How can you be a Congressman and be this stupid?

[MODU]

Mr. CONYERS introduced a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to permit persons who are not natural-born citizens of the United States, but who have been citizens of the United States for at least 20 years, to be eligible to hold the Office of President. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:40:./temp/~c108mLdDDw::

And here's the amendment:

A person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 20 years shall be eligible to hold the Office of President.[/b]

What kind of wording is that? Bill Clinton would be eligible for a third term.

If you're a 20 year old natural born citizen, you would be able to run for president, despite not being eligible for the House of Representatives.

I don't think you are reading it correctly.  It's not changing the current voting laws as of age and term limits, but just addressing the foreign-born issue.  It won't pass, but I think you are making a bigger deal out of this than there really is.

As far as the founding fathers go, it was more to protect the new union from being torn apart within by allowing a foreign national to gain control of the country and then sabatoge it on behalf of the British or French or someone else.  The founding fathers never foresaw the "globalization of America."  Should we allow someone who has migrated to the US and became a citizen of her the right to run for office?  Sure, why not.  But it won't happen . . . at least not in the near future.

[MODU]

there are a lot of stupid congressman.  Intelligence is not a requirement.  I heard some idiots wanted to amend the constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman.  what nonsense.  Next they'll want to define Sunday as the Sabbath.  

Actually, the Sabbath is a Saturday, if you are following OT teachings.  However, if you consider that Jesus was the implementation of the "new law," then the argument can be made that Sunday is now the Sabbath.  It all depends on which religious teachings you follow (and if you really care about the "Sabbath" to begin with).

[MODU]

there are a lot of stupid congressman.  Intelligence is not a requirement.  I heard some idiots wanted to amend the constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman.  what nonsense.  Next they'll want to define Sunday as the Sabbath.  

Actually, the Sabbath is a Saturday, if you are following OT teachings.  However, if you consider that Jesus was the implementation of the "new law," then the argument can be made that Sunday is now the Sabbath.  It all depends on which religious teachings you follow (and if you really care about the "Sabbath" to begin with).

sarcasm my friend, sarcasm.

Noted.  Was just providing to you that there is a discrepency in how people view the Sabbath.  A funny parallel to the gay marriage debate. 

[MODU]

MODU,

This amendment makes it so that anyone who's been a citizen for 20 years is eligible for the presidency. It does not just remove the native birth requirement.

No Philip.  Let's go back to what the text says:

SECTION 1. A person who is a citizen of the United States, who has been for 20 years a citizen of the United States, and who is otherwise eligible to the Office of President, is not ineligible to that Office by reason of not being a native born citizen of the United States.

It's not stripping away the other constraints of being President.  All it is trying to do is allow foreign-borned citizens to become President.  You still serve upto only two terms, you have to be 35 years old, and so on.

[MODU]

That's a different[/b] amendment.

I already told you there are five versions of it.

The one you posted was introduced by some guy named "Mr. ROHRABACHER."

My appologies.  I did not see that there were two different bills saying the same thing on that site.  However, theysay the same thing.  The only thing that is different between the two is that Rohrabachers is more clear in it's intent.  Conyers amendment does not say anything about replacing current laws regarding age or terms.  It only discusses "birth right."  Rohrabacher's version states the same thing, but clarifies the issue which you are so hard-bent on.  Conyers intent isn't to allow 20-somethings to run for President.

[MODU]

Well, that's not what it's for. But that's what it says.

When you say "a person who has been a citizen for 20 years shall be eligible," it means every person who's been a citizen for 20 years is eligible.

Yes, but it's not saying that is the only requirement to be President.  All it is addressing is the foreign-born citizen aspect.  You are reading waaaaay to far into this.

[MODU]

Well, that's not what it's for. But that's what it says.

When you say "a person who has been a citizen for 20 years shall be eligible," it means every person who's been a citizen for 20 years is eligible.

Yes, but it's not saying that is the only requirement to be President.  All it is addressing is the foreign-born citizen aspect.  You are reading waaaaay to far into this.

No. It says everyone who's been a citizen for 20 years is eligible for the presidency.

I'm not reading anything into it. I'm just reading it.

You are sounding/acting like Nomo now.  Let's take the two election amendments for an example.

When the 22nd Amendment was drafted and ratified, it didn't replace all the items spelled out in the 12th Amendment.  The 22nd Amendment dealt only with term limits, and doesn't mention anything about having to live in the US for 14 years or be of 35 years or more.  Does that mean all someone has to do is be 14+ in order to run for President?  No.  The same holds true for the proposed Amendment you have listed.

If you can't figure that out, you're just wasting everyone's time (on purpose).