kipperthefrog Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 Would YOU vote Arnold??? Why not? ronald reagan was an actor and he made a good president!!! -Clicky-
ckcsaber Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 I like the idea of the amendment. Regarding Arnold becoming the president? Maybe. Eh, I need to throw this in (from Conan o'Brien) - "Lest you forget, Conan, in Batman and Robin, I was Mr. Freeze. I will freeze the budget crisis with my ray gun then turn to the camera and say 'You need to chill out.'"
Spider AL Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 Well let's put it this way, it would be nice to have a fascist in the white-house with a real-life germanic accent for a change. No, seriously I think Arnold would make at least as good a president as George W., and probably MUCH less dismal in the long run. Arnold at least has succeeded on his own merits in several walks of life before entering politics after all.
Kain Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 Anyone ever see Demolition Man? Listen to Sandra Bullock's speech in the beginning about how California was destroyed.
Writer Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 Eh, couldn't hurt, right? He seems like a smart enough guy.
Spider AL Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 Eh, couldn't hurt, right? He seems like a smart enough guy.As regards the latter part of your post, you are correct, when you compare Ahhnold to say... Bushie Jr. As to the former, oohohoho. Hurt? You haven't seen hurt until you've seen Ahhnold in action.
kipperthefrog Posted November 11, 2004 Author Posted November 11, 2004 At least he was a self made man as far as I know! Opera Winfry started out poor and knows what its like! she gives to the poor and buys people cars! Was Arnold just a foreign guy who just got into acting, and he made it himself? or was hee BORN rich and has NO connecection to the common man? Is he a Democrat or Republican? KAIN: Anyone ever see Demolition Man? Listen to Sandra Bullock's speech in the beginning about how California was destroyed. What does she MEAN California was destroyed??? (Maybie it was destroyed from the RICH people's perspective becuase they are only getting 25 million instead of 30 million! that won't likely HAPPEN, but its just a thought...)
Evil Dark Jedi Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 Arnie seems to be a great governor even though it means giving up acting for the next few years. As I said he is a great governor. Unfortunately he has to give up his acting for a few years because of his governor duties.
Shok_Tinoktin Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 Originally posted by kipperthefrog Was Arnold just a foreign guy who just got into acting, and he made it himself? or was hee BORN rich and has NO connecection to the common man? Is he a Democrat or Republican? He is a Republican. My understanding is that he was a poor immigrant from Austria who got his start in bodybuilding, then made a fortune in movies, and is now governor. I don't know about the amendment part (haven't thought about it too much), but if an amendment did exist, he would get my vote. As a Californian myself, I found that I agreed with him on most of the propositions, so I would logically find myself supporting him as a presidential candidate.
ET Warrior Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 Originally posted by Evil Dark Jedi Arnie seems to be a great president even though it means giving up acting for the next few years. er....you do know he's not ACTUALLY the president right now...just the governor of california. I suppose I'd vote for him if I agreed with the platform he ran on, but based on what he's done in California I doubt he'd get MY vote
Elijah Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 It would be nice, but he cant be elected, as he was not born in America, unless I am mistaken.
acdcfanbill Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 you are correct, also, i dont think Regan was that great of a president, unless perhaps you own stock in companies who have defense contracts...
ronbrothers Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 I really hate to say this because I like Arnold. But the founding fathers had good reason for disallowing just that. I'm sorry, but the United States of America should never have a foreign born president. You can't make exceptions just for one person. It would be dangerous to allow an individual who might have divided loyalties to govern this country. I truly think Arnold would mean well, but we'd be opening Pandora's box. Just like these idiots who emailed Ohio residents from England campaigning for Senator Kerry. It's out there. We do not need someone in the Oval Office who would potentially look to foreign opinion over the interests of the U.S. citizenry.
Shok_Tinoktin Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 What about second generation Americans? Why is that so different? Say someone comes to America and has kids soon after, do they have divided loyalties? It is hard to say. I'm not sure place of birth is simple enough to determine national loyalties. Still, I'm not sure if it would be a good idea to allow it.
Spider AL Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 the United States of America should never have a foreign born president. You can't make exceptions just for one person. It would be dangerous to allow an individual who might have divided loyalties to govern this country.Quite short-sighted. For instance many second-generation Jewish people have divided loyalties between the needs of the US and the needs of Israel. Yet they could run for president. Your stance is really based on very little reason.
ronbrothers Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 Originally posted by Spider AL Quite short-sighted. For instance many second-generation Jewish people have divided loyalties between the needs of the US and the needs of Israel. Yet they could run for president. Your stance is really based on very little reason. My stance is based only that it is a requirement put in place not by me, but by the framers of the United States constitution. I am not a fan of amending the constitution unless there are obvious needs such as abolition of slavery or the right to vote regardless of race or sex.
Spider AL Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 My stance is based only that it is a requirement put in place not by me, but by the framers of the United States constitution.That's not what you said in your original post. You put forward all sorts of reasons why you think those darned foreigners should be kept out of the oval office. And your reply does nothing to address the questions that were posed to you, specifically, why do you think that someone born in the US who has divided national loyalties should be eligible to run for president, but someone born outside America who has wholeheartedly adopted the American way of life, should not be eligible? Doesn't make any sense at all. I am not a fan of amending the constitution unless there are obvious needs such as abolition of slavery or the right to vote regardless of race or sex.Slavery was abolished because it was unjust. By purely technical standards, not allowing Arnold to run for President is also unjust. Thus, the constraints should be abolished.
kipperthefrog Posted November 13, 2004 Author Posted November 13, 2004 I asked my Grandpa about Swartzenegger be presedent and he said he can't be president unless they change the constitution, and they will not change the constitution.Grampa also says Arnold was born in ausria and thats where the Nazis come from; maybie his dad was a nazi. If they can pass stuff like the patriot act, they can pass the repeal of that law aginst foreign born presidents!
kipperthefrog Posted November 13, 2004 Author Posted November 13, 2004 Another thing: I don't think Arnold would hurt America just becuase he's a foreign born person. Who KNOWS??? He might be even better than Bu$h!
Leper Messiah Posted November 13, 2004 Posted November 13, 2004 well i think he could handle the job, mind you from what (admittedly little) ive seen of his work in california i think his actually winning an election might be a problem. as for the nationality thing, if he can be governer surely hes fit to be a president. President Jesse Ventura is an interesting possiblity
Shok_Tinoktin Posted November 13, 2004 Posted November 13, 2004 Originally posted by Leper Messiah from what (admittedly little) ive seen of his work in california i think his actually winning an election might be a problem. Why? He won the governor race overwhelmingly as a Republican in an extremely Democratic state, in spite of the fact that there were multiple Republican candidates (two of which had a significant percent of the vote) and only one Democrat. Most (if not all) of the propositions he backed passed. All the experts say he appeals to the moderates, which are usually the people who decide an election.
ronbrothers Posted November 13, 2004 Posted November 13, 2004 Originally posted by Spider AL That's not what you said in your original post. You put forward all sorts of reasons why you think those darned foreigners should be kept out of the oval office. And your reply does nothing to address the questions that were posed to you, specifically, why do you think that someone born in the US who has divided national loyalties should be eligible to run for president, but someone born outside America who has wholeheartedly adopted the American way of life, should not be eligible? Doesn't make any sense at all. Slavery was abolished because it was unjust. By purely technical standards, not allowing Arnold to run for President is also unjust. Thus, the constraints should be abolished. What you simply don't understand is how important our constitution is to us. It is not something to be toyed with. Slavery was most definately unjust. But you can't compare one human being owning another human being with someone choosing to immigrate here and not being allowed to run for president.
wassup Posted November 13, 2004 Posted November 13, 2004 Originally posted by kipperthefrog Grampa also says Arnold was born in ausria and thats where the Nazis come from; maybie his dad was a nazi. Indeed, his father, Gustav, was a high-ranking officer in the SA (Stormtroopers). However, Arnold didn't even attend his father's funeral, so I presume there's some animosity between them.
ronbrothers Posted November 13, 2004 Posted November 13, 2004 Originally posted by wassup Indeed, his father, Gustav, was a high-ranking officer in the SA (Stormtroopers). However, Arnold didn't even attend his father's funeral, so I presume there's some animosity between them. I'm no expert on his bio at all, but I remember the subject came up during the recall campaign and it was said that Arnold found out about Gustav's past after he died.
jon_hill987 Posted November 13, 2004 Posted November 13, 2004 "Vote for me if you want to liv" Well the way i see it he cant be any worse than Dublya, he seems bright enough. and why should he be blamed for the fact his dad was a nazi? what is the quote from demolition man? I'm sure I heard it but cant think what it was. anyway, there is no way he could be presedent, most americans are far to patriotic to let a foreigner in the white-house.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.