Sorry ...
 

On May 16, 11:24*pm, "Warren E. Harrison"
wrote:
On 5/16/2011 8:22 PM,Iarnrodwrote:

On May 16, 12:35 pm, John *wrote:
Sorry I have slowed on the quantity of posts

**** that, kook, try working on the QUALITY of them!

snicker

Obama would not, of course, have been born a citizen had he been born
abroad

Yes, he would.

(which he may very well have been.)

That has been proven to be an impossible claim ... TWICE.

Hawaii proved Obama is a natural born citizen, making Obama the FIRST
and ONLY presidential candidate in our nations history to DOCUMENT the
proven fact that he was born on US soil. A claim McCain could not
make.

Sorry ...
 

On 5/17/2011 5:35 PM, Iarnrod wrote:
On May 16, 11:24 pm, "Warren E. Harrison"
wrote:
On 5/16/2011 8:22 PM,Iarnrodwrote:

On May 16, 12:35 pm, John wrote:
Sorry I have slowed on the quantity of posts
**** that, kook, try working on the QUALITY of them!
snicker
Obama would not, of course, have been born a citizen had he been born
abroad
Yes, he would.

(which he may very well have been.)
That has been proven to be an impossible claim ... TWICE.

Hawaii proved Obama is a natural born citizen, making Obama the FIRST
and ONLY presidential candidate in our nations history to DOCUMENT the
proven fact that he was born on US soil. A claim McCain could not
make.


ROFLOL ... the insanity never ends. PRICELESS!!!

Regards,
JS

Sorry ...
 

On May 19, 9:21*am, "Warren E. Harrison"
wrote:
On 5/17/2011 5:35 PM, Iarntard wrote:

On May 16, 11:24 pm, "Warren E. Harrison"wrote:
On 5/16/2011 8:22 PM, Iarntard wrote:

On May 16, 12:35 pm, John * *wrote:
Sorry I have slowed on the quantity of posts

**** that, kook, try working on the QUALITY of them!

snicker

Obama would not, of course, have been born a citizen had he been born
abroad

Yes, he would.

No, he would not have been.

Yes, he would have been. Immaterial of course since he's the FIRST and
ONLY president in our history ever to release his birth certificate
and prove he was born on US soil.

Sorry ...
 

You know that Testors Glue? for glueing together model Airplanes.I used
to do that when I was a kid.That Glue smelled Real Good.
cuhulin, the Glue

Sorry ...
 

On 5/19/2011 8:22 PM, Iarnrod wrote:
On May 19, 9:21 am, "Warren E. Harrison"
wrote:
On 5/17/2011 5:35 PM, Iarntard wrote:

On May 16, 11:24 pm, "Warren E. Harrison"wrote:
On 5/16/2011 8:22 PM, Iarntard wrote:

On May 16, 12:35 pm, John wrote:
Sorry I have slowed on the quantity of posts

**** that, kook, try working on the QUALITY of them!

snicker

Obama would not, of course, have been born a citizen had he been born
abroad

Yes, he would.

No, he would not have been. The Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952 specified who would be a citizen if born abroad. If only one parent was a citizen, then that citizen needed to have been physically present in the USA for five years after the age of 14. As Obama's mother was only 18 at the time of his birth, she did not meet the requirement due to simple arithmetic. That provision applied regardless of the marital status of the parents. If the parents were not married, an additional restriction applied: the father had to "legitimate" the child by acknowledging and establishing paternity.


Sec. 309. (a) The provisions of paragraphs (3), (4), (5) and (7) of
section 301 (a), and of paragraph (2) of section 308, of this title
shall apply as of the date of birth to a child born out of wedlock
on or after the effective date of this Act, if the paternity of such
child is established while such child is under the age of twenty-one
years by legitimation.

http://library.uwb.edu/guides/USimmi...stat%20163.pdf


That is an *additional* restriction, and does not alter the physical presence requirement of the one citizen parent. The applicability of Title III, Section 301 (a)(7) does not depend in any way on the marital status of the parents: that one citizen parent must have been physically present in the USA for 10 years, five of which were after the age of 14, in order for the child born abroad to be a citizen at birth. Nothing in the statute mentions the marital status of the parents, and there is no implicit reference to marital status. The marital status was irrelevant.

Yes, he would have been.

Wrong. Had he been born outside the US, he would not have been born a
citizen under the law in effect.

Sorry ...
 

On May 19, 11:16*pm, "Warren E. Harrison"
wrote:
On 5/19/2011 8:22 PM,Iarnrodwrote:



On May 19, 9:21 am, "Warren E. Harrison"
*wrote:
On 5/17/2011 5:35 PM, Iarntard wrote:

On May 16, 11:24 pm, "Warren E. Harrison"wrote:
On 5/16/2011 8:22 PM, Iarntard wrote:

On May 16, 12:35 pm, John * * *wrote:
Sorry I have slowed on the quantity of posts

**** that, kook, try working on the QUALITY of them!

snicker

Obama would not, of course, have been born a citizen had he been born
abroad

Yes, he would.

No, he would not have been. *The Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952 specified who would be a citizen if born abroad. *If only one parent was a citizen, then that citizen needed to have been physically present in the USA for five years after the age of 14. *As Obama's mother was only 18 at the time of his birth, she did not meet the requirement due to simple arithmetic. *That provision applied regardless of the marital status of the parents. *If the parents were not married, an additional restriction applied: *the father had to "legitimate" the child by acknowledging and establishing paternity.

* Sec. 309. (a) *The provisions of paragraphs (3), (4), (5) and (7) of
* section 301 (a), and of paragraph (2) of section 308, of this title
* shall apply as of the date of birth to a child born out of wedlock
* on or after the effective date of this Act, if the paternity of such
* child is established while such child is under the age of twenty-one
* years by legitimation.

*http://library.uwb.edu/guides/USimmi...stat%20163.pdf

That is an *additional* restriction, and does not alter the physical presence requirement of the one citizen parent. *The applicability of Title III, Section 301 (a)(7) does not depend in any way on the marital status of the parents: *that one citizen parent must have been physically present in the USA for 10 years, five of which were after the age of 14, in order for the child born abroad to be a citizen at birth. *Nothing in the statute mentions the marital status of the parents, and there is no implicit reference to marital status. *The marital status was irrelevant.

Yes, he would have been.

Wrong. *

Right.

Had he been born outside the US, he would not have been born a
citizen under the law in effect.

Yes, he would have. You're wrong.

Sorry ...
 

On 5/20/2011 5:17 AM, Iarnrod wrote:
On May 19, 11:16 pm, "Warren E. Harrison"
wrote:
On 5/19/2011 8:22 PM,Iarnrodwrote:



On May 19, 9:21 am, "Warren E. Harrison"
wrote:
On 5/17/2011 5:35 PM, Iarntard wrote:

On May 16, 11:24 pm, "Warren E. Harrison"wrote:
On 5/16/2011 8:22 PM, Iarntard wrote:

On May 16, 12:35 pm, John wrote:
Sorry I have slowed on the quantity of posts

**** that, kook, try working on the QUALITY of them!

snicker

Obama would not, of course, have been born a citizen had he been born
abroad

Yes, he would.

No, he would not have been. The Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952 specified who would be a citizen if born abroad. If only one parent was a citizen, then that citizen needed to have been physically present in the USA for five years after the age of 14. As Obama's mother was only 18 at the time of his birth, she did not meet the requirement due to simple arithmetic. That provision applied regardless of the marital status of the parents. If the parents were not married, an additional restriction applied: the father had to "legitimate" the child by acknowledging and establishing paternity.

Sec. 309. (a) The provisions of paragraphs (3), (4), (5) and (7) of
section 301 (a), and of paragraph (2) of section 308, of this title
shall apply as of the date of birth to a child born out of wedlock
on or after the effective date of this Act, if the paternity of such
child is established while such child is under the age of twenty-one
years by legitimation.

http://library.uwb.edu/guides/USimmi...stat%20163.pdf

That is an *additional* restriction, and does not alter the physical presence requirement of the one citizen parent. The applicability of Title III, Section 301 (a)(7) does not depend in any way on the marital status of the parents: that one citizen parent must have been physically present in the USA for 10 years, five of which were after the age of 14, in order for the child born abroad to be a citizen at birth. Nothing in the statute mentions the marital status of the parents, and there is no implicit reference to marital status. The marital status was irrelevant.

Yes, he would have been.

Wrong.Had he been born outside the US, he would not have been born a
citizen under the law in effect.

Yes, he

No, he would not have been. The law has been cited and you're wrong.
His mother was not old enough - she had not been physically present in
the USA for five years after the age of 14 at the time of his birth.

Sorry ...
 

On 5/20/2011 7:06 AM, Warren E. Harrison wrote:
...
No, he would not have been. The law has been cited and you're wrong.
His mother was not old enough - she had not been physically present in
the USA for five years after the age of 14 at the time of his birth.

You are 100% correct. irontard has never been correct ... don't make
here screw up her perfect record!

ROFLOL

Regards,
JS

Sorry ...
 

On 5/20/2011 9:22 AM, John Smith wrote:
On 5/20/2011 7:06 AM, Warren E. Harrison wrote:
...
No, he would not have been. The law has been cited and you're wrong.
His mother was not old enough - she had not been physically present in
the USA for five years after the age of 14 at the time of his birth.

You are 100% correct. irontard has never been correct ... don't make
here screw up her perfect record!

irantard is a snarky young male, who for some bizarre reason likes to
pretend he's a 60+ year old woman.

Sorry ...
 

On May 20, 8:06*am, "Warren E. Harrison"
wrote:
On 5/20/2011 5:17 AM,Iarnrodwrote:



On May 19, 11:16 pm, "Warren E. Harrison"
*wrote:
On 5/19/2011 8:22 PM,Iarnrodwrote:

On May 19, 9:21 am, "Warren E. Harrison"
* *wrote:
On 5/17/2011 5:35 PM, Iarntard wrote:

On May 16, 11:24 pm, "Warren E. Harrison"wrote:
On 5/16/2011 8:22 PM, Iarntard wrote:

On May 16, 12:35 pm, John * * * *wrote:
Sorry I have slowed on the quantity of posts

**** that, kook, try working on the QUALITY of them!

snicker

Obama would not, of course, have been born a citizen had he been born
abroad

Yes, he would.

No, he would not have been. *The Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952 specified who would be a citizen if born abroad. *If only one parent was a citizen, then that citizen needed to have been physically present in the USA for five years after the age of 14. *As Obama's mother was only 18 at the time of his birth, she did not meet the requirement due to simple arithmetic. *That provision applied regardless of the marital status of the parents. *If the parents were not married, an additional restriction applied: *the father had to "legitimate" the child by acknowledging and establishing paternity.

* *Sec. 309. (a) *The provisions of paragraphs (3), (4), (5) and (7) of
* *section 301 (a), and of paragraph (2) of section 308, of this title
* *shall apply as of the date of birth to a child born out of wedlock
* *on or after the effective date of this Act, if the paternity of such
* *child is established while such child is under the age of twenty-one
* *years by legitimation.

*http://library.uwb.edu/guides/USimmi...stat%20163.pdf

That is an *additional* restriction, and does not alter the physical presence requirement of the one citizen parent. *The applicability of Title III, Section 301 (a)(7) does not depend in any way on the marital status of the parents: *that one citizen parent must have been physically present in the USA for 10 years, five of which were after the age of 14, in order for the child born abroad to be a citizen at birth. *Nothing in the statute mentions the marital status of the parents, and there is no implicit reference to marital status. *The marital status was irrelevant.

Yes, he would have been.

Wrong.Had he been born outside the US, he would not have been born a
citizen under the law in effect.

Yes, he

No, he would not have been.

Yes, he would.