Foreigners’ presidential eligibility

[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 ?

 

[Smurf]

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.

Thats bollocks, you don't have to be patriotic to want to improve your country...

 

[russ_watters]

Thats bollocks, you don't have to be patriotic to want to improve your country...

I'm not sure what other word to use to describe someone who cares about their country enough to want to improve it...

 

[Ivan Seeking]

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

Could you elaborate? This almost sounds like a cheap shot that is completely out of context.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

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

The constitution would have to be changed in order for him to become president. I cited the constitutional article earlier.

Constitutional amendments are no small matter. To do this for one man, with no other motivation - say like a mass social movement - is obscene and dangerous at best. Unless some great social injustice demands change - such as the right for women to vote - we don't change the literal definition of this country at a whim; especially just for one person to gain power.

 

[Smurf]

technically its not being changed for one man, its not like they want to edit it to say "No one who was not born in US can run for president, with the exception of Action-Hero and Republican politician Arnold Swartzeneggar"

 

[Ivan Seeking]

This is completely the motive: Arnold. This is certain.

This is not from some greater social issue.

 

[Bystander]

(snip)Constitutional amendments are no small matter. To do this for one man, with no other motivation - say like a mass social movement - is obscene and dangerous at best. Unless some great social injustice demands change - such as the right for women to vote - we don't change the literal definition of this country at a whim; especially just for one person to gain power.

Amendment whatever, two term presidents, could be called the "no more Roosevelts" amendment; amendment whichever, cutting out the speaker of the house in the presidential succession, could be called the anti-John McCormick, or walking corpse, amendment. There was some talk of repealing the anti-FDR to cook up a third term for Eisenhower. Constitutional amendments aimed at specific individuals? All the time, Ivan --- yeah, it's obscene.

Question: is that the point of what Hatch is proposing? Arnold be eligible? And no one else? Seriously, whoever's running has to appeal to, or the opponent be repulsive to, usually over 50% of the voting electorate --- Pele, Arafat, Jaque Chirac, ain't going to make it --- Anwar Sadat might have, but his competence got him killed. There ain't that many cold-war moles, deep plants, whatever running around. Plus, other governments around the world are admittedly more persevering in policies than ours with its two-year house of reps flip-flop, but none of them have maintained focus on anything for the 20 or 35 years necessary to subvert this government in the event such an amendment should pass.

 

[Gokul43201]

This is completely the motive: Arnold. This is certain.

This is not from some greater social issue.

Okay, so you're saying the reason behind the Arnold proposal (not "really" proposed by Arnold, I imagine) is far from the reason behind the Bush proposal for amendment ?

Some might call that cynical...but I'll have to agree with you on this.

My initial reaction was to what I thought was a claim that a proposal to amend the Constitution, is by itself, unamerican.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I will answer later Bystander. For now, another entire dimension of this issue to consider: Loyalties

The videos are all at the unclassified level, but because of the nature of the product, they are for internal government educational use only. They are not available to anyone outside the government.

CI-TV host David Major introduces an episode on Russian Illegals in front of the Arlington House apartments in Rosslyn, VA where the Peter Herrmann, the son of Russian Illegal Rudi Hermann, lived. Peter was being groomed to continue his father's work lived. Peter grew up, though, thinking his parents were far right-leaning Germans who had immigrated to the US. Before he went to college, his father sat him down and told him that they were in fact Czechs and that Rudi was actually a Soviet intelligence office--a KGB Lt. Colonel--and his mother also worked for the KGB.

The KGB gave Peter his codename, INHERITOR, and provided training for him. He was accepted into Georgetown University and was told to befriend students with fathers in government, those with personal problems who could be approached, "progressives" among students and professors, Chinese students, and look for part-time employment with the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

The FBI was on to the Soviet Illegal family and turned them in 1977.

http://www.cicentre.com/LINKS_CI-TV.htm

Don't doubt for a second that infiltration by foreign operatives is an impossiblity. It has happened before. One spy that I read about [*.gov or otherwise reliable docs] was living here for something close to thirty years. He married an American woman and had kids. IIRC he also worked at high levels within US intelligence. One day he left and went home to mother Russia.

I believe one of the 911 terrorists lived here for over ten years and was married with kids.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Amendment whatever, two term presidents, could be called the "no more Roosevelts" amendment; amendment whichever, cutting out the speaker of the house in the presidential succession, could be called the anti-John McCormick, or walking corpse, amendment. There was some talk of repealing the anti-FDR to cook up a third term for Eisenhower. Constitutional amendments aimed at specific individuals? All the time, Ivan --- yeah, it's obscene.

I'm not sure about the Speaker of the House reference, but yes, I would oppose any such actions taken for or against any candidate. If some great principle were at stake that would be another thing.

I don't consider a few examples from the last 220 years as common though. They didn't repeal anything for Ike. I'm not clear on what drove the FDR limits. Was this a case of political tampering? FDR actually pushed this through didn't he?

 

[Gokul43201]

FDR actually pushed this through didn't he?

That's what I thought...

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Okay, so you're saying the reason behind the Arnold proposal (not "really" proposed by Arnold, I imagine) is far from the reason behind the Bush proposal for amendment ?

Some might call that cynical...but I'll have to agree with you on this.

My initial reaction was to what I thought was a claim that a proposal to amend the Constitution, is by itself, unamerican.

No; by no means. There are times when Constitutional Amendments are completely appropriate.

Also, consider the logic for the original link [from Arnold]:

"There are so many people in this country that are now from overseas, that are immigrants, that are doing such a terrific job with their work, bringing businesses here, that there’s no reason why not," said Schwarzenegger, who became a U.S. citizen in 1983.

This has always been true and those who wrote the Constitution knew it; and knew it would be. So again on Arnold's part we see a complete disregard for who we are. I wonder if he has any interest in constitutional arguments; or just his own agenda? We need to get into some of the original constitutional arguments for this. That should be interesting.

 

[Bystander]

XXII (two term limit), passed in 1947, ratified 1951 --- FDR would have have made the deal with the devil to run things from the grave, but I kinda doubt he had much active involvement with anything after 1945.

 

[Nereid]

Could you elaborate? This almost sounds like a cheap shot that is completely out of context.

Yes ... and no. From afar this debate looks like something entirely US (not even 'American', it wouldn't play in Canada, would it?), and very much 'of the moment' (Arnie, current balance of powers, etc). I mean, why does it matter where you were born? No one has any memories worth anything of their first x months/years, so why not set the bar at, say, from age 5? Then there's the hypocrisy of the whole thing - supposedly there's only one class of (US) citizenship - you're a US citizen or you're not - but then we learn that today there are in fact several classes of citizenship, just as there were previously in US history (women, slaves, land-owners, native Americans, ...), and still are (ex-felons, those in prison, 'enemy combatants', ...). So why is this particular two-class citizenship any less arbitrary than any other?

If the US were just a country of 2 million, in some out-of-the-way place, with no nukes, etc none of this would matter very much (except to those in the US). However, as the only superpower, the US' domestic politics casts a huge shadow over all of us.

 

[russ_watters]

This has always been true and those who wrote the Constitution knew it; and knew it would be. So again on Arnold's part we see a complete disregard for who we are. I wonder if he has any interest in constitutional arguments; or just his own agenda? We need to get into some of the original constitutional arguments for this. That should be interesting.

Since an amendment is a change in the Constitution, of what relevance is the intent of the framers?

Even as someone who has been called a nationalist on this board, I disagree with your position, Ivan. Arnold has been a citizen (not just a resident) for 20 years. I see no cause to doubt his loyalty to the US Constitution.

And though xenophobia is as American as apple pie, the US is now and always has been an "immigrant nation."

 

[Smurf]

isn't apple pie from europe somewhere?

 

[russ_watters]

isn't apple pie from europe somewhere?

Germany, I'd imagine...

 

[Smurf]

hehe, I wonder how that proverb came about 'As American as Apple Pie'. does anyone know anything about it? or should I start a new thread?

 

[russ_watters]

hehe, I wonder how that proverb came about 'As American as Apple Pie'. does anyone know anything about it? or should I start a new thread?

I think its a Pennsylvania Dutch (German) variant of German apple strudel.

 

[Bystander]

(snip)We need to get into some of the original constitutional arguments for this.(snip).

This was for the most part a "no hunting, fishing, or trespassing" sign posted for the European royal families --- fairly prescient considering Mexico, the French, and Maximillian forty (fifty?) years later.

Post WW I, it's pretty much obsolete.