Posted on 02/29/2012 9:01:28 AM PST by jmaroneps37
Attorney Orly Taitz vowed to shove everything she had concerning Barack Obama’s evidentiary problem at last week’s eligibility challenge in front of Indiana’s election board. Taitz, whose airline ticket to the hearing was purchased by a concerned citizen presented evidence of a “stolen social security number and a forgery instead of a birth certificate!”
She told WND reporter Bob Unruh that Indiana just removed their Secretary of State Charlie White for his discrepancies with voter registration irregularities over “minor” problems. Taitz said our sitting president’s eligibility problems are major in comparison.
But new questions about the status of BHO’s teen age mother Stanley Ann Dunham are surfacing as analysis at another web site is revealing a Congressional rule change for people born between December 23, 1952 and November 13, 1986 puts in serious doubt Stanley Ann Dunham’s ability to confer citizenship status on her son.
Since Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. was born in 1961, this newly discovered law involves Dunham’s age because she was only 18 at time of delivery!
The law says: ”When one parent was a U.S. citizen and the other a foreign national, the U.S. citizen parent must have resided in the U.S. for a total of 10 years prior to birth of the child with FIVE of the years after the age of 14.” Stanley Ann Dunham did not meet requisite status according to blog discovery.
One commenter said, “She was not old enough to register Obama’s birth in Hawaii or anywhere else in the U.S. as a Natural Born Citizen as she did not meet the residency requirements!
Backing this statement up, another commenter reiterates:” The law specifically outlines the requirements for a CITIZEN mother to confer citizenship to her baby. Ann Dunham was NOT old enough-case closed!”
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
”When one parent was a U.S. citizen and the other a foreign national, the U.S. citizen parent must have resided in the U.S. for a total of 10 years prior to birth of the child with FIVE of the years after the age of 14.” Stanley Ann Dunham did not meet requisite status according to blog discovery.
By the express terms of the law linked in that same article, that only applies to children born overseas. It has nothing to do with children born in the U.S..
One commenter said, “She was not old enough to register Obama’s birth in Hawaii or anywhere else in the U.S. as a Natural Born Citizen as she did not meet the residency requirements! Backing this statement up, another commenter reiterates:” The law specifically outlines the requirements for a CITIZEN mother to confer citizenship to her baby. Ann Dunham was NOT old enough-case closed!”
I'm not sure who these unnamed "commentators" are as well, but they're morons too. No U.S. law says anything about being old enough to register a birth, nor does the 14th Amendment say anying about the age of the mother, nor did English common law. These idiots are conflating a provision applicable only to overseas births, and pretending it applies to domestic births as well.
What website? It sure would be nice to be able to go there and read what is being said.
Google returns...@Congressional rule change for people born between December 23, 1952 and November 13, 1986
What Congressional rule change? Again, it sure would be nice to be able to go and read the law mentioned.
Thanks for so little info, coach.
Citizenship Rules for People Born Outside the United States
It would be interesting to ask people promoting this theory about the citizenship of children born to unwed teen mothers with unidentified fathers in that period. Were they utterly stateless?
Even that's far from certain. The age requirement only applied to married women. It could be argued that Stanley Ann was not validly married, since BHO, Sr. already had at least one wife back in Kenya.
BTW, be sure to click through to the article and select "Over $9" in his poll.
no there is a provision for that, read the law.
An additional new factor arose recently in zero’s very confusing past. According to State Dept. documents, it seems that his father was married to a woman in Africa when he “married” zero’s mother prior to zero’s birth.
This, IMO, raises additional questions about zero’s true eligibility status on top of those already floating around about his citizenship.
Ok, doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results is the definition of insanity. This Birther movement is not going to get rid of Obama as much as people wish it would. The Birther movement is like a bright light at night drawing moth’s. It just keeps people wasting time on pointless pursuits instead of spending energy on electing patriots.
Great screennames think alike, eh?
The Kenyan won’t be kicked off any ballot for the same reason he won’t be removed from office except by an electoral defeat (if he has not suspended the constitution before January 2013.) And they called Reagan the Teflon president.
If people actually read the law, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
Or is she somehow making the arbitrary decision that the person in question actually was born outside of the US?
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.