Is Mitt a Hit or a Misfit?

Is Mitt a Hit or a Misfit for the Office of the President?

The speculation that Mitt Romney may or may not 'run' for President is once again blasting ears of the American Public like a reverb button that has been turned up high and continues to echo in your head. On the Democratic Party side we are blasted in the news with Sen. Hillary Clinton's mojo, as if her giving up against Obama in the Democratic Party nomination was a reward for receiving the nomination in 2016.

Is there a hit in Mitt and Hillary yet or do we have old school songs that have been remixed one to many times already? Don't get me wrong, I love Tanya Tucker singing Delta Dawn, but I keep wondering if America still hasn't heard the notes that were not quite in tune when it comes to the actual job requirement of the President in defending, protecting, and preserving the United States Constitution?

If you recall Mitt Romney ran for President in 2008 losing the Republican nomination to Sen. John McCain. He re-rallied the forces for another ride in 2012 this time hurdling the Republican Nomination he'd tripped over in 2008 only to experience a melt down with Barack Obama in the 2012 showdown general election.

What Mitt failed to do in his campaigns of 2008 and 2012 was actually defend the United States Constitution from an unqualified candidate. Both McCain and Obama were not 'Born in the U.S. to Citizen Parents' as is defined in the term 'natural born Citizen', the requirement for the Office of the President in the United States Constitution. Excluding foreign influence in both nature and nurture the Office of the President is unique in its requirement from U.S. Representatives and U.S. Senators and a foreign influence can permeate that office either by a foreign birth or a foreign or alien parent.

While being born outside the United States or being born to an alien parent does not make your skin blue, it does create a certain allegiance that persons "born in the U.S. to Citizen Parents" are not subjects to in a legal arena as far as being granted a foreign citizenship that might create a dual citizenship prohibited in the Office of the President. The question is not is the alien citizenship employed, but rather does the alien citizenship exist? If it does, that is prohibited from the Office of the President in the United States of America.

Its not a matter of 'discrimination' its a matter of 'qualification', much the same as the age restrictions also noted are different from U.S. Reps, U.S. Sen., and U.S. Presidents, or for that matter the age restrictions on driving a car, or buying alcohol exist. Allowing infants to drive your car, or juveniles to buy your alcohol is illegal and is not lawful, yet the voting public has over the last two presidential cycles not had any candidates in the major parties that have agreed with the law.

If you like the idea of 'infants on thrones' you need to understand there is a difference between someone who is of wise judgement and that being seen as good or innocent like an infant, and the negative contraction of the idea existing stating, those who are not qualified or fail to qualify should not be allowed in the Office for good reasons much the same as we don't allow people who are 7 to drive or those who are 14 to buy alcohol because your just asking for an accident to happen.

Like former Gov. Mitt Romney failed to challenge Sen. John McCain in his 'qualification failure for not being born in the U.S. but receiving his native born citizenship from Panama and generally populating the idea that McCain had not one but two Congressional Acts on his Citizenship generally formed under the 14th Amendment or non-binding U.S. Senate Resolution 511, Hillary Clinton failed to do the same thing on Barack Obama. In her democratic party campaign she failed a most basic objection to his candidacy for the nomination in 2012 which ultimately could have prohibited any further crisis and given her the nomination. This is why I say she 'gave up' against Barack Obama in her campaign and failed to do the most basic duty of a President in objecting to an unqualified candidate in the race.

Mitt Romney went on to repeat Hillary Clinton's failure, and thus suffered the same defeat.

The premise is very basic but reveals or uncovers quite a bit,If you can't at the very least stand up and defend, preserve, and protect the U.S. Constitution while your in the race for President by objecting to unqualified candidates in affect threatening the office of the President unlawfully, how are you going to do it if you were elected? Why should someone be rewarded with the Office of the President who neglects the most basic task from the very beginning?

Now through out this stage of experimentation with our Republic, that's the Republic for which we stand, for those who have forgotten the Pledge of Allegiance, neither Mitt Romney or Hillary Clinton have changed their tune about Barack Obama who is not a qualified individual in the Office of the President. One of the very basic tenants of a Republic is that elections don't over-ride the Constitution but are suppose to co-inside with the Constitution.

What that means is that it does not matter how many people voted for Barack Obama without being educated that he was not a natural born Citizen, what matters is the Constitution and one person standing up and saying so. One person can stand against every one that voted for Barack Obama. In a Constitution Republic, if that one person is right by the Constitution, all those votes really do not count because they were cast under a veil of fraud, deceit, and cover-up of an identity.

The way I see it as the only U.S. Presidential Candidate who actually as a matter of record in Court objected to both McCain and Obama's qualification for the Office of the President all the way through the election cycles of 2008 and 2012, is if the tune hasn't changed, its probably the same old song. I've been waiting for an objection cast from the lips of both Mitt Romney and Hillary Clinton, but so far all I hear is silence. There is no music being played that would turn me on. In fact I actually see a confirmation that indeed their tune hasn't changed.


Recently Mitt Romney said, "I mean, you hope you learn from your mistakes," he said, "but at the same time, there are people who are not yet known by the American public who have extraordinary records, great capability, Paul Ryan being one of them, Scott Walker, Bobby Jindal, Marco Rubio. Of course, people are getting to know Chris Christie. Jeb Bush, they don’t know Jeb Bush as the governor of Florida, and the kind of record he has and had there. These are people who I think have the potential to really ignite interest in our party and potentially win the general."

http://www.businessinsider.com/mitt-romney-2016-president-hugh-hewitt

No offense Mitt, but even some of your recommendations as far as 'good people' for the Office of the President would be walking talking violations of the U.S. Constitution if they were to win the Office of the President. I can not recommend 16 year olds buying alcohol and say that it is good. It has nothing to do with Marco Rubio or Bobby Jindal not being good fathers or parents or a good U.S. Senator or Governor it has to do with the qualifications the American People have set up for the Office of the President that both Marco Rubio and Bobby Jindal fail.

Now I don't think Mitt Romney is a bad guy or Hillary Clinton is a bad gal nor do I think Barack Obama is a bad guy. There are many good qualities about Romney, Clinton, and Obama as well as McCain, Rubio, Jindal, Cruz,as well as Santorum all of whom I even recently challenged in the ALS Ice bucket challenge, only because I knew Mitt had already done it and challenged his wife also, but we have to start facing facts.

If all of these people recommend that 16 year olds can buy alcohol and 7 year olds can drive, maybe their advice is somewhat of a misfit and not something we want in the Office of the President? They are all free every day to accept a challenge and begin fresh and I for one sincerely hope they do, because nothing would be better to me than if I could have someone to vote for who was legal besides myself.

Will Mitt Romney take another run who knows? What I do know is that the tune hasn't changed. I've written some 60+ songs and many of them I actually dreamed about. You can imagine my surprise when I leaped out of bed with this tune being chanted in my head during my sleep by not just me but many many people. It sounded pretty good as a chorus of many people, not as good with just me, but look at the date on this thing and then ask yourself is Mitt Romney running again as a hit or a misfit?

I just checked this link and its only been seen 11 times! You know how hard that is to do with a video published June 20th,2013, over a year ago? ( smile ) Maybe the 'reverbs' a little to high? Let's hope they all change their tune!

Mitt Romney's Loop te Loop





Update on Judy v. Obama 1:14-cv-93 filed in the U.S. Court (District of Utah)
1. MOTION FOR DEFAULT W PROPOSED ORDER OF JUDGEMENT

2. ORDER OF DEFAULT JUDGEMENT (PROPOSED)


Those wishing to read the U.S. Federal Civil Rights Complaint may now do so here now as it is public information: Judy v. Obama 2014 U.S. FED Case No. 1:14cv00093


Wow!Just found my book, Taking A Stand, on sale at your local B&N for nook users if you prefer over soft or hard bound - only $8.49 That's a Great price

Cody Robert Judy
For U.S. President 2016

If you think “Truth” is worth it, support it and quit supporting the lie. That is the beginning of change, or we can just keep on going down this road and see where it leads with Obama. Which is it going to be?

TRUTH IS REAL

The Commercial is simply called "America"