Posted on 10/28/2009 2:23:58 AM PDT by kingattax
In little noticed remarks, Michelle Obama stated at a public event that her husband's mother, Ann Dunham, was "very young and very single" when she gave birth to the future U.S. president.
Her comments further undermine the official story as told by Barack Obama – that Dunham was married to his father, Barack Obama Sr., at the time of birth.
The remarks were made by Michelle Obama during a July 2008 round table at the University of Missouri. Obama was responding to criticism of her husband's presidential campaign speeches about fatherhood and faith-based initiatives.
Michelle Obama explained her husband understands the struggles of low-income families.
"He understands them because he was raised by strong women. He is the product of two great women in his life. His mother and his grandmother," she said.
"Barack saw his mother, who was very young and very single when she had him, and he saw her work hard to complete her education and try to raise he and his sister," Michelle Obama said.
Her remarks about Dunham being "very single" when she gave birth to Barack Obama were also quoted last year on a blog posted at MSNBC.com. The remarks, however, contradicted previous claims President Obama made about the circumstances of his birth.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Check out #2 and #34. The current thread is getting interesting, a SP showed up. [FRmail me if you've forgotten the definition of SP.]
A FReeper named “notebook” wrote this on December 13, 2006:
The man's full name is
'Barak Ismail Akhtar al-Sulaiman bin Saddam Mohammed Hussein Obama'.
Found the name in this old thread; there are some interesting comments in here, but can not FR bookmark for some reason:
I think that was a joke.
Oh!
Just skimmed through the link you provided. BO even had defenders 3 years ago. Amazing.
Me too. Good luck finding it. I searched for months. No dice. I still believe it’s out there somewhere.
OMG, think about being left handed and signing that name. HAH!
I believe Loren Davis and his wife on Obama’s full name. In fact we may find out that he is hiding his BC because of his full name that he shortened because middle names not necessary. But American voters would have a tough time with the name Mohammed and Hussein.
As missionaries in Kenya I am sure they heard a lot of stories. And everything Obama has done since he was elected fits right in with what they warned us about.
Good detective work, Spunky.
Hmm, have to wonder... that is not insignificant.
Those old threads can be very telling. Funny how often the defenders way back in 2004-2006 are still defenders now, isn’t it?
Exactly TR...who the heck is this guy? The story is ever changing and no one seems to care....Obamao is on his way to be the dictator of the most powerful country on the earth!
I view this as a potentially crucial fact in the chain of facts that would need to be proved to establish that BHO II was a dual citizen.
I believe it is only potentially crucial because the issue of whether this marriage is bigamous in HI cannot yet be determined with certainty (although many folks make “certain” statements for or against this as being a bigamous marriage). A bigamous marriage in HI would prevent the 1948 BNA from transmitting UK citizenship to BHO II in my non-lawyer reading of the 1948 BNA.
Some folks are certain that just having a non-US citizen parent is sufficient to make a person a non-NBC and ineligible for POTUS, whether or not the person is a dual citizen. I am not certain one way or the other.
See:
From: Okubo, Janice S.
To: [email redacted]
Cc: Onaka, Alvin T.
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 12:47 PM
Subject: RE: Request for information
Aloha..,
Index data referred to in HRS 338-18 from vital records in the State of Hawaii is available for inspection at the Department of Health’s Office of Health Status Monitoring at 1250 Punchbowl Street in Honolulu . The Director in accordance with 338-18 (d) has not authorized any other data to be made available to the public.
In response to your request the following index data is being provided:
BIRTH INDEX
OFFICE OF HEALTH STATUS MONITORING
CHILD
OBAMA II, BARACK HUSSEIN
GENDER
M
MARRIAGE INDEX
SORTED BY BRIDE
OFFICE OF HEALTH STATUS MONITORING
GROOM
OBAMA, BARACK HUSSEIN
BRIDE
DUNHAN, STANLEY ANN
Janice Okubo
Communications Office
Hawaii State Department of Health…
That’s a lot of words.
No license though.
There is no Obama/Dunham marriage license in the public domain.
You can view it any way you want. You can believe what you want.
No license.
True.
But the official HI “index” of births and marriages _is_ in the public domain if requested by name and the existence of an index for the SADO-BHO Sr. marriage confirms the existence of that marriage “in the public domain,” just as the “index” of BHO II’s birth confirms that HI has a record of his birth “in the public domain.”
I doubt there is anything in the HI statutes that would allow recording of an indexed marriage document without there being an underlying HI marriage license.
Just the fact that there IS a marriage index leads me to believe that it was legit. The truth is, we don’t know if Obama Sr was married to another person, or if that marriage was legal. there are a lot of unanswered questions. Based on the Marriage that Hawaii has, its a legit marriage, and therefore Obama Jr. was a legitimate son, and not a bastard, at birth.
Time will tell.
The “best evidence” provided by the HI index is that Obama was “legitimate” until or unless proven otherwise.
This takes away the explanation that Obama has been withholding his long form BC (or whatever report of birth is in his vital records) because he is trying to hide some embarrassing fact such as lack of a father on the form.
All children of a marriage are legally presumed to be fathered by the husband so this HI index record seems to me to remove any chance that Frank Marshall Davis is on the BC vital record, so that excuse for hiding Obama’s vital record is out, I would think with the following extremely remote possibility:
There is no marriage date on the HI vital record index, so it is not proof that they were married in February 1961 or before he was born, but no one has suggested any scenario in which the parents were married _after_ BHO II was born.
The bone they are throwing out is insulting. No date? No license? No place of marriage? And we are supposed to believe them just because they said so?
Just because the DoH says so does not make it true. Ask anyone posting on the Duke Lacrosse threads. 99.9% of the Durham City & County Governments lied. Not only did they lie to frame 3 lacrosse players, they lied when they hauled a taxi cab driver into court.
from DoH website:
“An original entry on a birth, death, marriage, or divorce certificate may be amended by either the private request of an individual or an order of a court of competent jurisdiction. An amendment includes changes, corrections, additions, deletions, or substitutions.”
Also Michelle probably thinks that with that truth single mothers will flock to his side.
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.