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
You said, “And you know for a fact that Hawaii’s public schools keep their records for over 40 years? How?”
We can infer from their claim of having “lost” Obama’s records that they would ordinarily have such records. They didn’t say, “We don’t keep kindergarten records for 40 years.” They said they lost his records.
john mirse, I don’t have any personal knowledge of the SS# office. I’m going from memory of how things used to work in government clerical offices way back when, in the 1970s.
My guess is that it first involved a manual process. It may not have involved manually assigning the SS#, but I am reasonably sure that it would NOT have involved TYPING the application on a typewriter—transcribing from the written application received.
My guess is that they would manually CODE the application for data entry. Somebody opened the mail, wrote standardized codes onto the various data fields on the application, and then sent the coded sheets to the keypunch department, where it was keypunched onto a card or key-entered onto a floppy disk. The clerks would not have a keypunch machine on their desks.
These would be in another department, dedicated to key entering all sorts of data from all sorts of departments. For example, in a business setting, the keypunch department would receive and key enter data for payroll, inventory, accounts receivable, accounts payable, etc. Then the same department would process the data through the mainframe computer and print out inventory reports, paychecks, etc.
A key point (pun intended) is that the keyboard on a keypunch or key-to-disk machine was not like a typewriter keyboard. Because of the sheer volume of numeric data entered, and in order to ensure SPEED in data entry, a numeric keypad was used. It looked similar to the keypad on a calculator. When entering numeric data, it was much faster to enter if via a specialized numeric keyboard, than via the type of layout that’s on a typewriter. Whereas someone might type at 40 words per minute, a good keypuncher could enter numeric data at speeds more like 100 words per minute (with a “word” being 5 numeric digits). So the incurious one’s theory that since the 9 is next to the 0 on a typewriter, that means somebody made a typo that resulted in Obama’s CT SS# doesn’t hold water. The 0 is not next to the 9 on the numeric keypad of a keypunch machine.
On a SS application, a code would be, for example, the standardized abbreviation for the state in the mailing address. If there was no zip code on the mailing address, then clerk would look it up and write it on the application. The address would be standardized. Maybe Avenue reduced to AV. (Space was a consideration back then. Punch cards and floppy disks were limited in length.) This would have to be done in order to maintain a record of the information for every SS card holder—whether in a drawer of punched cards or in a file on the computer, after the floppy disks were processed.
However, even after the data was run through the computer, exception reports were typically run to identify errors in the data that was entered. Keep in mind that first ALL punched cards and floppy disks would have already been double checked—first entered by the original keypuncher and then “verified” by another person—the verifier. A keypunch machine that verified did not punch the card but verified that the card was correctly punched by the original keypuncher. In other words, it read the holes as the person reentered the coded data. If what the verifier entered did not match the punched card, the card was rejected and the verifier looked to see why and then corrected the data to ensure that it recorded exactly what the application said. (If it was a floppy disk, then the verifying machine simply read the magnetized data as the verifier rekeyed the information.) I’m not saying this well, but the important point is that there were MULTIPLE steps to ENSURE that data was put in the computer and into the files CORRECTLY.
Only after the exception reports were examined to ensure that there were still no errors that slipped by would the data finally be accepted for whatever constituted the database—whether a computer file or a drawer of punched cards.
As an example, a computer program could cross reference state codes with zip codes and kick out an error flag if somebody’s zip code didn’t match the state in the mailing address. This is something that could be quickly and easily done by the computer but time consuming for a clerk and not an error easily seen by looking at the application data.
My point is that it’s highly unlikely, after all these steps, that a mailing address of Hawaii would result in a SS# from Connecticut.
It’s possible that after the data set of applications was cleared (meaning no input errors) at that point a computer program assigned the appropriate SS# and perhaps even printed the SS Cards.
It’s also possible, however, that the original clerk, who manually coded the application for data entry, assigned the number at that point and wrote it on the application.
But if so, then the computer exception report probably would flag as an error a SS# from a state that didn’t match the application’s mailing address. It’s possible that the program would even print the envelopes for mailing the card to the applicant.
This is all speculation but it’s based upon experience with these types of processes, back in the 1970s. I hope it helps you to visualize. Short of finding someone who actually worked in that office in Baltimore in the ‘70s, this is the best I can do to explain what the process probably was.
I've seen lots of birther blogs make this claim, but I have yet to see it substantiated. I therefore suspect it's another birther myth, like the Pakistan travel ban. Do you have a source, other than a birther blog or WorldNutDaily, that can substantiate this claim?
Okay, I'll take your word for it on these technical details. That still doesn't change the fact that someone had to punch in the zip code by hand by a clerk. Since clerks and the people checking them are subject to human error, it is virtually certain that they occaisionally mistyped a digit or two.
rolling_stone: You rock!
What I said. My job is not to do your research for you. Can you prove they did NOT say this? Even when links are provided, you ignore, lie or rationalize, so why bother? You are a true believer or else you’re paid to be.
Yes, that was the only NEWS article I found in your link. The rest were op-eds, book reviews, blogs and websites. Those don't count as news articles in my book. If you want to call those news articles, fine. I really don't see the point of arguing what is or is not a news article.
So suppose your claim were right, and numerous news articles got her first name wrong. So what? Why do you think this is so important and so damning?
LOL. The burden of proof is on the one who makes a positive claim, not on the one who would deny it.
The only actual news article you provided to me making the rror on Queens Medical was the UPI. I have yet to see any evidence of any African newspapers making the same error, and you have not provided any proof they have. Yet again, like a typical birther, you are nit-picking on technical details to hide the fact that in the grand scheme of things, you have nothing.
So let's stipulate you are right. Suppose that in addition to UPI, a handful of African papers also committed the error that Obama was born at Queens Hospital. What would that prove, and why do you find it so damning?
Again, lying and misleading. The article clearly denotes in each paragraph that contains a link whether the link is to a NEWS STORY, a blog, a book review, an encyclopedia, an AOL story, a book, a genealogical article, etc. There are NUMEROUS NEWS STORIES linked. You simply do not want people to see and realize the truth.
Do you all notice how incurious moves the goal post? First denigrate all the links as blogs. Then, when proven wrong, redefine what a news article is. It all depends upon what the definition of is, is. You see? It’s impossible to debate HONESTLY with people like this, who won’t even agree upon what WORDS mean. If we have no common language, then it’s useless to continue to speak.
“Suppose” my claim is right?!! After being presented with NUMEROUS examples that PROVE my “claim” IS RIGHT, you still persist in calling it a “claim” and just “supposing” it’s right. IT IS RIGHT AND YOU CAN’T EVEN BRING YOURSELF TO ADMIT IT.
What is it so important that her name was first Shirley and then suddenly became Stanley? Why is it important that he first was born in Queen’s Medical and then in Kapiolani? Why is it so important that first Dr. West delivered him but then he didn’t? Why is it so important that he ADMITS THAT HIS LIFE STORY IS A LIE? He does, you know.
It’s important because there is plenty of evidence that indicates he is NOT who and what he claims that he is and NO EVIDENCE to support that he is who and what he claims that he is. That’s why.
All you have evidence for is that at some point, a handful of reporters got his mom's first name wrong and his birth hospital wrong. You don't have any evidence of Obama or any member of his family changing the story.
Why is it so important that first Dr. West delivered him but then he didn’t?
I'm not sure what you mean by this. Please elaborate.
Why is it so important that he ADMITS THAT HIS LIFE STORY IS A LIE? He does, you know.
Really? Where does he admit that?
It’s important because there is plenty of evidence that indicates he is NOT who and what he claims that he is and NO EVIDENCE to support that he is who and what he claims that he is.
A handful of reporters getting facts wrong 50 years after they happend is not evidnece of anything. Reporters are human, after all, and they make mistakes.
As to your claim that there is "no evidence to to support that he is who and what he claims that he is," that is simply false.
There is evidence that he attended Kindergarten where he says he did:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/03/remembering-barack-obama/
People who knew his parents affirm that he was their child. Several teachers have stated they new him at his elemenatry school and high school. There are photos of him attending school in Indonesia, and a student registration document from an Indonesian private school is in the public domain. Classmates who knew him both at Occidental and Columbia have come forward. His name is on the graduation program at Columbia. Both Occidental and Columbia have publicly affirmed that he was a student there. One could go on and on.
Tell me, what aspect of his life do you think is missing evidence?
Again with the insults. It seems to me that you are the nit-picky one. It seems to me that I didn’t even provide you with the Queen’s Medical example on UPI, but whatever.
If, as you say, nobody takes “birthers” seriously, then why do you? Why do you spend so much time trying to make us look crazy and wrong? If it’s self-evident, then it is and any logical person would come to the same conclusion that you do. So why do you so quickly jump upon anything written here in response to your ridiculous comments? Why do you devote so much time to refuting every nit-picky “technical” detail, if it’s self-evident to everybody that “birthers” are nuts? Hmmm?
However, in the GRAND SCHEME of things, we have PLENTY of evidence, and the bottom line is that you have NONE.
You assume that Obama’s truthful about his history, even though he admits that his history is not true.
You assume that when he says he was born in Hawaii, he was, and to the individuals he claims as his parents, yet there’s no evidence that it’s true.
If there is, then all he has to do, as Donald Trump says, is to show it. If there is, why would he send a man to prison instead of simply revealing the truth? That’s illogical at best and I don’t even want to say what it is at worst. Horrid. Certainly. This is the person you defend.
The African news articles are interesting because they were written before he ran for president and while he was visiting Africa. The writers interviewed him. They got their information from somewhere. African reporters wouldn’t likely know the names of hospitals in Hawaii. So where did they get the name?
Not from that student, because his story post-dates the African news articles. And again, I’m not looking them up for you. Look for your own information, if you CARE to know the truth, which is doubtful.
This is another obot tactic: Ask for links. That was exposed long ago. It’s on your list of orders. Isn’t it?
He admits that his life story is a lie in the very autobiography in which he tells his fictional life story. Haven’t you read it? Really, you should.
....Is there a point in that jumbled, impossible to follow mess you posted?.....
Yes there is a point, you are full of it, you are arrogant, and you don’t research anything but instead follow the rest of the mindless obots around the yard like a bunch of chickens who just had their heads cut off. Evidence points to logical conlusion that Obama is a liar and something is seriously wrong with his supposed “background”. You won’t reply because you can’t come up with a logical reasonable counter point. You have gone off the cliff in your zest to try and prove something that is wrong. You have an “excuse” for everything, but you ignore reality. You think you are smarter than others and arrogantly deride and belittle them when in fact you are the one lacking the ability to face reality and instead you rationalize your position/agenda. Then again you might not even believe your own crap, but be like Jamese777 just a plain liar?
////////////////////////
It started out innocently enough. I began to think at parties now and
then - just to loosen up and be a part of the crowd.
Inevitably, though, one thought led to another and soon I was more than
just a social thinker.
I began to think alone — “to relax,” I told myself — but I knew it wasn’t
true. Thinking became more and more important to me, and finally I was
thinking all the time.
That was when things began to sour at home. One evening I turned off the TV
and asked my wife about the meaning of life. She spent that night at her mother’s.
I began to think on the job. I knew that thinking and employment don’t mix, but I couldn’t help myself.
I began to avoid friends at lunchtime so I could read Thoreau, Muir,
Confucius, Camus and Kafka. I would return to the office dizzied and
confused, asking, “What is it exactly that we are doing here?”
One day the boss called me in. He said, “Listen, I like you, and it hurts me
to say this, but your thinking has become a real problem. If you don’t
stop thinking on the job, you’ll have to find another job.”
This gave me a lot to think about. I came home early after my conversation
with the boss. “Honey,” I confessed, “I’ve been thinking...”
“I know you’ve been thinking,” she said, “and I want a divorce!” “But Honey,
surely it’s not that serious.” “It is serious,” she said, her lower lip aquiver.
“You think as much as college professors and college professors don’t make
any money, so if you keep on thinking, we won’t have any money!”
“That’s a fallacious syllogism,” I said impatiently.
She exploded in tears of rage and frustration, but I was in no mood to
deal with the emotional drama.
“I’m going to the library,” I snarled as I stomped out the door.
I headed for the library, in the mood for some John Locke. I roared into
the parking lot with NPR on the radio and ran up to the big glass doors.
They didn’t open. The library was closed.
To this day, I believe that a Higher Power was looking out for me that night.
Leaning on the unfeeling glass and whimpering for Emerson, a poster caught
my eye, “Friend, is heavy thinking ruining your life?” it asked.
You probably recognize that line. It comes from the standard Thinkers
Anonymous poster.
This is why I am what I am today: a recovering thinker.
I never miss a TA meeting. At each meeting we watch a non-educational video;
last week it was “Porky’s.” Then we share experiences about how we avoided
thinking since the last meeting.
I still have my job, and things are a lot better at home. Life just seemed
easier, somehow, as soon as I stopped thinking. I think the road to
recovery is nearly complete for me.
Today I took the final step... I joined the Democratic Party.
Really? So in his autobiography, he says the book is really fiction? In which book and on what page?
You “know” so much so tell us: Where was he during that year between when he left Occidental in June, 1981 and showed up at Columbia over a year later, in Sept. 1982?
Look it up. It’s on Google books, where you can read it! The whole thing. It’s called “Dreams From My Father” and DREAMS the entire thing is.
I don't.
Why do you spend so much time trying to make us look crazy and wrong?
Because it's fun.
If it’s self-evident, then it is and any logical person would come to the same conclusion that you do.
Logical people invariably do. I have yet to encounter a birther who has even the most elementary grasp of logic.
However, in the GRAND SCHEME of things, we have PLENTY of evidence,
No you do not.
and the bottom line is that you have NONE.
Actually, I have plenty. I listed a bunch in my last post.
You assume that Obama’s truthful about his history,
No. There is plenty of evidence to corroborate his history.
even though he admits that his history is not true.
Where? I have yet to see you substantiate this claim.
You assume that when he says he was born in Hawaii, he was,
The state of Hawaii verifies the claim. Piece of evidence one.
and to the individuals he claims as his parents, yet there’s no evidence that it’s true.
Sure there is. First there's the COLB he posted which lists its parents. That's evidence, even if you want to dismiss it. Then there are birth announcements in the papers, which list his parents names. Then there are several people who knew his parents around the time of his birth confirming that they had a newborn baby at home whose name was Barack Obama. Piece of evidence number 3. That's more than enough to establish beyond reasonable doubt the identify of his parents.
If there is, then all he has to do, as Donald Trump says, is to show it.
He has.
If there is, why would he send a man to prison instead of simply revealing the truth?
The man went to prison for disobeying a lawful order, and that would have happened regarless of what Obama did or did not do.
The African news articles are interesting because they were written before he ran for president and while he was visiting Africa.
So?
The writers interviewed him.
I have yet to see any of these supposed African news stories. Got a link?
They got their information from somewhere. African reporters wouldn’t likely know the names of hospitals in Hawaii. So where did they get the name?
If these supposed articles exist, then the reporters most likely got their info on from the UPI article or Wikipedia, which was the original source of this piece of misinformation.
Not from that student, because his story post-dates the African news articles. And again, I’m not looking them up for you. Look for your own information, if you CARE to know the truth, which is doubtful.
I've looked for them. I have not found them. Hence until you provide them to me, I must assume they do not exist.
This is another obot tactic: Ask for links.
LOL. I see, so asking birthers to substantiate their claims with evidence is somehow a dishonest "tactic." ROFLOL. That explains a lot.
When you want to cite a book as evidence for a claim, it is standard practice to cite the page number(s) that contains the evidence.
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.