It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Are we sure Mitt Romney is eligible to be President?

page: 3
38
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:36 PM
link   
I wouldn't buy a used car from either of them...be it in Mexico. Kenya, Indonesia or Detroit let alone call them my President.

Peace




posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 12:30 AM
link   
what's up with all these foreigners trying to be the potus? and what's up with our country letting them slide election after election?



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 02:35 AM
link   
the son of an illegal mexican, an elitist 1%er and a polygamist who want's to nuke iran and personifies corporatism.

this guy beats obama out of the water.

it will be the first time america has 14 first ladies. i don't think he can fit all his secret wives in the white house.

is america that stupid to actually vote for this guy.



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 02:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5
One thing is clear, Orly Taitz, the Queen of the birther movement, has filed multiple legal arguments that if found valid, would immediately disqualify Mitt Romney as a candidate for President.


The problem with Orly is that she hasn't won a single challenge. She doesn't do her homework to anaylize the information and flys off half cocked and looses every time. If Orly can't make the case for Mr. Obama then what would convince anyone that she could make the case against Mr. Romney? The sad truth is that she can't.



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 02:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by pikypiky
Shouldn't those potential "beings" applying for the POTUS submit to background/criminal checks (i.e. eVerify)? I do NOT think Mitt is eligible to be President because his grandparents were felons on the run (at that time, of course) and in my opinion only.


Neither the Republicans or Democrats bother with the details any more. In the 2008 election neither candidate was eligible to serve and yet they both were nominated and ran for office anyway. The "courts" don't bother the enforce the Constitution and the House and Senate left their respective balls in their wife's purse.

Unless "we the people" clean house and stop electing socialists and the like then we will continue to lose as a nation. Anyone who doesn't vote can't bitch any more, it will fall of deaf ears.



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 03:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by derst1988
Where was Mitt born, and can he prove it? that is all.

Second line.


If Mr. Romney's Father is a Mexican Citizen then what was his mother's citizenship? I believe that Mr. Romney's father tried to run for president but couldn't because he was not an American citizen. More research is needed, but if true then Mr. Romney can't run either because he is not a natural born citizen regardless of where he was born or even if his mother could have been an American citizen, he would have a dual citizenship just like Mir. Obama.



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 03:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


So Mitt Romney is a coward and a traitor besides being a pathological liar? (I don't mean to offend but I find people who have dual citizenship to be disgusting people. Your either a citizen to a nation or your not. It is like worshiping two religions and serving two different masters etc. I think anyone with dual citizenship, or rather any American with dual citizenship should automatically lose their American citizenship).



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 03:52 AM
link   
Maybe I can get a job with Mitts campaign, im good with photoshop, I'm sure I could do a better job on his BC than whoever did obamas.

So to clarify, it's written that a natural born citizen equals both parents being born in the usa,.I always thought it was simply the person had to be born here.. What if his mother was artificially impregnated, and the father was unknown, or not a citizen, would that count?

I thought of that, because it seems even if a unlikely variable exists, people on the losing end of the argument say even though it's unlikely, it could happen, thus unfair and nullified.



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 04:05 AM
link   
Sure why not, because America now needs a White Obama:




edit on 14-1-2012 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 04:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by sicksonezer0
So to clarify, it's written that a natural born citizen equals both parents being born in the usa,.


No, that's not written anywhere except birther blogs. There are only two ways to be classified as a citizen, either by birth on US soil or by naturalization. Only citizens born on US soil are eligible to become president.

I have to wonder how many wives Mitt's father had and if there is some problem hidden there though. Would his birth be recognized if the marriage wasn't recognized? It was a felony (still is I think) to have multiple wives.



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 04:09 AM
link   
It would be nice to see someone else other than Obama be attacked for their lack of eligibility.

But it seems common that in the past 4 years, there have been 3 candidates with questionable eligibility pertaining to their place of birth. I think McCain's issue was sorted but of course, Obama is always up for debate and now Romney.



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 04:11 AM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


If Obama's camp uses this video in their ads, Romney is toast.

Flip-floppers suck and we don't need to swap one (Obama) for another (Romney).



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 04:12 AM
link   
reply to post by korathin
 


That's quite an ignorant and xenophobic thing to say.

I see nothing wrong with someone being loyal to two different countries. How common are people with dual-citizenship?



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 04:28 AM
link   
reply to post by The Sword
 


Most people with dual citizenship never had a choice in the matter. They usually got it from their parents as most countries grant automatic citizenship to children of their nationals born overseas. The UK grants citizenship for two generations, so if your grandfather was born in the UK you qualify as a citizen. It doesn't mean anything unless you renounce one citizenship to get another.



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 04:31 AM
link   
reply to post by mythatsabigprobe
 


I think it would be useful in a SHTF scenario, especially if one country is more stable than the other, etc.

Probably explains why so many politicians have it. They want to be able to renounce one so they can escape to the other, etc.



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 04:43 AM
link   
reply to post by The Sword
 


Exactly why it was practiced. The UK especially was empire building and they had to create some safeguards for their citizens that went to colonize different countries. If there were rebellions or wars the colonists wanted to be able to get their entire families out. Before that, a lot of them would send their pregnant wives back to give birth - dangerous and not very practical.



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 04:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by derst1988
Where was Mitt born, and can he prove it? that is all.

Second line.


That's not how the definition of "NATURAL born citizen" is defined. Citizenship is not in question here. The qualification established by the constitution and the high courts, that being NATURAL born citizenship, is in question.

Please stop trying the standard politcal ploy called "muddying the waters" on this issue. We're talking about "apples and oranges" level of distinction.



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 04:52 AM
link   
Thats a big negative ghost rider!



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 04:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe

Originally posted by sicksonezer0
So to clarify, it's written that a natural born citizen equals both parents being born in the usa,.


No, that's not written anywhere except birther blogs. There are only two ways to be classified as a citizen, either by birth on US soil or by naturalization. Only citizens born on US soil are eligible to become president.

I have to wonder how many wives Mitt's father had and if there is some problem hidden there though. Would his birth be recognized if the marriage wasn't recognized? It was a felony (still is I think) to have multiple wives.


Really?

There is a little founding document for you on this:

Message body
www.constitution.org...


Book 1 Chapter XIX

§ 212. Citizens and natives.

The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 05:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by tkwasny

Book 1 Chapter XIX

§ 212. Citizens and natives.

The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.


1. That says citizen, not Natural Born Citizen so there goes that argument.
2. That does not specify it must be both parents.



new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join