Posted on 01/11/2009 4:35:26 AM PST by dascallie
Posted by Ron Polarik
IP: 70.119.62.151
Jan 10th, 2009 - 2:10 PM
I hate to rain on anyone's parade here, but the only way to know for sure when and where Stanley Dunham was married is to see a certified genuine copy of her original Marriage Licenses on record in Hawaii -- assuming that she actually had one for Obama Sr. to begin with. (BTW, a copy of the marriage license was not a required document to get a divorce, as explained below).
Back in 1961, common-law marriages (marriages w/o a marriage license needed) were still recognized as legitimate unions. Basically, all it would take is for Dunham and Obama to simply shack up together for while and refer to themselves as a "married couple."
Also, the immigration laws at the time were extremely lax about immigrants marrying US citizens as a fast track to get a Green Card and to become lawful permanent residents.
Short of a DNA test, we have no way of knowing who is Obama Jr's biological father, and without that vault original birth certificate, we don't know what parent names were put on that certificate, where he was born, and when (The date, August 4, 1961, may be true, but it is far from being etched in stone).
There is another problem with this assumed paternity, and that is Obama Jr. looks much more like Malcolm X or Frank Marshall Davis than he looks like Obama Sr.
Now, there may have actually been a civil ceremony, but that, in and of itself, does not make the "Daddy was Obama Sr" scenario a slam dunk.
Far from it. Stanley Ann Dunham was three months pregnant when she married Obama Sr, and given her devious past history, there is a better than chance likelihood that this was a "shotgun wedding," i.e., that she entrapped Obama Sr. into marrying her whether it was his kid or someone else's.
Let's face facts here. In 1961, there was a big-time stigma to becoming a single teenage mom. In most rural parts of the country, she'd be run out of town on a rail. This is also the reason why a lot of teenagers got married, or as they used to say back then, "The father did the right thing."
Then again, you had a "Guess who's coming to dinner" scenario as well. As for which states in the US were mixed marriages most tolerated, the top three choices are Hawaii, Hawaii, and Hawai. The fact that whites were a minority group in Hawaii had a lot to do with their acceptance level, as native Hawaiians would be far less tolerant to a "Haole" marrying one of their own.
I look at the Dunham-Obama as a "Marriage of convenience," and I'm not alone in this view. If you were a teenage mom back in 1961, the only way to avoid the stigma was to find someone to marry, if not the sperm donor himself.
Now, if Dunham was impregnated by another black man, she would be looking to marry a black man, and the traditional tale of (a) boy meets girl, (b) boy and girl settle down, and (c) boy and girl make a baby would be the same, except that (c) would come before (b) and would read, "different boy" and girl make baby.
What I can say, for sure, is that Barack Hussein Obama II has never proven when, where, and to whom he was born, and that he committed felony document fraud to cover it up. He's deceived the American voter into believing that he was born in Hawaii as the biological child of Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Hussein Obama I. Even if the document were real, he still could not use it to prove his natural-born status.
What the forgery does prove, however, is the extent to which someone would break the law in order to become President, and that fact alone should disqualify him from any public office, let alone the President.
It is telling that the poster wishes to pose the issues in an either/or manner. Rule of exclusion obfuscates many meaningful parts of a story. It is also a technique well used in criminal trials ... usually by the defense attorney.
The story that Stanley Armour Dunham was involved in espionage at Boeing during WWII is just that, a story. If you will notice there is a Boeing tie to other members of his family including his own father. Stanley Armour Dunham signed up with the military in June 1942, so just exactly when was he involved in espionage? According to the “official” story Madelyn Dunham was employed at Boeing during the war years as a quality control worker.
....the story is still there, but the VERSE of the shahada is missing.
I’m a dillwad too!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2162584/replies?c=79
I’m an Aussie, so when you reply to me, make the letters very bold or else I won’t be able to hear you...
thanks. As though there are only two directions, N and S.
Thanks for the clarification.
The vast majority of "card-carrying" Socialists were indistinguishable from everyone else, and that was by design. They needed to blend in, not stick out. They did not walk around town in brown shirts with hammer & sickle armbands. < p>That's One.
The stigma of a pregnant teen in 1961 also greatly affected the parents -- especially if one or more of them were in high-profile jobs or considered to be "pillars of society."
That's Two.
The Dunhams did what was necessary to keep up the illusion of normalcy in their town, and look how long it lasted!!!
Lots of people noticed. But Michelle looks so much like a black Widow Spider that that drew all the comment. ;)
She is a joke. She is trying to be Jakie O.
In the future, please place content from this website into the bloggers forum.
ok
You certainly can be a card carrying commie and totally unaccepting of inter-racial dating and marriage.
Especially in the timeframe of the early 1960’s.
Especially with your one & only young daughter.
Nearly everyone shunned interracial dating, particularly those with MidWestern or Southern roots. It just wasn’t done and was totally socially unacceptable regardless of one’s political leanings.
The most likely scenario would be for the Dunham’s of Kansas to send their daughter out of the area with a chunk of money to birth the kid elsewhere. It is highly unusual and very odd that not a single eye-witness places pregnant Ann in Hawaii or the new teen mother with a baby in Hawaii. He simply was not born there and no plausible explanation has been offered to explain this.
Who remembers them?
No classmates of BHO or Ann’s at U of HI
No prenatal OB/GYN doctors or nurses
No hospital admiiting officer or roommates
No pediatric physician, nurse, or staff
No neighbors, landlords, or employers
No relatives, friends, or associaties
No babysitters, shopkeepers, or clergy
There is no one who saw them there.
She was not there in her ‘showing’ state of pregnancy.
She did not give birth to him in the State of Hawaii.
He did not live as a newborn in Hawaii with his mother.
There are zero photographs of Zero in Hawaii or with his supposed father, mother, or grandparents until he is the age of a toddler. Kind of makes one wonder where he was raised and how old he was when her family first saw him.
We noticed the anarchist colors, but I hadn’t noticed the not so subliminal X.
Her torso so clearly resembled the body of a black widow spider, I missed the X!
Hey, if we count her daughters’ limbs as attached to the momma, it would give her the required 8 legs, a Black Widow Spider, compleat!!
Clearly their career is based on a web of deception.
Too bad Sean Hannity had to hammer Michelle into silence over her recent discovery of pride as an American. Her flapping gums and evil spirit would have been quite useful over the course of the campaign. They nailed her big mouth shut way too soon and missed a golden opportunity on the campaign .
Re: The Mouse that Roared...That movie comes to mind constantly while reviewing current events, the latest of which is the Gaza War. Go Israel! I hope they don’t turn into Wimpus Iraelus Apologeticus like America has (Wimpus Americus Apologeticus). It is a disgusting species.
Not quite relevant to this thread, but it’s been mentioned
elsewhere how a father who insisted on a traditonally
men’s name for a daughter later used her identity in fraud
later.
Late thanks- am diverted (the double episodes of 24 Sun-Mon and now something here Tues-and now into WED-pooped). Don’t mean to appear casual on these things. Would like to draw your attention to Chief Engineer’s post #64 in this thread, and hope others have paid attention.
Wanted to add I’ve certainly spent some time on “Obama File” but “Obama Timeline” is just, say, something easier to digest AS A COMPENDIUM as it READS so well, without charts, tables etc. It rounds out the “story” so carefully AND succinctly. Errors are minor enough to my mind, that it can be sent to relations, government types, vets appropriately enough.
I’ve never had a problem w/ Obamafile I can recall.
thanks for that Beckwith.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.