[Freedom of Speech Wins]

3 year difference between reported birth years of 1961 and 1964 and a 3 year difference between the mother being 18 and 21 and it possibly having bearing on whether he is eligible to be president.

I don't think that this is coincidence.

The article could have gotten it wrong accidentally and stated that he was 3 years old in 1967 when it should have stated that he was older.

Again the forged birth certificate says that he was born in 1961. That is a 3 year difference whether he was born in 1961 or 1964. This isn't a one year dating difference that we are talking about.

I don't think it was an accident that there is a 3 year difference in the reported birth year and a 3 year difference in the age that his mother may have needed to be for Obama to be eligible.

I believe people lied intentionally.

[cajungirl]

That is possible if they read the law as closely as we have.

When one is constantly confused as in this case,odd dates, sloppiness in labeling things, it is hard not to think that behind the “confusion” is an attempt to deceive. EVerything becomes so laden with mistaken info that the intent is suspect.

There is something odd here.