Does polygamy secure Obama’s citizenship?

Update:

KISSING off speculation on Obama’s birth certificate

The Saturday, Aug. 9, Canada Free Press front page story I authored generated a firestorm of letters to the Toronto newspaper. One particular Letter to the Editor makes some vital points, and asks an important question not before asked: Does polygamy protect Barack Obama's status as a natural born US citizen?

---

According to the writer, "Obama Is a Natural Born US citizen, regardless of place of birth, because his parent's marriage was invalid. The problem comes down to the validity of Obama's parent's marriage. When he was 18, Barack Obama Sr. married a woman named Kezia and had four children with her. Two of them later returned to Kenya from the United States. He never divorced her. In the US, polygamy is illegal. If you are already married, regardless of where you got married, all subsequent marriages are invalid. This is the case with the marriage of Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Obama Sr. in February 1961. Barak Obama Jr. was born out of wedlock. As a child born out of wedlock, a different citizenship law is applied." The writer went on to explain: "The U.S. citizen parent, and the foreign parent must be married. The actual law pertaining to this issue can be found here ." The writer then provided this US law:

7 FAM 1133.4-3 Birth Out of Wedlock to American Mother (TL:CON-68; 04-01-1998) a. Section 309 (c) INA: A child born abroad out of wedlock after December 24, 1952, to a U.S. citizen mother acquires U.S. citizenship if the mother was physically present continuously for 1 year in the United States or its outlying possessions at any time prior to the child's birth.

If the writer is correct, the above law may supercede the law that was in effect at the time of Barak Obama's birth in 1961 to an 18 year old mother (below), and he is legally qualified to hold the office of President. Here is the law per FindLaw.com that applied at the time of his birth -- if his parents were legally married:

4. December 24, 1952 to November 13, 1986: If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least ten years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16.

If the above law is found to be the correct law applying at the time of the birth of Barak Obama, he is legally not qualified to hold the office of President. Which of the two laws applied at the time of his birth? If his parents were not married at the time of his birth, then Barak is qualified under then-current law to hold the office of President. If his parents were married at the time of his birth, then Barak is not quantified under then-current law to hold the office of President. Also, according to all research so far tendered, the law at the time of his birth is the only law that applies in this case. Citizenship laws enacted after November 13, 1986 are much more liberal, and have spurred the coining of the title "anchor baby." However, it is not believed that newer laws supercede the much stronger citizenship law in effect at the time of Senator Obama's birth, and his ability to be a natural born citizen of the United States, nor does it matter that he was born in Hawaii that gained statehood in 1959. This important matter has caused much discussion and confusion. It deserves a more complete investigation. American voters deserve a thorough explanation and clarification before election day.

To mock the National Anthem, and belittle the Pledge of Allegiance

I believe these two sad videos share something in common. They both show well known people disrespecting a symbol of our nation. The first video shows Roseanne Barr mocking the National Anthem: In the second video, Barak Obama forgets to conduct the Pledge at the outset of the meeting; asks a heckler to lead it; then does not face the flag. You be the judge.