What makes a "natural born" person patriotic?

[bripat9643]

Take this bripunk wannabe traitor savage. No one hates America more than him, but if hell froze over he could be President. Thank goodness that will NEVER happen and the utterly impotent and irrelevant loser will always remain the filthy useless animal that he is.

I hate the government, not America. I'm not eager to lick government butthole like you just because they run this country.

More specifically-you hate Americans.

It depends on the Americans. I hate ticks on the ass of society who vote themselves a bigger share of someone else's paycheck.

 

[FJO]

There are many natural born Americans who - by their birth place - qualify to be President.

You know, home loving patriots like Benedict Arnold, Aaron Burr, Jane Fonda, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Adam Yahiye Gadahn, Aldrich Aimes, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Robert Hanssen, John Walker Jr. and Benedict Arnold. Just to name a few.

Contrast the short list above (and you know that there are many many more) to the thousands (perhaps MILLIONS) of naturalized citizens who are happy to be in the land that gave them the opportunity their country of birth never could give them, and would NEVER try to "fundamentally transform" their new home to something similar to the hell hole they left behind.

A normal person would bet on the loyal naturalized citizens over the pieces of dirt who had the good luck of lottery to be born in America, but would be ready and willing to subjugate her to third world status.

The present law that requires the contender to be American born is - to be gentle and charitable - is archaic, obsolete, racist, xenophobic and totally 19th century, not that there is anything wrong with that.

And just to make it clear: I am a Canadian who is hooked on American politics and and I have no desire to run for President. And to be even more clear, I don't have the ability even if I were American.

Seems that the current field of presidential contenders should take my concession of lack of ability as a well meaning advice.

As your list points out- a natural born citizen is not inherently more patriotic than any other citizen.

However, It is a constitutional requirement and seems like a reasonable condition- as well as the others.

Actually, a natural born is inherently more patriotic to his country than a lot of immigrants. .

No- I don't know that this woman

born in the United States- who broadcast on behalf of Hitler was more patriotic than this man

View attachment 65459

No one but an flaming bigot would think otherwise.

Proving my poit. Thank you.

The present law is woefully obsolete and defies reality.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know, I've known people who served alongside me in the Navy, and some of them weren't U.S. natural born citizens, or in some cases, not even citizens at all, and each of them was more patriotic than many natural born citizens that I have met over the years.

One of them was my very first supervisor, who was a Philippine national, and another one was a teacher from Mexico who was working on becoming a citizen. Two years after I reported onboard that command, he did become a citizen.

What makes someone patriotic? A strong belief in the country that they live in, along with a desire to make it a better place to live for everyone.

 

[The VOR]

The voters can say NOTHING. The best person can NEVER be the President of the United States of America unless that person was born in the United States Of America.

That is the archaic and obsolete law, until sober heads prevail and it is changed.

BTW how can a foreign born person be a governor of an American State? Shouldn't there be the same or similar law?

I'm with you. I don't give a shit where the person was born. As long he/she is currently, and has been a citizen of the US for say 10 years, they should be able to run for President in my opinion.

 

[bripat9643]

There are many natural born Americans who - by their birth place - qualify to be President.

You know, home loving patriots like Benedict Arnold, Aaron Burr, Jane Fonda, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Adam Yahiye Gadahn, Aldrich Aimes, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Robert Hanssen, John Walker Jr. and Benedict Arnold. Just to name a few.

Contrast the short list above (and you know that there are many many more) to the thousands (perhaps MILLIONS) of naturalized citizens who are happy to be in the land that gave them the opportunity their country of birth never could give them, and would NEVER try to "fundamentally transform" their new home to something similar to the hell hole they left behind.

A normal person would bet on the loyal naturalized citizens over the pieces of dirt who had the good luck of lottery to be born in America, but would be ready and willing to subjugate her to third world status.

The present law that requires the contender to be American born is - to be gentle and charitable - is archaic, obsolete, racist, xenophobic and totally 19th century, not that there is anything wrong with that.

And just to make it clear: I am a Canadian who is hooked on American politics and and I have no desire to run for President. And to be even more clear, I don't have the ability even if I were American.

Seems that the current field of presidential contenders should take my concession of lack of ability as a well meaning advice.

As your list points out- a natural born citizen is not inherently more patriotic than any other citizen.

However, It is a constitutional requirement and seems like a reasonable condition- as well as the others.

Actually, a natural born is inherently more patriotic to his country than a lot of immigrants. Take all these muzzie savages, for example. Do you really think they give a crap about American and its values? No, they want to destroy America. They say so frequently.

Some of the examples I gave you should make you at least think why the land of birth might or might not mean patriotism. There is NOTHING inherently more patriotic about the place of birth. If you think there is, you brazenly and foolishly discount the influence of caring and patriotic parents, the inborn decency as the result of caring and patriotic parents and the fact that there is still a remnant of morality of the 50's and 60's left in America.

If you claim that no person who was born outside of United States jurisdiction could ever be a better person for president than some lucky asshole given the gift of the accident of birth, you are denying reality.

I would never claim that "no person born outside of United States jurisdiction" would be a better person than a native born American, but the odds are much lower. A native born American, especially if his ancestors have been here for several generations is far less likely to harbor ill will towards his country than someone born in Syria. There is simply no way you can reasonably claim otherwise.

 

[FJO]

There are many natural born Americans who - by their birth place - qualify to be President.

You know, home loving patriots like Benedict Arnold, Aaron Burr, Jane Fonda, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Adam Yahiye Gadahn, Aldrich Aimes, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Robert Hanssen, John Walker Jr. and Benedict Arnold. Just to name a few.

Contrast the short list above (and you know that there are many many more) to the thousands (perhaps MILLIONS) of naturalized citizens who are happy to be in the land that gave them the opportunity their country of birth never could give them, and would NEVER try to "fundamentally transform" their new home to something similar to the hell hole they left behind.

A normal person would bet on the loyal naturalized citizens over the pieces of dirt who had the good luck of lottery to be born in America, but would be ready and willing to subjugate her to third world status.

The present law that requires the contender to be American born is - to be gentle and charitable - is archaic, obsolete, racist, xenophobic and totally 19th century, not that there is anything wrong with that.

And just to make it clear: I am a Canadian who is hooked on American politics and and I have no desire to run for President. And to be even more clear, I don't have the ability even if I were American.

Seems that the current field of presidential contenders should take my concession of lack of ability as a well meaning advice.

So we should trust that the kind of "natural born American" who slaughtered all those people in San Bernardino would make a good president?

One of the murderers was a natural born citizen- the other was not a citizen at all.

We have a whole host of murderers- mass murderers in the United States who were natural born citizens- from Jeffrey Dahmer to Tim McVeigh to the San Bernadino killer- all natural born.

All killers.

None of which changes the eligibility requirements of the Constitution.

That is exactly my point. According to present law they are all eligible to be president, while a hard working hones t and patriotic naturalized citizen immigrant is not.

 

[bripat9643]

The voters can say NOTHING. The best person can NEVER be the President of the United States of America unless that person was born in the United States Of America.

That is the archaic and obsolete law, until sober heads prevail and it is changed.

BTW how can a foreign born person be a governor of an American State? Shouldn't there be the same or similar law?

I'm with you. I don't give a shit where the person was born. As long he/she is currently, and has been a citizen of the US for say 10 years, they should be able to run for President in my opinion.

Fuck that. I say they should have been born here, and both their parents should have been born here.

 

[Syriusly]

There are many natural born Americans who - by their birth place - qualify to be President.

You know, home loving patriots like Benedict Arnold, Aaron Burr, Jane Fonda, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Adam Yahiye Gadahn, Aldrich Aimes, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Robert Hanssen, John Walker Jr. and Benedict Arnold. Just to name a few.

Contrast the short list above (and you know that there are many many more) to the thousands (perhaps MILLIONS) of naturalized citizens who are happy to be in the land that gave them the opportunity their country of birth never could give them, and would NEVER try to "fundamentally transform" their new home to something similar to the hell hole they left behind.

A normal person would bet on the loyal naturalized citizens over the pieces of dirt who had the good luck of lottery to be born in America, but would be ready and willing to subjugate her to third world status.

The present law that requires the contender to be American born is - to be gentle and charitable - is archaic, obsolete, racist, xenophobic and totally 19th century, not that there is anything wrong with that.

And just to make it clear: I am a Canadian who is hooked on American politics and and I have no desire to run for President. And to be even more clear, I don't have the ability even if I were American.

Seems that the current field of presidential contenders should take my concession of lack of ability as a well meaning advice.

As your list points out- a natural born citizen is not inherently more patriotic than any other citizen.

However, It is a constitutional requirement and seems like a reasonable condition- as well as the others.

Actually, a natural born is inherently more patriotic to his country than a lot of immigrants. Take all these muzzie savages, for example. Do you really think they give a crap about American and its values? No, they want to destroy America. They say so frequently.

Those are the voices in your head.

Here are some real voices:

#notinmyname








Muslims Are Speaking Out Against ISIS To Say: You Do Not Represent Us






Filming British Muslims' fight against extremism

Indian Muslims against Terrorism

Not in the Name of Islam? (Muslims Rally against Terrorism in Detroit)

How about these Muslims?

I just want to point out you ignore the Muslim American who sacrificed his life fighting for his adopted country.

Just goes to show- the issue isn't you hating the government- it is you hating Americans.

 

[Syriusly]

The voters can say NOTHING. The best person can NEVER be the President of the United States of America unless that person was born in the United States Of America.

That is the archaic and obsolete law, until sober heads prevail and it is changed.

BTW how can a foreign born person be a governor of an American State? Shouldn't there be the same or similar law?

I'm with you. I don't give a shit where the person was born. As long he/she is currently, and has been a citizen of the US for say 10 years, they should be able to run for President in my opinion.

Fuck that. I say they should have been born here, and both their parents should have been born here.

Like I said- you just hate Americans.

 

[Syriusly]

There are many natural born Americans who - by their birth place - qualify to be President.

You know, home loving patriots like Benedict Arnold, Aaron Burr, Jane Fonda, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Adam Yahiye Gadahn, Aldrich Aimes, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Robert Hanssen, John Walker Jr. and Benedict Arnold. Just to name a few.

Contrast the short list above (and you know that there are many many more) to the thousands (perhaps MILLIONS) of naturalized citizens who are happy to be in the land that gave them the opportunity their country of birth never could give them, and would NEVER try to "fundamentally transform" their new home to something similar to the hell hole they left behind.

A normal person would bet on the loyal naturalized citizens over the pieces of dirt who had the good luck of lottery to be born in America, but would be ready and willing to subjugate her to third world status.

The present law that requires the contender to be American born is - to be gentle and charitable - is archaic, obsolete, racist, xenophobic and totally 19th century, not that there is anything wrong with that.

And just to make it clear: I am a Canadian who is hooked on American politics and and I have no desire to run for President. And to be even more clear, I don't have the ability even if I were American.

Seems that the current field of presidential contenders should take my concession of lack of ability as a well meaning advice.

So we should trust that the kind of "natural born American" who slaughtered all those people in San Bernardino would make a good president?

One of the murderers was a natural born citizen- the other was not a citizen at all.

We have a whole host of murderers- mass murderers in the United States who were natural born citizens- from Jeffrey Dahmer to Tim McVeigh to the San Bernadino killer- all natural born.

All killers.

None of which changes the eligibility requirements of the Constitution.

That is exactly my point. According to present law they are all eligible to be president, while a hard working hones t and patriotic naturalized citizen immigrant is not.

Not 'current' law- our Constitution.

Perhaps we will change it someday- but the Constitution provides only the minimum standards- natural born citizen, 35 years or older, 14 years a resident- none of them guarantee anything- but there is also no pressing need to change the requirements.

 

[SwimExpert]

The present law that requires the contender to be American born is - to be gentle and charitable - is archaic, obsolete, racist, xenophobic and totally 19th century, not that there is anything wrong with that.

 

[FJO]

There are many natural born Americans who - by their birth place - qualify to be President.

You know, home loving patriots like Benedict Arnold, Aaron Burr, Jane Fonda, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Adam Yahiye Gadahn, Aldrich Aimes, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Robert Hanssen, John Walker Jr. and Benedict Arnold. Just to name a few.

Contrast the short list above (and you know that there are many many more) to the thousands (perhaps MILLIONS) of naturalized citizens who are happy to be in the land that gave them the opportunity their country of birth never could give them, and would NEVER try to "fundamentally transform" their new home to something similar to the hell hole they left behind.

A normal person would bet on the loyal naturalized citizens over the pieces of dirt who had the good luck of lottery to be born in America, but would be ready and willing to subjugate her to third world status.

The present law that requires the contender to be American born is - to be gentle and charitable - is archaic, obsolete, racist, xenophobic and totally 19th century, not that there is anything wrong with that.

And just to make it clear: I am a Canadian who is hooked on American politics and and I have no desire to run for President. And to be even more clear, I don't have the ability even if I were American.

Seems that the current field of presidential contenders should take my concession of lack of ability as a well meaning advice.

As your list points out- a natural born citizen is not inherently more patriotic than any other citizen.

However, It is a constitutional requirement and seems like a reasonable condition- as well as the others.

Actually, a natural born is inherently more patriotic to his country than a lot of immigrants. Take all these muzzie savages, for example. Do you really think they give a crap about American and its values? No, they want to destroy America. They say so frequently.

Some of the examples I gave you should make you at least think why the land of birth might or might not mean patriotism. There is NOTHING inherently more patriotic about the place of birth. If you think there is, you brazenly and foolishly discount the influence of caring and patriotic parents, the inborn decency as the result of caring and patriotic parents and the fact that there is still a remnant of morality of the 50's and 60's left in America.

If you claim that no person who was born outside of United States jurisdiction could ever be a better person for president than some lucky asshole given the gift of the accident of birth, you are denying reality.

I would never claim that "no person born outside of United States jurisdiction" would be a better person than a native born American, but the odds are much lower. A native born American, especially if his ancestors have been here for several generations is far less likely to harbor ill will towards his country than someone born in Syria. There is simply no way you can reasonably claim otherwise.

Obviously your mind has been locked in an irreversible paradigm: Native born good immigrant bad.

As a Canadian who worked in the States for six years and got hooked on American politics and learned to love America and Americans, let me be so brave and say that you are wrong. Length of ancestry for being loyal American has about as much bearing and validity as a recent black immigrant from Africa has for reparation for slavery.

Let the best person - proven by credible record and history - be the best person for the job. From dog catcher to President. Let the facts, not obsolete traditions speak for themselves.

This is ONE change of the Constitution that is long overdue.

 

[bripat9643]

There are many natural born Americans who - by their birth place - qualify to be President.

You know, home loving patriots like Benedict Arnold, Aaron Burr, Jane Fonda, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Adam Yahiye Gadahn, Aldrich Aimes, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Robert Hanssen, John Walker Jr. and Benedict Arnold. Just to name a few.

Contrast the short list above (and you know that there are many many more) to the thousands (perhaps MILLIONS) of naturalized citizens who are happy to be in the land that gave them the opportunity their country of birth never could give them, and would NEVER try to "fundamentally transform" their new home to something similar to the hell hole they left behind.

A normal person would bet on the loyal naturalized citizens over the pieces of dirt who had the good luck of lottery to be born in America, but would be ready and willing to subjugate her to third world status.

The present law that requires the contender to be American born is - to be gentle and charitable - is archaic, obsolete, racist, xenophobic and totally 19th century, not that there is anything wrong with that.

And just to make it clear: I am a Canadian who is hooked on American politics and and I have no desire to run for President. And to be even more clear, I don't have the ability even if I were American.

Seems that the current field of presidential contenders should take my concession of lack of ability as a well meaning advice.

As your list points out- a natural born citizen is not inherently more patriotic than any other citizen.

However, It is a constitutional requirement and seems like a reasonable condition- as well as the others.

Actually, a natural born is inherently more patriotic to his country than a lot of immigrants. Take all these muzzie savages, for example. Do you really think they give a crap about American and its values? No, they want to destroy America. They say so frequently.

Those are the voices in your head.

Here are some real voices:

#notinmyname








Muslims Are Speaking Out Against ISIS To Say: You Do Not Represent Us






Filming British Muslims' fight against extremism

Indian Muslims against Terrorism

Not in the Name of Islam? (Muslims Rally against Terrorism in Detroit)

How about these Muslims?

I just want to point out you ignore the Muslim American who sacrificed his life fighting for his adopted country.

Just goes to show- the issue isn't you hating the government- it is you hating Americans.

I don't ignore them. I just don't think that justifies taking a risk on them. Fighting in the armed forces is one thing. Becoming president of the United States is another. A significant percentage of people who weren't born here aren't going to experience any loyalty to this country. That's just a fact. Your theory is just like the one that says we should import the Syrian "refugees" because 98% of them aren't going to commit terrorism. That's a stupid theory. It has been demonstrated repeatedly by current events.

 

[bripat9643]

There are many natural born Americans who - by their birth place - qualify to be President.

You know, home loving patriots like Benedict Arnold, Aaron Burr, Jane Fonda, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Adam Yahiye Gadahn, Aldrich Aimes, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Robert Hanssen, John Walker Jr. and Benedict Arnold. Just to name a few.

Contrast the short list above (and you know that there are many many more) to the thousands (perhaps MILLIONS) of naturalized citizens who are happy to be in the land that gave them the opportunity their country of birth never could give them, and would NEVER try to "fundamentally transform" their new home to something similar to the hell hole they left behind.

A normal person would bet on the loyal naturalized citizens over the pieces of dirt who had the good luck of lottery to be born in America, but would be ready and willing to subjugate her to third world status.

The present law that requires the contender to be American born is - to be gentle and charitable - is archaic, obsolete, racist, xenophobic and totally 19th century, not that there is anything wrong with that.

And just to make it clear: I am a Canadian who is hooked on American politics and and I have no desire to run for President. And to be even more clear, I don't have the ability even if I were American.

Seems that the current field of presidential contenders should take my concession of lack of ability as a well meaning advice.

As your list points out- a natural born citizen is not inherently more patriotic than any other citizen.

However, It is a constitutional requirement and seems like a reasonable condition- as well as the others.

Actually, a natural born is inherently more patriotic to his country than a lot of immigrants. Take all these muzzie savages, for example. Do you really think they give a crap about American and its values? No, they want to destroy America. They say so frequently.

Some of the examples I gave you should make you at least think why the land of birth might or might not mean patriotism. There is NOTHING inherently more patriotic about the place of birth. If you think there is, you brazenly and foolishly discount the influence of caring and patriotic parents, the inborn decency as the result of caring and patriotic parents and the fact that there is still a remnant of morality of the 50's and 60's left in America.

If you claim that no person who was born outside of United States jurisdiction could ever be a better person for president than some lucky asshole given the gift of the accident of birth, you are denying reality.

I would never claim that "no person born outside of United States jurisdiction" would be a better person than a native born American, but the odds are much lower. A native born American, especially if his ancestors have been here for several generations is far less likely to harbor ill will towards his country than someone born in Syria. There is simply no way you can reasonably claim otherwise.

Obviously your mind has been locked in an irreversible paradigm: Native born good immigrant bad.

As a Canadian who worked in the States for six years and got hooked on American politics and learned to love America and Americans, let me be so brave and say that you are wrong. Length of ancestry for being loyal American has about as much bearing and validity as a recent black immigrant from Africa has for reparation for slavery.

Let the best person - proven by credible record and history - be the best person for the job. From dog catcher to President. Let the facts, not obsolete traditions speak for themselves.

This is ONE change of the Constitution that is long overdue.

There's nothing "obsolete" about it. The FBI doesn't allow foreigners to have security clearances for a reason. Why should we allow them to become president?

 

[Syriusly]

As your list points out- a natural born citizen is not inherently more patriotic than any other citizen.

However, It is a constitutional requirement and seems like a reasonable condition- as well as the others.

Actually, a natural born is inherently more patriotic to his country than a lot of immigrants. Take all these muzzie savages, for example. Do you really think they give a crap about American and its values? No, they want to destroy America. They say so frequently.

Those are the voices in your head.

Here are some real voices:

#notinmyname








Muslims Are Speaking Out Against ISIS To Say: You Do Not Represent Us






Filming British Muslims' fight against extremism

Indian Muslims against Terrorism

Not in the Name of Islam? (Muslims Rally against Terrorism in Detroit)

How about these Muslims?

I just want to point out you ignore the Muslim American who sacrificed his life fighting for his adopted country.

Just goes to show- the issue isn't you hating the government- it is you hating Americans.

I don't ignore them. s.

You absolutely ignored the very dead, very patriotic Muslim American veteran who gave his life serving our country.

Because you hate Americans.

Not all Americans.

Just those who don't pass your particular tests....probably only 95% or so of Americans.

 

[Syriusly]

As your list points out- a natural born citizen is not inherently more patriotic than any other citizen.

However, It is a constitutional requirement and seems like a reasonable condition- as well as the others.

Actually, a natural born is inherently more patriotic to his country than a lot of immigrants. Take all these muzzie savages, for example. Do you really think they give a crap about American and its values? No, they want to destroy America. They say so frequently.

Some of the examples I gave you should make you at least think why the land of birth might or might not mean patriotism. There is NOTHING inherently more patriotic about the place of birth. If you think there is, you brazenly and foolishly discount the influence of caring and patriotic parents, the inborn decency as the result of caring and patriotic parents and the fact that there is still a remnant of morality of the 50's and 60's left in America.

If you claim that no person who was born outside of United States jurisdiction could ever be a better person for president than some lucky asshole given the gift of the accident of birth, you are denying reality.

I would never claim that "no person born outside of United States jurisdiction" would be a better person than a native born American, but the odds are much lower. A native born American, especially if his ancestors have been here for several generations is far less likely to harbor ill will towards his country than someone born in Syria. There is simply no way you can reasonably claim otherwise.

Obviously your mind has been locked in an irreversible paradigm: Native born good immigrant bad.

As a Canadian who worked in the States for six years and got hooked on American politics and learned to love America and Americans, let me be so brave and say that you are wrong. Length of ancestry for being loyal American has about as much bearing and validity as a recent black immigrant from Africa has for reparation for slavery.

Let the best person - proven by credible record and history - be the best person for the job. From dog catcher to President. Let the facts, not obsolete traditions speak for themselves.

This is ONE change of the Constitution that is long overdue.

There's nothing "obsolete" about it. The FBI doesn't allow foreigners to have security clearances for a reason. Why should we allow them to become president?

So Kissinger never had a security clearance?

Fascinating.

 

[bripat9643]

Actually, a natural born is inherently more patriotic to his country than a lot of immigrants. Take all these muzzie savages, for example. Do you really think they give a crap about American and its values? No, they want to destroy America. They say so frequently.

Those are the voices in your head.

Here are some real voices:

#notinmyname








Muslims Are Speaking Out Against ISIS To Say: You Do Not Represent Us






Filming British Muslims' fight against extremism

Indian Muslims against Terrorism

Not in the Name of Islam? (Muslims Rally against Terrorism in Detroit)

How about these Muslims?

I just want to point out you ignore the Muslim American who sacrificed his life fighting for his adopted country.

Just goes to show- the issue isn't you hating the government- it is you hating Americans.

I don't ignore them. s.

You absolutely ignored the very dead, very patriotic Muslim American veteran who gave his life serving our country.

Because you hate Americans.

Not all Americans.

Just those who don't pass your particular tests....probably only 95% or so of Americans.

I don't "ignore them." I simply don't seen any benefit to taking the additional risk of allowing foreigners who may hate American to become president. The fact that some are patriotic doesn't mean they are all patriotic. That's the fact that you ignore.

 

[FJO]

And just to make it clear: I am a Canadian who is hooked on American politics and and I have no desire to run for President (AHEM). And to be even more clear, I don't have the ability even if I were American (TRUE DAT).

Ted, stop posting to message boards!

Why? I thought America was a land of free speech. Was I wrong? Are you a liberal?

I hope it still is. No, I wasn't. Yes, you are.

 

[bripat9643]

Actually, a natural born is inherently more patriotic to his country than a lot of immigrants. Take all these muzzie savages, for example. Do you really think they give a crap about American and its values? No, they want to destroy America. They say so frequently.

Some of the examples I gave you should make you at least think why the land of birth might or might not mean patriotism. There is NOTHING inherently more patriotic about the place of birth. If you think there is, you brazenly and foolishly discount the influence of caring and patriotic parents, the inborn decency as the result of caring and patriotic parents and the fact that there is still a remnant of morality of the 50's and 60's left in America.

If you claim that no person who was born outside of United States jurisdiction could ever be a better person for president than some lucky asshole given the gift of the accident of birth, you are denying reality.

I would never claim that "no person born outside of United States jurisdiction" would be a better person than a native born American, but the odds are much lower. A native born American, especially if his ancestors have been here for several generations is far less likely to harbor ill will towards his country than someone born in Syria. There is simply no way you can reasonably claim otherwise.

Obviously your mind has been locked in an irreversible paradigm: Native born good immigrant bad.

As a Canadian who worked in the States for six years and got hooked on American politics and learned to love America and Americans, let me be so brave and say that you are wrong. Length of ancestry for being loyal American has about as much bearing and validity as a recent black immigrant from Africa has for reparation for slavery.

Let the best person - proven by credible record and history - be the best person for the job. From dog catcher to President. Let the facts, not obsolete traditions speak for themselves.

This is ONE change of the Constitution that is long overdue.

There's nothing "obsolete" about it. The FBI doesn't allow foreigners to have security clearances for a reason. Why should we allow them to become president?

So Kissinger never had a security clearance?

Fascinating.

They make exceptions on special occasions. I was once interviewed for a job that required a security clearance and they lost interest the minute I told them my wife was foreign born.

 

[FJO]

There are many natural born Americans who - by their birth place - qualify to be President.

You know, home loving patriots like Benedict Arnold, Aaron Burr, Jane Fonda, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Adam Yahiye Gadahn, Aldrich Aimes, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Robert Hanssen, John Walker Jr. and Benedict Arnold. Just to name a few.

Contrast the short list above (and you know that there are many many more) to the thousands (perhaps MILLIONS) of naturalized citizens who are happy to be in the land that gave them the opportunity their country of birth never could give them, and would NEVER try to "fundamentally transform" their new home to something similar to the hell hole they left behind.

A normal person would bet on the loyal naturalized citizens over the pieces of dirt who had the good luck of lottery to be born in America, but would be ready and willing to subjugate her to third world status.

The present law that requires the contender to be American born is - to be gentle and charitable - is archaic, obsolete, racist, xenophobic and totally 19th century, not that there is anything wrong with that.

And just to make it clear: I am a Canadian who is hooked on American politics and and I have no desire to run for President. And to be even more clear, I don't have the ability even if I were American.

Seems that the current field of presidential contenders should take my concession of lack of ability as a well meaning advice.

So we should trust that the kind of "natural born American" who slaughtered all those people in San Bernardino would make a good president?

One of the murderers was a natural born citizen- the other was not a citizen at all.

We have a whole host of murderers- mass murderers in the United States who were natural born citizens- from Jeffrey Dahmer to Tim McVeigh to the San Bernadino killer- all natural born.

All killers.

None of which changes the eligibility requirements of the Constitution.

That is exactly my point. According to present law they are all eligible to be president, while a hard working hones t and patriotic naturalized citizen immigrant is not.

Not 'current' law- our Constitution.

Perhaps we will change it someday- but the Constitution provides only the minimum standards- natural born citizen, 35 years or older, 14 years a resident- none of them guarantee anything- but there is also no pressing need to change the requirements.

Since the Constitution is the bases for all current laws, I make no apology for calling a section of the Constitution "current law".

I hope it will be changed some day, when cooler heads prevail.