Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: txflake
One website states: Stanley Ann Dunham married in 1960 and that in 1967 Barrack Obama was 3 years old.

If Barrack Obama was 3 in 1967 then he would have been born in 1964. Another site claims that Obama is 46 years old now. So how could he have been born in 1964? 2008-1964=44 years old. So how can articles claim that he is 46 years old when he should be 44 years old by his date of birth?

Article giving state of birth: http://www.mydamnchannel.com/blog/tag/Stanley%20Ann%20Durham%20Soetoro/page/1/default.aspx

Article stating his age: http://news-lanka.blogspot.com/2008/06/senator-barrack-obama-clinches.html

Looks like he was born sooner than claimed in the article unless they are lying about his age or are confused.

1,172 posted on 07/04/2008 11:26:09 PM PDT by Freedom of Speech Wins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1169 | View Replies ]


To: Freedom of Speech Wins

If Obama is 46 years old as articles state he would have had to have been born in 1962, not 1964. 2008-46=1962. Which is it? A lot of explaining to do here!?!?


1,174 posted on 07/04/2008 11:35:42 PM PDT by Freedom of Speech Wins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1172 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson