Skip to comments.How Mitt Romney’s Mexican-Born Father Was Eligible to be President
Posted on 02/15/2012 9:21:05 PM PST by James Thomas
Mitt Romneys father, George Romney, has been invoked on the campaign trail often.
Newt Gingrich used his release of 12 years of tax records as an example to push his rival to release his own tax returns. On Thursday night, Romney mentioned the fact that his father was born in Mexico in response to Gingrichs allegations that he is anti-immigrant, which raises the question: If George Romney was born in Mexico, how could he run for president?
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Unfortunately for you, the intent of the Founding Fathers is clear: Born in the country to Citizen parents is the standard for POTUS eligibility.
Your transparent attempts to build some phony consensus isn't working. Most here see right through that obot tactic.
First of all, when you politely order me to “not conflate” my “personal, narrow opinion”, you entirely miss the philosophy of this wonderful website. I would never even think about ordering the same of you or anyone else who voices his or her opinion here or anywhere else.
Secondly, I could care less about the majority of opinion in “Conservative circles.” That opinion and those cowardly circles are the problem. The fact is that Madison and the other contributors to the Constitution stipulated that the president be “natural born.” They did not require the same of senators, representatives, cabinet members, or Supreme Court justices.
Is this merely an accident? I think not. I retain my opinion, supported by Minor v. Happersett, that a natural born citizen of the U.S.A. must be born of two citizens of the U.S.A.
To James Madison, “Natural Born Citizen” was simply a contrast between that and a “Naturalized Citizen”.
Madison did not believe what you claim, not at all.
Senators and Representatives to Congress can be Naturalized.
A President must be a Citizen from the moment of Birth.
That is all the words mean. Natural Born Citizen means Citizen at Birth, under the laws of our nation at the time of Birth.
It is an established maxim, received by all political writers that every person owes a natural allegiance to the government of that country in which he is born. Allegiance is defined to be a tie, that binds the subject to the state, and in consequence of his obedience, he is entitled to protection
The children of aliens, born in this state, are considered as natural born subjects, and have the same rights with the rest of the citizens.
Zephaniah Swift, A system of the laws of the state of Connecticut: in six books, Volumes 1-2 of A System of the Laws of the State of Connecticut: pg. 163,167 (1795)
The following is an enormous list of legal citations, from Obama operatives, but you need to know what you are up against:
James Madison, The Founders Constitution Volume 2, Article 1, Section 2, Clause 2,
It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth however derives its force sometimes from place and sometimes from parentage, but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other.
If you held the majority view, even on these threads, I think you would have far more vocal support.
You don't, do you? It is the same old, same old small group of Birther obsessives every time.
The fact that few argue with you only means that most IGNORE YOU AS A HOPELESS, LOST CAUSE!
The Birther issue causes web page hits, and heated discussion. However, I am quite confident that the majority of Freepers would side with me, over you, on these issues.
I don't need a majority consensus to convince me of the truth. Just the facts.
Maybe you could get the management to do a sidebar poll on wether Freerepublic believes Obama is a natural born Citizen since that is what your entire argument seems to hinge upon.
You do not understand the facts.
Humility and common sense would dictate that we all, from time to time, submit our thoughts for some type of “review” by the public at large.
The arrogant and the ignorant do not care to submit themselves to the logic or reason of anyone, even people who should be their natural allies.
Radicals all seem to have a martyr complex.
You WANT to be a martyr, so you stake out an impossible position to justify, and then you whine and complain, or even worse, you claim that those who do NOT see the “wisdom” in your crazy, off the wall ideas, are somehow inferior.
Sure, the majority is sometimes wrong, but a modest, honest man would feel it his duty to check his ego at the door and actually study the issue a bit more, before spouting off and hurling insults.
You are the one whining and complaining. You know the more this information gets out, the more it hurts your agenda.
I will never stop speaking out on this subject.
I just feel, towards YOU, the same way that William Buckley felt about John Birchers: I think YOU are NUTS and that it is my duty to call you out on your harebrained nonsense when every I get the chance!
You have absolutely NO support in conservative circles.
You have absolutely NO support in Republican circles.
You are too cowardly to call EVERYONE who is against you a traitor, or an Obot, -—
So you simply concentrate on those of us who have made it our business to OUT you as a crack-pot!
The VAST majority of conservatives simply ignore you.
At this point, any Conservative that has been following this issue knows Obama is NOT eligible.
Someone on another thread was asked why we push this issue so relentlessly? His reply:
"So....History can permanently record the names of the cowardly traitors who **refused** to honor their oaths taken before God to defend the Constitution."
You exhibit paranoid delusions for all to see, now and in the future.