http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/entertai...r/asnaked02.jpg

Edited to add: And for those of you who read my posts "for the articles," here's this:

http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/entertai...schwarzenegger/

[ August 09, 2003, 10:13 AM: Message edited by: twin58 ]

Would *you* or anyone else you know want to see Gray Davis naked???

Schrecklich, as Arnie might say.

I'm accumulating a long list of items that Orrin Hatch should just shut up about. Allowing Hollywood the right to destroy our personal computers without any due process of law (by allowing the entertainment industry to send out file-destroying computer viruses to people who use filesharing software) is at the top of the list. Amending the Constitution to allow Michigan's liberal Democratic governor, Jennifer Granholm, to run for president, is another.

Hey Orrin, buddy, the Constitution's pretty good as it is. Stop trying to edit James Madison's, and Thomas Jefferson's, best work.

Charlie, even George Will says that part of the Constitution is outdated and today meaningless, considering immigration, this being a melting pot, etc.

However, I disagree with Will. I believe the Constitution's requirement that a president be native born is a good one. The argument for this might not be exactly the same as it was 200+ years ago when our Founders wrote it, but it's still valid and I think still reasonable. Perhaps I'm a bit naive, but I believe someone who was born on American soil might just have a little "thing" for this country more so than someone who was born elsewhere then moved here. It's kind of a "feel," so to speak. (Note: This is NOT meant to disparage immigrants or to imply that they're any less patriotic.)

[ August 10, 2003, 10:56 AM: Message edited by: MIB ]

MIB -- the flip side of your argument is that more recent immigrants may actually have more love and appreciation for the American "thing".

Perhaps, md, but I still believe the native-born requirement is important and worth keeping.

I was discussing this with a friend of mine, someone who's a second generation Serbian. His parents came here 40 or so years ago and are American citizens, of course. My buddy, who agrees with this native born requirement, explained to me that if his father, as an example, was president, and had to make a decision involving Serbia, there very well may be a conflict because of the "love for the Mother country," so to speak.

I believe the native born requirement is a small way to avoid this. Nevertheless, it's been part of the Constitution since day one, and there doesn't seem to be any big push to discard it, so let's leave well enough alone.

I think the intention of that rule is that someone's family be here at least one generation before it should be running our government. Back in the 1700s Im sure they didnt want some Brits coming back over and trying to bully their way into the government positions.
It would hold true today. I cant say that if you were born in India, Russia, Zimbabwe or anywhere else that you should be my President. If you werent born here, youre not a true American and even citizenship doesnt make that true in the eyes of people who were born here.