There has been one president in-between the two.

I think that people forget (especially nowadays WRT Bush) that being Commander in Chief is not the primary function of the President.

You assume that nationalism/patriotism is a quality for a president, I see it as a hindrance. I could go on a veteran's day rant here, but I'll spare you.

Education does not equal intelligence, quite commonly the opposite.

This is for the electorate to decide. Limiting the pool of potential candidates will make it really, really, easy for special interest groups to buy their guy.

I don't think there should be any requirements, but the ones I have the biggest problem with are:

1. Be a natural born citizen. This leads to ridiculous situations like the one Mayo pointed out. To pay taxes here all your life but have no possibility of the presidency isn't right.

2. Be at least 35 years old. Ridiculous. Ability doesn't have an age and the electorate can sufficiently act as a check to ensure that this isn't an issue.

I don't really have a problem with the residency requirement but I wouldn't care if it didn't exist. Nobody is going to pop in from Austria and be elected president in a year.

I think the president should be required to have been an astronaut.

Would being shot out of a cannon during a county fair count?

Jimbo

Right, and he served in the national guard.

Based on the first GW administration, I'd have to say you're right.

The relatively dovish State Department was stocked with veterans like Colin Powell, whereas one could go on forever listing the chicken-hawks elsewhere like Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz.

Here's a question I have.

The constitution says that the President must be natural-born citizen. Suppose Obama really was born in Kenya. Wouldn't that still qualify him because he was a citizen at birth because his mother was a citizen?

I feel like I'm missing something because even smart people seem to think one has to have been born in the country or in an embassy or military base or something. When I've asked some people this they say that one major point of embassies is that they allow the children of ambassadors to be president. That doesn't seem likely as it's the only job as far as I know where such a requirement exists and it seems a bit strange to go through that kind of trouble so diplomats have a 1 in a million shot at becoming president instead of zero. Obviously there are other reasons for embassies, but it seems like if that has any weight whatsoever it's too much.

Both parents have to be U.S. citizens (see McCain, John).

According to wiki, one parent is enough if the child was born after 1986. Seems weird to me that they have different rules depending on when you are born.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_citi...States_citizen

Ahh, ok. I had figured McCain was on some sort of military base or something similar in Panama.

Yep, I was born in Canada in 1989 and since my dad's an american who lived in the states for more than the minimum number of years I'm a natural born U.S. citizen.