The California Legislature full with Girlie Men

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2004-07-19 07:44pm

SirNitram wrote:Hell, he'd probably pull some of the Liberal vote, as long as he stood by some social liberal issues.

Are you kidding? He could probably beat a Roosevelt-zombie.

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2004-07-19 07:45pm

Howedar wrote:
SirNitram wrote:Hell, he'd probably pull some of the Liberal vote, as long as he stood by some social liberal issues.
Are you kidding? He could probably beat a Roosevelt-zombie.

But the comedy value of a Roosevelt-zombie candidate would be hilarious.

"In the face of these terrorist attacks, the only thing we have to fear is BRAAAAAAAAAAAINS!!!"

Thag · Post by **Thag** » 2004-07-20 12:01am

Just wondering, how's the mainstream news running this? The only info I've seen so far has been on here, but I wouldn't be surprised if they're crying seven different degrees of wolf.

Lonestar · Post by **Lonestar** » 2004-07-20 12:09am

It's been on cnn.com.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-07-20 12:22am

Howedar wrote:I would absolutely be in favor of such an amendment, at which time I'd definately vote Ahnold.

Hell, I would vote for Arnold. If I were American, that is. Well, we can only dream.

Having dreams must be so good...

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-07-20 12:28am

The issue with opening the presidency to foreigners is somewhat difficult, since it's pretty clear that if you removed that requirement you'd hve to replace it with another. For example, should a foreigner running for president have to have gone through grad school or college in the US? How long must they have been a US citizen, if you place any requirement on them? The list of difficulties goes on and on, and it would probably become so technical that the amendment in any given form would never have sufficient momentum to be ratified.

Aeolus · Post by **Aeolus** » 2004-07-20 11:15am

Xenophobe3691 wrote:
Howedar wrote:
SirNitram wrote:Hell, he'd probably pull some of the Liberal vote, as long as he stood by some social liberal issues.
Are you kidding? He could probably beat a Roosevelt-zombie.
But the comedy value of a Roosevelt-zombie candidate would be hilarious.

"In the face of these terrorist attacks, the only thing we have to fear is BRAAAAAAAAAAAINS!!!"

Thank you, I haven't stopped laughing for almost 5 minutes.And coffie is now all over my desk

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-07-20 01:46pm

Bah! I still like the one in my sig better.

Luzifer's right hand · Post by **Luzifer's right hand** » 2004-07-20 04:44pm

New brew: 'Governator' beer

Chicvara, meanwhile, promises the quality of the brew is excellent, with a smooth finish and bit of a bite.

"It's no 'girly-man' beer," he said.

Post by **Kuja** » 2004-07-21 12:46am

That's great! I wish mayor Masiello could be more like the Governator.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-07-23 10:40pm

Master of Ossus wrote:The issue with opening the presidency to foreigners is somewhat difficult, since it's pretty clear that if you removed that requirement you'd hve to replace it with another. For example, should a foreigner running for president have to have gone through grad school or college in the US? How long must they have been a US citizen, if you place any requirement on them? The list of difficulties goes on and on, and it would probably become so technical that the amendment in any given form would never have sufficient momentum to be ratified.

I think its only difficult if you put difficulties there. The question you should ask why is there discrimination on the basis of nation of origin?
The only criteria in a democratic nation should be that a person must be a citizen of that nation to hold office, simple as that.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-07-23 10:46pm

Stuart Mackey wrote:
Master of Ossus wrote:The issue with opening the presidency to foreigners is somewhat difficult, since it's pretty clear that if you removed that requirement you'd hve to replace it with another. For example, should a foreigner running for president have to have gone through grad school or college in the US? How long must they have been a US citizen, if you place any requirement on them? The list of difficulties goes on and on, and it would probably become so technical that the amendment in any given form would never have sufficient momentum to be ratified.
I think its only difficult if you put difficulties there. The question you should ask why is there discrimination on the basis of nation of origin?
The only criteria in a democratic nation should be that a person must be a citizen of that nation to hold office, simple as that.

I disagree. There should at least be a residency requirement simply to place a limit on the number of people who can run for the US presidency.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-07-23 11:04pm

Master of Ossus wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:
Master of Ossus wrote:The issue with opening the presidency to foreigners is somewhat difficult, since it's pretty clear that if you removed that requirement you'd hve to replace it with another. For example, should a foreigner running for president have to have gone through grad school or college in the US? How long must they have been a US citizen, if you place any requirement on them? The list of difficulties goes on and on, and it would probably become so technical that the amendment in any given form would never have sufficient momentum to be ratified.
I think its only difficult if you put difficulties there. The question you should ask why is there discrimination on the basis of nation of origin?
The only criteria in a democratic nation should be that a person must be a citizen of that nation to hold office, simple as that.
I disagree. There should at least be a residency requirement simply to place a limit on the number of people who can run for the US presidency.

I think you will find that the practical issues surrounding running for office will solve that problem..hell, just look at the money you need to do it.
As a matter of fact, in NZ the moment you are a citizen you can be electd to parliment, but that does not mean that all freshly minted citizens do so, or even want to.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2004-07-24 04:14am

Isn't that sort of creating a 'second class citizen'. If you are a citizen, but not born in the country, and offices of power are automatically banned from you, aren't you by default a second class citizen

Post by **Gandalf** » 2004-07-24 04:29am

Crown wrote:Isn't that sort of creating a 'second class citizen'. If you are a citizen, but not born in the country, and offices of power are automatically banned from you, aren't you by default a second class citizen

Technically yes.

Can foreigners be VP?

Son of the Suns · Post by **Son of the Suns** » 2004-07-24 05:13am

Gandalf wrote:
Crown wrote:Isn't that sort of creating a 'second class citizen'. If you are a citizen, but not born in the country, and offices of power are automatically banned from you, aren't you by default a second class citizen
Technically yes.

Can foreigners be VP?

I don't think there is anything that says that they can't be, and if the prez were to die, they would assume the office, although they couldn't run for president.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-07-24 10:09am

Master of Ossus wrote:I disagree. There should at least be a residency requirement simply to place a limit on the number of people who can run for the US presidency.

I'd rather see a wealth limit. Personally, I don't like the fact that you don't have a chance in Hell of ever becoming President unless you're filthy rich.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2004-07-24 01:37pm

Aw but Mike, that would ban Schwarzenegger from being president!

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2004-07-25 01:50pm

Son of the Suns wrote:I don't think there is anything that says that they can't be, and if the prez were to die, they would assume the office, although they couldn't run for president.

I'm pretty sure that because the VP is more or less a backup-President in case the President dies or something, that the same qualifications for becoming President apply also to becoming Vice-President.

Symmetry · Post by **Symmetry** » 2004-07-25 06:02pm

Marksist wrote: From what I've seen (Californians correct me if I'm wrong) Arnold is a pretty moderate Republican a la John McCain.

No actually, he's more moderate than McCain in terms of things like abortion.

Master of Ossus wrote:The issue with opening the presidency to foreigners is somewhat difficult, since it's pretty clear that if you removed that requirement you'd hve to replace it with another. For example, should a foreigner running for president have to have gone through grad school or college in the US? How long must they have been a US citizen, if you place any requirement on them? The list of difficulties goes on and on, and it would probably become so technical that the amendment in any given form would never have sufficient momentum to be ratified.

What's so hard? You have to be a citizen for 7 years to be a rep, 9 years to be a senator. 11 years in the US ought to be enough to become president.

Oh, and the governator makes another reason to regret the fact that I didnt' get a job with HP in California this summer (not that the Media Lab is bad).

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2004-07-25 08:35pm

Master of Ossus wrote:The issue with opening the presidency to foreigners is somewhat difficult, since it's pretty clear that if you removed that requirement you'd hve to replace it with another. For example, should a foreigner running for president have to have gone through grad school or college in the US? How long must they have been a US citizen, if you place any requirement on them? The list of difficulties goes on and on, and it would probably become so technical that the amendment in any given form would never have sufficient momentum to be ratified.

Wha...? Do you think the Democratic or Republican parties would put someone who couldn't speak English on the ticket? I think we can just add requirements similar to those for being elected into Congress and we'll be fine.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2004-07-25 09:44pm

Uraniun235 wrote:
Master of Ossus wrote:The issue with opening the presidency to foreigners is somewhat difficult, since it's pretty clear that if you removed that requirement you'd hve to replace it with another. For example, should a foreigner running for president have to have gone through grad school or college in the US? How long must they have been a US citizen, if you place any requirement on them? The list of difficulties goes on and on, and it would probably become so technical that the amendment in any given form would never have sufficient momentum to be ratified.
Wha...? Do you think the Democratic or Republican parties would put someone who couldn't speak English on the ticket? I think we can just add requirements similar to those for being elected into Congress and we'll be fine.

I don't think Ossus read the ammendment. They would require 20 years citizenship in addition to the residency requirement instead of natural-born status. An education requirement would be unreasonable, since only educated people are going to bother running. Sure, 40 foreigners could run, but they'd have not the money or the popularity to win.

P.S. VP and Pres have the same requirements. I think if succession lines ever got past the VP and got to a non-natural citizen (a Speaker who was Canadian) then they'd get skipped over.

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2004-07-25 11:16pm

Darth Wong wrote:
Master of Ossus wrote:I disagree. There should at least be a residency requirement simply to place a limit on the number of people who can run for the US presidency.
I'd rather see a wealth limit. Personally, I don't like the fact that you don't have a chance in Hell of ever becoming President unless you're filthy rich.

And what of those of us who are rich, yet want to be president?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-07-25 11:44pm

Xenophobe3691 wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:
Master of Ossus wrote:I disagree. There should at least be a residency requirement simply to place a limit on the number of people who can run for the US presidency.
I'd rather see a wealth limit. Personally, I don't like the fact that you don't have a chance in Hell of ever becoming President unless you're filthy rich.
And what of those of us who are rich, yet want to be president?

Quite frankly, the rich already have more than enough advantages in life. You won't be so pedantic as to actually demand evidence of this obvious fact, will you?

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2004-07-25 11:59pm

Darth Wong wrote: Quite frankly, the rich already have more than enough advantages in life. You won't be so pedantic as to actually demand evidence of this obvious fact, will you?

No, I was just wondering if blocking the rich would serve any good as well. A more explicit question would be "What if this person were self made?"