Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Have you read it and did it change your mind?
Read it,made me change my mind or ask more questions 4 11.11%
Read it,still think Obama is a natural born citizen 5 13.89%
Haven't read it but want to 1 2.78%
Won't read it 21 58.33%
Just here to troll the thread 5 13.89%
Voters: 36. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 02-08-2014, 12:02 PM
 
1,855 posts, read 3,613,044 times
Reputation: 2151

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Britt Reid View Post
Show me a statute that proves it!
Not necessary. If that were the case, the law would read 'immediately' or 'consecutively' prior to birth. You see, the default presumption is that the person reading the statute can, in fact, comprehend clear language. That obviously doesn't apply in your case.

 
Old 02-08-2014, 12:05 PM
 
26,579 posts, read 14,472,137 times
Reputation: 7444
Quote:
Originally Posted by stoutboy View Post
Not necessary. If that were the case, the law would read 'immediately' or 'consecutively' prior to birth.
yep.


britt>foot>shot.
 
Old 02-08-2014, 12:20 PM
 
26,579 posts, read 14,472,137 times
Reputation: 7444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Britt Reid View Post
Show me a statute that proves it!
here it is. Sec. 309. [8 U.S.C. 1409]

INA: ACT 309 - CHILDREN BORN OUT OF WEDLOCK

"....a person born, after December 23, 1952, outside the United States and out of wedlock shall be held to have acquired at birth the nationality status of his mother, if the mother had the nationality of the United States at the time of such person's birth, and if the mother had previously been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year."

there is no requirement that the "continuous period of one year" be immediately preceeding the birth of the child.


i hope your foot gets better soon.
 
Old 02-08-2014, 12:38 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,867,071 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Britt Reid View Post
So what if it has taken two years WB! How long did it take for the ball on Watergate to get rolling? About as long as this investigation has been taking place as I recollect, about 2 years. As for consulting with their attorney behind closed doors away from the public venue, they have always done that with her during this investigation. As for consulting with congressional members, Zullo has had numerous meetings with them across the country and so what if has not elaborated to the public what took place in their conversations. It is none of our business until they are ready to tell us. I'm going to tell you something WB, you sound just like blogger RC squealing for Reed Hayes to present him his report when it was non of his business. Stop being so impatient!
I don't know exactly, but it was all over, from the burglary to Nixon's resignation, in 2 years, 2 months. And that was w/o the internet!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Britt Reid View Post
No. That did not happen. Do your research.
You are correct. Ms. Obama did not take any classes spring semester.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Britt Reid View Post
Oh no I'm not shooting myself in the foot. From your link in the FAQ section:

I am claiming citizenship through my mother. My parents were not married at the time of my birth. Does this affect whether I automatically acquired citizenship?

[It may. You acquired U.S. citizenship at the time of your birth if you were born out of wedlock after December 23, 1952 and your U.S. citizen mother was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for at least one year prior to your birth. The requirements before December 23, 1952 varied to some extent.]


Now here is the problem with that. Between February 1961 to Aug 4, 1961 or Aug 19, 1961 when she starts classes in Seattle, there is no record of Stanley Ann Dunham anywhere. In essence, it can't be determined if she was in the U.S. for one year prior to his alleged birth date. Where was she?
She was on the moon. Where do you think she was? She was 18 years old, with no means of support. Her family (parents) lived in Hawaii. Not to mention, it doesn't matter anyway.
 
Old 02-08-2014, 12:57 PM
 
26,579 posts, read 14,472,137 times
Reputation: 7444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
I don't know exactly, but it was all over, from the burglary to Nixon's resignation, in 2 years, 2 months. And that was w/o the internet!
june 17, 1972: whitewater break-in and arrests.

june 20, 1972: woodward/bernstein washington post reporting begins.

may 17, 1973: senate hearings begin.

july 27-30 1974: house passes articles of impeachment.

aug 9, 1974: nixon resigns.

Watergate timeline - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


so, the MCCCP "investigation" has been going on longer than watergate and all we have to show for it is "universe shattering evidence"...... that can't be released for some unknown reason.
 
Old 02-08-2014, 01:59 PM
 
Location: Somewhere extremely awesome
3,130 posts, read 3,078,036 times
Reputation: 2472
Birthers are silly.
 
Old 02-08-2014, 04:12 PM
 
Location: Los Awesome, CA
8,653 posts, read 6,140,421 times
Reputation: 3368
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrecking ball View Post
here it is. Sec. 309. [8 U.S.C. 1409]

INA: ACT 309 - CHILDREN BORN OUT OF WEDLOCK

"....a person born, after December 23, 1952, outside the United States and out of wedlock shall be held to have acquired at birth the nationality status of his mother, if the mother had the nationality of the United States at the time of such person's birth, and if the mother had previously been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year."

there is no requirement that the "continuous period of one year" be immediately preceeding the birth of the child.


i hope your foot gets better soon.
Britt just needs to give it up... I've never seen anyone be schooled like that on CD before... hahaha...
 
Old 02-09-2014, 11:32 AM
 
Location: Ohio
2,801 posts, read 2,311,779 times
Reputation: 1654
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrecking ball View Post
so they claimed after the fact.

two years later and they still haven't produced this code book as they said they would.
They will release it "next month" with the other earth shattering evidence ...
 
Old 02-09-2014, 02:05 PM
 
26,579 posts, read 14,472,137 times
Reputation: 7444
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrecking ball View Post
are you going to keep pushing this point or conveniently abandon it now?
well?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:24 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top