Posted on 03/22/2011 1:23:41 PM PDT by STARWISE
While out promoting my new book, “Deconstructing Obama,” I have been asked a few times about Obama’s mysterious Social Security number.
Not knowing enough to speak authoritatively, I chose to swim upstream through the data flood and head for the source.
Here I found a no-nonsense licensed investigator from Ohio named Susan Daniels. Widowed at 30 with seven children, Daniels went back to school and eventually emerged as a certified paralegal.
After several years working for others, Daniels got her own license as an investigator in 1995. Since then, she has specialized in litigation support for law firms. Her particular strength has been in researching assets.
By her own admission, Daniels is “good with public records.” She knows her way around databases and has access to many that the public does not.
“I did not like the way things were going,” Daniels says of the country’s drift circa 2009. And so in the best spirit of citizen journalism, she began to investigate Obama on her own.
What she and fellow investigator Neil Sankey unearthed was a nugget that could have ended the career of a George Bush or a Sarah Plain: Barack Obama had been using a social security number issued in Connecticut between 1977 and 1979, a state in which he never lived or even visited at that time in his life.
This will not come as news to the readers of WorldNetDaily, whose thorough investigation climaxed last June when WND’s veteran White House correspondent Les Kinsolving confronted Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs on the subject.
Predictably, Gibbs laughed Kinsolving off and switched the subject to the birth certificate. Kinsolving had seen this kind of laugh and switch before. In 1982, for instance, he introduced the subject of AIDS to then press secretary Larry Speakes.
“Over a third of [the victims] have died,” said Kinsolving. “It’s known as ‘gay plague.’”
“I don’t have it. Do you?” joked Speakes to a general round of laughter. But unlike Gibbs, Speakes simply did not know any better.
As much as Daniels appreciates the work of WND and other serious investigators who have helped clarify the picture, she is distressed by the few who have clouded it.
“There have been many playing junior investigator from the start,” she jokes. “I don't know if they even have their decoder rings yet.”
This being the case, I asked Daniels to guide me through the data mine field and help me ascertain what we know for sure about the world’s best-known social security number--042-68-4425.
“All I can say,” says Daniels of 042-68-4425, “is that it’s phony and [Obama] has been using it, with it first appearing on his selective service document in 1980.”
Daniels sent me a copy of the hand-written application of the individual who held the number immediately before Obama’s, 042-68-4424. The applicant, Thomas Wood, died at age nineteen which is why his information is available.
Wood's Social Security number was issued sometime between March and May of 1977. Obama would turn sixteen in August of that year. Woods lived on Glenview Drive in Newington, Connecticut, the state from which all “042s” applied. Obama lived in Hawaii.
True to form, the left-leaning media set out to undermine the Social Security controversy and ridicule the investigators. Revealing, however, is the weakness of the response.
“Numbers are assigned based on the return address on the request envelope, not residency,” crowed Jason Linkins in the Huffington Post as though he had said something meaningful. Linkins suggested two possible explanations, both preposterous.
One is that Obama applied for his SSN as a little boy in Indonesia for no known reason, and the application just happened to be processed in Connecticut for no known reason either.
For the second, Jinkins cited the argument of Carole Glibert, in the Yahoo-related “Associated Content.” Said Gilbert, presumably with a straight face, “In fact, Barack Obama's dad attended college in Connecticut and in 1977, Obama was college aged; is it beyond reason to consider that he might have checked out his father's alma mater?”
Last time I checked, Harvard was in Massachusetts. The closest town to Harvard in Connecticut is about 90 minutes away, and there is no record that Obama Sr. lived there, let alone that Obama visited his imaginary alma mater and just happened to apply for a Social Security card while visiting.
Daniels also sent me a copy of Obama’s Selective Service data. Obama appears to have registered on September 4, 1980, a month after his nineteenth birthday. The form lists the telling last four digits of his “042” number, “4425.”
This is the first use of the “042” number that Daniels could find. She is just not sure it is legitimate. Some have credibly argued that the Selective Service information was forged and backdated once Obama became a presidential candidate.
“They were stupid to use the CT number on the [Selective Service] card,” Daniels adds, “because now there is no way for [Obama] to back out of that number.”
Rest @ link
I think the 999 codes are what are used for foreign students. We used to have to enter “something” into the bank’s database when opening a checking account for people. When the person was a alien student on a visa, we had to enter the 999’s and there was another form we took note of. Its a little cloudy, but for that name it would make sense. Again, not proof, just experience.
Kindergarten? Are you serious? That was 45 years ago! Can you name a single kindergarten that keeps records that long?
Does George W. Bush's Kindergarten still have his student records? Does Clinton's? I seriously doubt it.
For example, the numerous NEWS articles that state that he was born at Queen’s until he suddenly was born at Kapiolani.
Nope. There was exacly one such news article, a UPI article. The reporter got his facts wrong because he was too lazy to do any research beyond reading Wikipedia. Wikipedia got the hospital wrong because the high school kid who created the entry for Obama guessed the hopstial and got it wrong.
Once the error was pointed out to UPI, the reporter corrected it.
The numerous news articles that gave his mother’s name as Shirley until she suddenly became. . . Ta Da! Stanley.
Okay, so a reporter got his mother's first name wrong. Why is that important? And what does it have to do with missing records?
Yes, a clerk in the Social Security Administration.
Now, it's possible for a government worker to not figure out that a letter is addressed to Honolulu, CT. Do you know how much mail the SSA handles in a daily basis??
Okay, you seem to be under the impression that all government workers are the same and they work for a single monolith called "the government." They don't.
You see, there are different agencies within the government, which do different things and have workers with different skills. For example, there's the Social Security Administration, which handles Social Security applications. Then there is the post office, which handles mail. The two are not the same, and the workers at each aren't the same.
The main difference relevant to our case is that the postal workers actually have to deliver mail. So they actually have to make sure the address on an envelope is real place they can deliver the mail to. Social Security workers don't. That's why a postal worker would be much more likely than a Social Security worker to realize the zip code didn't match the state.
This isn't very complicated, but I realize you were obviously stunted in your mental evelopment, so you might find the above hard to follow. Nevertheless, do try. I'll be happy to provide you with more clarification if you have trouble.
It's not an unusal name in East Africa, so it is not unusal that a handful of people with that name would turn up in a country of over 300 million people that also happens to have a significant number of East African immigrants.
(_E=MC2_) (_x_)
I think so, yes. They are human. They make mistakes.
*******
1. Have you ever worked for the Social Security Administration, especially the processing office in Baltimore, and that is why you know so much about what goes on there?
2. If a clerk in the Baltimore central processing office of Social Security made a mistake with Obama's application form in 1977---he typed 0 for Connecticut instead of 9 for Hawaii--wouldn't it be reasonable to expect that the same clerk, or other clerks, made the same mistake several times over the period from 1977 to the present?
3. That is, shouldn't there be OTHER present or former residents of Hawaii who are walking around with Social Security numbers that begin with 042 of Connecticut instead of 942 of Hawaii?
4. My point is this: It is difficult for me to believe that the only time in Baltimore Social Security Administration history---especially from 1977 to the present---that a clerk accidentally typed/punched the number 0, Connecticut, instead of 9, Hawaii, on an application form was in the Obama case in 1977.
5. So until you can come up with some present or former Hawaii residents besides Obama who also have a Social Security number beginning with 0 or 042, for Connecticut, instead of 942 for Hawaii, but who have never lived in Connecticut, then I say that your theory is in error, sounds highly improbable. and you are just guessing.
No, I'm just saying they weren't in widespread use and most things got punched in by hand.
******
1. So you admit that the federal government probably had some type of scanners back in 1977.
2. So how do you know that back in 1977 the Social Security Administration did not have some of those scanners, because, as I see it, if any federal agency could have used them, it would be the Social Security Administration, an agency that handles thousands of pieces of paper every day.
3. I'm trying to imagine the processing steps of a Social Security application sent from Hawaii back in 1977 after it entered the Baltimore office.
a. Let's say I lived in Hawaii in 1977 and sent my application to Baltimore.
b. Does my application first end up unopened---along with many other application forms---on a clerk's desk?
c. Does the clerk open it and start typing and transferring the information on my application form onto a Social Security data sheet, hopefully without mistakenly punching 0, Connecticut, instead of 9, Hawaii?
d. In 1977, would the clerk be sitting in front of a typewriter or a computer screen? Would the clerk be typing on a keyboard as the clerk looked at a computer screen, or did they even use computer screens back in 1977?
e. After the clerk finished typing my information onto the computer screen or some other type of screen, would the clerk put my original application into a pile with other original application forms, and would the clerk then move on to the next original application form in the clerk's first pile of unopened letters?
f. Again, back in 1977, if I sent my Social Security application form to Baltimore, Maryland from Hawaii, would a clerk process my application form in similar steps like I write about above?
Hello, precious. Haven’t talked to you in a while.
I mean that WorldNetDaily has very little, if any, credibility on the eligibility issue. (As I have documented numerous times.) So if that’s his standard, then he need say no more.
At least Orly Taitz provides high entertainment value. What’s WND’s excuse?
2. So how do you know that back in 1977 the Social Security Administration did not have some of those scanners, because, as I see it, if any federal agency could have used them, it would be the Social Security Administration, an agency that handles thousands of pieces of paper every day.
Okay, so I actually did a little research, and I can say with certainty that the Social Security Administration did not use scanners to process applications 1977.
The first optical character recognition scanner, that is, the first scanner capable of inputing written characters on written paper into a computer database, was the Kurzweil Reading Machine. Its initial purpose wasn't scanning data from documents into databases, but helping the blind read, though it could do the former too. The first prototype was built in 1975, and the first public demonstration of the machine was 1976. As of 1977, no government agency was using it only any large scale. Some government agencies were testing it, but to help the blind read, not process paperwork. You can read more about it here:
http://www.rehab.research.va.gov/jour/77/14/1/kleiner.pdf
The machine wasn't available commercially until 1978.
So it's pretty certain that in 1977, a clerk at the SSA had to type in application data by hand.
3. I'm trying to imagine the processing steps of a Social Security application sent from Hawaii back in 1977 after it entered the Baltimore office.
Your image is probably acurate. The application comes into the Baltimore office mail room. Most likely the mailroom clerk opens the applications and puts them on a pile for processing. Another clerk distributes them to the data entry clerks. The data entry clerks, likely sitting in front of a primitive computer screen, type the data into the a computer database. Once the data are entered, another clerk probably files them away for a time somwhere, and they are eventually shredded.
Why are you so intersted in all these details about clerical work at the SSA?
Well, Dear, seems you just want to open a can of worms with that???
And equally well, Dear,... seems you still looking with "one" eye and toooooo narrow minded to realize that WND's Jerry Corsi had a huge hand in preventing your pal john Skerry from occupying the Whit-Hut, likewise you helped out with the present "occupier", hmmm!!!
Me: Bugs ate his school records in Indonesia and somehow the kindergarten he attended in Hawaii “lost” his records.
Incurious: Kindergarten? Are you serious? That was 45 years ago! Can you name a single kindergarten that keeps records that long?
Me: Yeah, every Catholic kindergarten in the country. My kindergarten. The public schools in the city where I live—ARCHIVES. I know my kindergarten has the records because I got my records from kindergarten through high school when I was in my late 30s. My guess is it’s far more common for the records to exist than to be mysteriously missing for one child. Or eaten by bugs.
******
Incurious: Does George W. Bush’s Kindergarten still have his student records? Does Clinton’s? I seriously doubt it.
Me: It would be surprising if they do NOT have the records. Somebody could check their presidential libraries. If anybody had asked, Bush and Clinton, too, probably would have said show them.
******
Me: For example, the numerous NEWS articles that state that he was born at Queen’s until he suddenly was born at Kapiolani.
Incurious: Nope. There was exacly one such news article, a UPI article. The reporter got his facts wrong because he was too lazy to do any research beyond reading Wikipedia. Wikipedia got the hospital wrong because the high school kid who created the entry for Obama guessed the hopstial and got it wrong.
Once the error was pointed out to UPI, the reporter corrected it.
Me: Nope, you’re wrong again. Numerous news articles, Snopes itself (until it scrubbed), Wikipedia, a student newspaper written by a person who interviewed his sister (a student who, btw, has never “corrected” his “mistake”), African news stories, genealogists, and even one of his own campaign websites. http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=103306 First it was Queen’s until it wasn’t.
********
Me: The numerous news articles that gave his mother’s name as Shirley until she suddenly became. . . Ta Da! Stanley.
Incurious: Okay, so a reporter got his mother’s first name wrong. Why is that important? And what does it have to do with missing records?
Me: A reporter? ONE? Did you see that word I used? NUMEROUS. See this link for a comprehensive review of numerous “reporters” who “got his mother’s first name wrong”: http://wtpotus.wordpress.com/2011/02/01/shirley-we-hardly-knew-ye-open-thread/
Why is it important? Why is it NOT important? Are we limited to ONLY talking about missing records? How about changed and scrubbed records? How about changed and scrubbed history? Have you read 1984?
Well, Dear, seems you missed that Donald Trump washed the floor with the Washing-Women at VIEW yesterday, showing real cojones and freaked out racist Wooppii!!!
Now, Dear one, who in YOUR eyes have more credibility on the eligible issue, huh???
Well, Dear, seems you missed that Donald Trump washed the floor with the Washing-Women at VIEW yesterday, showing real cojones and freaked out racist Wooppii!!!
Now, Dear one, who in YOUR eyes have more credibility on the eligible issue, huh???
Vermont Lt said: I think the 999 codes are what are used for foreign students. We used to have to enter “something” into the bank’s database when opening a checking account for people. When the person was a alien student on a visa, we had to enter the 999’s and there was another form we took note of. Its a little cloudy, but for that name it would make sense. Again, not proof, just experience.
I respond: You are correct! It was a common thing, especially back in the early days of data entry, that some data fields were coded numeric, especially when the field NEVER should contain alphabetic characters. In most cases, a person had a number, so to ensure accuracy and completeness of data entry, fields were often also coded as mandatory entry. In the rare instance when a number did not apply (no matter what the number was—account number, SS#, medical record#, limitless examples)—it was common practice to knowingly fill the field with 9s. This allowed exception reports to be printed so auditors could verify that each was a deliberate exclusion (allowed) and not an error.
All 9’s was the common filler when a particular field, for a particular person, needed to be left “blank” but couldn’t be left blank because it was coded numeric, mandatory entry, but there was no valid number to enter. Forcing the data entry operator to fill with 9’s assured that the operator consciously recognized that this person’s data was exceptional. If skipped but not consciously filled with 9s, the field would have filled with zeroes.
In 1977, and especially since we’re talking about the federal government, it’s more likely that they used keypunch machines and punched cards. That is, if they had to enter the data in the first place. It seems more likely to me that it was a manual process. Somebody looked at the mailing address, got out a chart, and assigned the number based upon what the person SAW on the mailing address.
It is curious indeed, but I doubt Trump can get any more access to Obama’s long-form BC than Gov Abercrombie did. He’s a shrewd man. He realizes that Obama’s refusal to produce the long-form BC and his repeated snide comments in answer to reporters’ questions about it indicate that Obama is either hiding something or playing games with conservatives.Trump is calling Obama’s bluff. There are two possibilities in my mind.
1) If Trump thinks the eligbility issue could be used to damage conservative presidential candidates, he may want to squelch the issue. What’s the best way to do that? Make Obama produce the long-form BC or explain precisely why he can’t.
2) If Trump believes Obama has something to hide, he may want to damage Obama very early before the Obama campaign train leaves the station. What’s the best way to do that? Make Obama own up to and explain his lies.
Last night both Hannity and Greta likewise got a "free pass" to cover the VIEW event, while BOR of course was AWOL, otherwise he would have to eat some very stinking and bad tasting crow by his own doing???
Unlike the other three you mentioned, Rush doesn’t need permission and wouldn’t ask for it anyway. He does what he wants ... and we like it that way, don’t we?
“Unlike the other three you mentioned, Rush doesn’t need permission and wouldn’t ask for it anyway. He does what he wants ... and we like it that way, don’t we?”
Really, NO we don’t, including Donald Trump who is kind of opening a can of worms for the Dung Head Media to look at and smell!
I have to disappoint your and other FINO’s wishes. IT’S NOT GOING AWAY, just remember your friend Abercommie plus Tim Adams, Lucas Smith, etc.!!
It’s just in the brewing stage!!!
Maybee you need to wake up and read this???
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/13373
We don’t want Rush to do what he wants when he wants? Explain that one to me, precious, because I don’t understand.
Rush Limbaugh has been a powerful voice for conservatives in part because he isn’t afraid of consequences. He makes his own rules. (So does Trump. Albeit for very different reasons.) In fact, I’d say that Rush makes the liberals play by his rules.
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.