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

To: RummyChick
That’s bull. A marriage that was void at inception is not considered a legal marriage just because you got a marriage license. Good god, read some immigration case law. ***************************************************

Prove to me that Obama Sr. had a valid marriage prior if you can.. Then prove to me why the marriage makes any differance at all ,, Obama Sr. claimed Obama II/jr. as his child and gave him his name WHILE IN A MARRIAGE TO THE MOTHER.. US law says he is Obama Sr.'s child no matter what the other circumstances might be. Your building arguments based upon assumptions and presumptions, especially the void at inception bit, NOBODY HAS LEGALLY CHALLENGED THE VALIDITY OF THE MARRIAGE. Do you really think challenging it retroactively is a winning gambit for Dear Leader? The old ... let me fix my paperwork and stall for the next 3 years routine works for you??

83 posted on 10/02/2009 2:33:00 PM PDT by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]


To: Neidermeyer

Good god, I am not going to go over the British law for the upteenth time. It doesn’t matter what the heck Obama Sr said or what Jr said.

READ THE BRITISH LAW on IMMIGRATION. Start with the link in my profile.

You can choose to carry on about Sr not being married. I think it is ridiculous to make that claim..but go ahead and base your whole argument on it


86 posted on 10/02/2009 2:36:19 PM PDT by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | 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