Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Tee hee... The birthers are going after Romney now
They are in a dither about Willard's dad being born in Mexico.
I submit therefore that your responsibility and duty is to prohibit and remove from our primary and general election ballot Mr. Willard Mitt Romney, as he is not “legally qualified” to hold the Office of President. One must be a Natural Born Citizen in order to be “legally qualified to hold such an office”. The U.S. Constitution as set forth in Article II Section I Clause V relating to the Office of President: “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.” We have U.S. Supreme Court precedent establishing Article II Section I with the ruling of Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. pg. 167-68 (1875). “Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two ways: first, by birth, and second, by naturalization. This is apparent from the Constitution itself, for it provides that ‘no person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President,‘ and that Congress shall have power ‘to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.’ Thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization.
Source: http://www.thepostemail.com/2012/01/15/ballot-challenge-to-mitt-romneys-eligibility-filed-in-illinois/
Source: http://www.thepostemail.com/2012/01/15/ballot-challenge-to-mitt-romneys-eligibility-filed-in-illinois/
When Mitt Romney’s father George Romney ran for President in 1968, nobody seemed to care that he was born in Galeana, Chihuahua, Mexico. The media just assumed that because his parents were allegedly US citizens he was too. The media never really questioned the possibility that Romney’s ancestors, who voluntarily left the Utah territory before Utah became a state in 1896, may not have been citizens within the meaning of the Fourteen Amendment. They, like many other Mormoms, may have left because they opposed the conditions forced on Utah to become a state, like the elimination of polygamy. They, like many other Mormons who were in Utah during the so-called Utah War, may never have accepted the authority of the United States over the Utah territory. In other words, the Romneys may not have been "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States such that they were born citizens under the Fourteen Amendment.
Source: http://naturalborncitizen.com/
Source: http://naturalborncitizen.com/
19 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]Well, Honolulu wasn't good enough to make Obama being born there a "natural born citizen," so I guess it's only fair that Detroit can't do the same for Mitt.
These birther loons are really priceless.
But it's HILARIOUS when they compound it, if only to use it against someone they hate anyway.
Now, if Baby Newtie's daddy wasn't a citizen, would they contest him? Waaaaaait a minute, Newt was ADOPTED! So how to we know just WHERE he came from??/? What if he is the product of Soviet spies or Nazi experiments? We don't know?!?!?!
No, Newtie's a good ol' boy from an orphanage.
THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT "THEY" WANT YOU TO THINK!!1!!
