The issue presented is not whether MRomney is a U.S. Citizen, he clearly is. At issue is the Constitutional qualification that to be President you must be 'natural born'. Is there a difference between being a 'citizen' and a 'natural born citizen'? Definitely. One can become a 'citizen' in a number of ways: naturalization, under the 14th amendment and being natural born for example. Being Natural born is a subset of being a Citizen. Natural born citizens are a privileged class in that they can serve as President, where other non-natural born citizens cannot. That is undeniable under the Constitution.
The question presented refers to MRomney's citizen status. IIRC, to be natural born you must be born to two parents that are both citizens of the U.S. and born on 'U.S. soil' (which doesn't necessarily mean in the U.S.). The 'two parent' issue is what is now facing Obama, as today's hearing in GA is stating. Clearly, his father was not a U.S. citizen. It appears this is the case for MRomney as well; his father was not a U.S. citizen, rather a citizen of Mexico.
Questions remaining: if you're born in the U.S. but neither parent is a U.S. citizen, are you natural born? I would say no.
if your'e born in the U.S. but only one parent is a U.S. citizen, are you natural born? My limited knowledge leads me to no as well.
It seems so simple a question should have been answered long ago and if not, is easily answerable today.
Carry on.
The ONLY relevant question here is "Is Mitt Romney a natural-born U.S. Citizen?"
The answer is "Yes."
Children are not responsible for the errors of their parents.
Case closed.
