant and voila!
An additional difficulty is that Chinese has much less soundcombinations than our western languages. We have a few thousand possibilities, in Chinese only about 600. So John would become Yue han. John they simply cannot pronounce (let alone Ron )

 

[JohnDubYa]

Cool! Thanks for the info. How much English is taught in their public school system?

 

[Mercator]

The examples you cited certainly seem to support your position. However the Japanese only took about 70 years to go from the Iron Age to the Nuclear Age. With a little persuasion they went from despotism to democracy in about 5 years. Hong Kong, Taiwan? I admit it seems to take external pressure to initiate the change but afterwards rapid progress is made.

I’ve read that I “think” (no comment please) in English because it’s my native language. Would a Chinese person’s thought process be different from mine; think in pictures rather than words? I’ve also read that the Chinese (average) IQ is higher than western cultures. Has their language given them an advantage in reasoning at the expense of individuality?

Well, the Chinese made technological progress too, though both Japanese and Chinese are said to be good in copying rather than come up with original ideas. I don't know the Japanese very well, but China is not Hong Kong, where there was not " a little persuasion" but simply western rule for a century or so. Mao introduced pinyin, the romanisation of Chinese. He wanted to "democratize" the language, make it easier for ordinary Chinese to become literate. But he stopped short of using it to replace the characters and now it is only used as an aid in the study of Chinese and other languages.
Chinese have to memorise several thousand complicated characters during their youth and that certainly determines part of their character. It will certainly help with mathematical studies, because they learn to concentrate and work hard and it has some similarities. It is not just a matter of pictograms, they form the basis, but the actual language is a complex logic system. It is well possible that this gives them an advantage in certain tests. Individuality and creativity on the contrary (which are not measured in the usual IQ tests) would probably score much lower. Many foreigners visiting China will probably disagree, because they come to places like Shanghai, essentially the cities were all the ambitious and creative talents crowd together. Inland China is a completely different story.

 

[Mercator]

Cool! Thanks for the info. How much English is taught in their public school system?

Now every middle school teaches English and even some (better) first grade schools do. But the quality is not consistent. In general the Chinese education system is becoming a very elitist affair. Public,free schools which offer no future for their students for the poor and "famous" private run schools which can cost a multitude of an average Chinese monthly salary per month. Still teaching is so-so. The listen and write down style. Repeating and don't think for yourself. In general they will be much better in writing than in speaking the language (also because have less opportunity to speak it) But since they got the Beijing Olympics in 2008 and a few other international events in sight, many do their best to speak a little.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I'm not sure if a German upbringing prohibits someone to become a fuctioning member of an English speaking country. (BTW, why governor yes, but prez no?)

I'm not saying anything about becoming a functional member. This is not intended as a slight in any way; we are talking about a person holding the highest office in the land. Also, personally, I don't think Arnold should be governor either but this is not so critical as holding national office in my mind. The short answer as to why Arnold can be Gov is that the states each write their own constitutions.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Though I don't object to the "born in the USA" rule, your argument is not very strong. Isn't the whole concept of "being an American", that anyone with any background (with the exception of the French of course for those suffering of French-o-phobia) can become an American if he has the right spirit? Arnold's english language skills may not be perfect, but besides the accent they may be better than Bush's. He certainly personifies America better than Bush or Kerry do. But I would still prefer De Niro. ( YOU talking to ME?)

Let me say this: US soldiers swear to defend the U.S Constitution against all threats; foreign and domestic. The fact that Arnold would seek to modify this in his quest for power - the Constitution, the very definition of our country - is in itself proof that he is not an American at heart.

EDIT: Well, maybe it does represent the worst of America - the ruthless pursuit of power.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Not in so many words --- more a matter of requiring a minimum of 35 years experience with the culture --- what the "candidate" makes of the 35a is his/her business. Mastery of idiom, customs, and what not? Again to the trivial cases --- anybody here know the exact meanings of "rare, medium, and well done" for every state in the union? If you like your yolks hot but still liquid, do you order "sunny side up" or "over medium?" What parts of the country do you have to specifically state, "HOLD the mayo," to get a palatable burger?

Culture is important. They must be assimilated. Resistance is futile.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I also want to stress that I am not making a simple objection to Arnold's use of English. I was pointing out that even language - which much less complex than deep cultural issues - can elude long time citizens. Also, with regard to cultural issues and perceptions, the first 20 years of life are probably more important than the rest combined.

The second point is that according to some reports that I have read, one's native language and childhood may even influence basic cultural perceptions and biases on a physical level. So I'm am not complaining about Arnold or anyone else having an accent or anything as simple as that.

 

[Mercator]

I also want to stress that I am not making a simple objection to Arnold's use of English. I was pointing out that even language - which much less complex than deep cultural issues - can elude long time citizens. Also, with regard to cultural issues and perceptions, the first 20 years of life are probably more important than the rest combined.

The second point is that according to some reports that I have read, one's native language and childhood may even influence basic cultural perceptions and biases on a physical level. So I'm am not complaining about Arnold or anyone else having an accent or anything as simple than that.

I guess that is all true, I did not interprete your posts as simple as a remark on his accent either. But you are making it sound like you want to make absolutely sure that people in a governing position have a certain "cultural identity" (by lack of a better word) and that this has to be cultivated through a few generations of immersion in that culture. I thought of the US as much more diversified as that. Can a president not be someone who has respect for, but is not immersed in all the cultures that form his country?
In Belgium f.e., we have 3 official languages. Our people are historically mixed and the mixing of different cultures is a continuous process, Spanish, Italian, North Afriacns immigrants and more recently East Europeans add to the mix. Not that it makes things easy, but in our small country it is just not possible to have a PM for example who perfectly masters the languages , let alone the culture of Flemish, Walloon, German and others.
Thinking about it, unification of language and culture is a great tool and advantage. China did it more than 2000 years ago and the US has evolved with a common laguage. That this never happened in Europe is at this moment an enormous problem. Did you hear about the translation system in the European institutions? I for one would be very much in favor in a common language in stead of this tower of Babel.

 

[russ_watters]

It has been my perception that immigrants don't take the USA for granted as much as natural-born citizens. As a result, their patriotism is often stronger than average. Colin Powell isn't an immigrant, but his parents were - he's the most patriotic American I've ever heard of.

 

[Smurf]

Patriotism shouldn't be the first concern anyways, I'm hardly patriotic myself but given the chance I would never betray My country for any reason.

 

[Gokul43201]

Let me say this: US soldiers swear to defend the U.S Constitution against all threats; foreign and domestic. The fact that Arnold would seek to modify this in his quest for power - the Constitution, the very definition of our country - is in itself proof that he is not an American at heart.

I'm not sure I follow this. What is it exactly that Arnold seeks to modify ?

 

[Smurf]

Let me say this: US soldiers swear to defend the U.S Constitution against all threats; foreign and domestic. The fact that Arnold would seek to modify this in his quest for power - the Constitution, the very definition of our country - is in itself proof that he is not an American at heart.

EDIT: Well, maybe it does represent the worst of America - the ruthless pursuit of power.

Erm, so modifying the constitution for the effect of gaining power is un-american?

 

[Nereid]

Simple, change the constitution to prohibit anyone who cannot trace their American ancestry back at least 500 years from holding any public office!

 

[russ_watters]

Patriotism shouldn't be the first concern anyways, I'm hardly patriotic myself but given the chance I would never betray My country for any reason.

Well, I was just thinking that patriotism is a big motivator for the two key components of a political official: 1. the desire to improve the country and 2. caring enough about it to want to hold public office.

Yeah, I know I'm overly idealistic.

 

[Gokul43201]

Erm, so modifying the constitution for the effect of gaining power is un-american?

That can't be what he meant...can it ?