A question about a question

http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/obamas-social-security-number-challenged/

Obama’s Social Security number begins with 042 which is only used for Connecticut residents. Obama never lived in Connecticut.

1) Why?
2) How is it that the previous question has never been asked of him?

Question 2 is, to my mind, FAR more disturbing than question 1. I can think of more or less innocent explanations for question 1, but none for question 2.

My current theory is that Obama avoided getting a social security number and avoided registering for the draft, by representing himself as an Indonesian national at the time he was applying to college, in order to obtain various advantages, and later, when he wanted a political career, had to manufacture a more conventional past for himself.

But I’m open to other explanations.

Advertisements

About Polymath

Discoverable with effort
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to A question about a question

  1. Wait wait wait, so now it’s that Obama actually IS an American citizen but he pretended not to be because of the massive benefits that gave him?

    OK.

    I think the reason no one would ask such a ridiculous question is obvious: it’s a ridiculous question. Why would someone know the reason the Social Security Administration issued them the number they did? Is it your serious contention that the President of the United States of America got a fake social security number in 1977, 35 years ago, at age 16 — two years after Gerald Ford signed legislation ending the requirement 18-year-olds register with Selective Service and three years before Jimmy Carter signed legislation re-instituting the requirement, making your supposition that it’s draft-related seem kind of unlikely — and has somehow managed to successfully use it all this time, without being detected, through getting licensed to drive, getting a US Passport, and so on?

    Really?

    Here’s another explanation: someone at the Social security Administration screwed up, and the 9 at the beginning of his Hawaii zip code was read or entered as a 0, which would have shown him as a Connecticut resident as far as the system was concerned.

    I know, it’s much more entertaining to believe teenage Barack Obama was in on this amazing conspiracy his handlers established 16 years earlier, when they placed that fake birth announcement in the Hawaii papers to pave the way for his presidency 47 years later than to believe a typewritten “9” was mistaken for a typewritten “0” by some government worker in 1977, right?

    Come on.

  2. Polymath says:

    Did you READ THE LINK?

    Obviously you are ignorant of how social security fraud works

    The way it works is a number is found which belongs to a dead person, and it is reused

    This is a number which was ORIGINALLY ISSUED in 1977 to a person BORN IN 1890 (probably an old immigrant)

    The contention is NOT that a teenage Obama was involved in a scam involving a brand new CT ss#

    It’s that LATER, when he needed a number he got a fake one from someone who specializes in getting people fake ones

    Such people have been known to exist

  3. Polymath says:

    RR, you may not have noticed, but I said that I found question 2 more worrisome than question 1. There are lots of possible explanations for Obama’s having a Connecticut SS #, but it’s rather creepy they haven’t been asked. It’s exactly the kind of odd and suspicious detail that ought to be followed up–like most leads a reporter follows, it may not lead anywhere, but somehow Obama emits a curiosity-suppressing radiation that affects reporters who pursue trivial details about Republicans relentlessly.

  4. I don’t click WMD links.

    The number was not originally issued to someone born in 1890, though:
    http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/ssn.asp

    Feel free to find a new conspiracy theory, though.

    Don’t worry, I’m sure Joe Arpaio will get to the bottom of all this any day now and the President will be hauled off in leg irons. I’m glad his next press conference is planned for before the DNC, though; it’ll be easy to swap in Hillary as the nominee.

  5. Polymath says:

    Why Barack Obama’s Social Security card application might have included a Connecticut mailing address is something of a curiosity, as he had no known connection to that state at the time, but by itself that quirk is no indicator of fraud. The most likely explanation for the discrepancy is a simple clerical or typographical error: the ZIP code in the area of Honolulu where Barack Obama lived is 96814, while the ZIP code for Danbury, Connecticut, is 06814. Since ‘0’ and ‘9’ are similarly shaped numbers and are adjacent on typewriter keyboards, it’s not uncommon for handwritten examples to be mistaken for each other, or for one to be mistyped as the other (thereby potentially resulting in a Hawaiian resident’s application mistakenly being routed as if it had originated from Connecticut).

    That’s the relevant paragraph from your Snopes link. But you make my point for me. Yes, that seems like a plausible explanation, but

    1) if Snopes thinks it is “something of a curiosity”, why aren’t reporters curious?
    2) this is easily verifiable because the original SS application is supposed to be in the government archives on microfilm, so why not verify it?
    3) Since social security fraud often takes exactly this form and is detected in this way (someone has a number belonging to a deceased person from a different state), and since lots of people get fake SS #s for one reason or another, why is this question so obviously unaskable?
    4) You seem to think it’s impossible that someone with a background in another country as well as the USA could ever possibly want to use his status in the other country instead of his US citizenship; but in addition to avoiding draft registration, an 18-year-old applying to college might have a better chance of getting in or qualifying for a particular scholarship if he were a foreign student. I am not claiming Obama renounced his citizenship or anything like that; just that he didn’t take the steps 18 year olds were supposed to take if they were American citizens in 1979. That’s when I got my draft registration done and when I would have had to get a SS# if I hadnt gotten one a few years earlier for a summer job (I was born the same year as Obama; they didn’t start giving SS #s to babies until later.)

  6. 1) Because of the source. No serious reporter wants to ask a President anything that bubbles up from the fringe; it’s the exact same reason you don’t see Obama or any other President getting many questions on whether the gold is still at Fort Knox or what’s really happening at Area 51 or if those Dulce Base stories are real. In this case, it’s just seen as more birther nonsense, and most people don’t want to be standing anywhere near, let alone next to Orly Taitz, Donald Trump, and Joe Arpaio.

    2) See #1?

    3) Because we’re not talking about some random guy in a Home Depot parking lot looking to do some day labor, we’re talking about the President of the United States. How is it not offensive to suggest the President is using a fake social security number, and a fake birth certificate?

    4) Wait, so now you’re saying he didn’t register for the draft, either?

    I don’t know; I’m obviously on the other side, but it seems to me there are like 700 smarter ways to support the Romney campaign than trying to sell this junk.

  7. Polymath says:

    1) You are saying that it WOULD have been appropriate for ordinary reporters to ask this question in 2008, before fringe elements started asking it, and that the very fact that they failed to do so and left it to the fringe elements now implies that they should NOT ask it, despite it never having been answered. So kooks get to veto legitimate questions that non-kooks would also like to know the answer to. Congratulations, you just insulted the integrity of professional journalists more than I ever did.

    2) see (1). For crying out loud, do you really think that your explanation, which basically amounts to “kooks got cooties, run away!” excuses professional journalists from doing their jobs? Obviously that is an excellent explanation of their MOTIVATION for failing to do their jobs, but that’s not the point, I’m not expressing mystification at why they don’t WANT to do it, I’m expressing mystification at their inability to demonstrate professional integrity.

    3) you’re changing the subject again. Yes, it’s offensive to a person to suggest that THAT PERSON might have committed a crime, especially if they didn’t, and it might even be offensive to their friends, but it should not be offensive to a professional news reporter to suggest that a politician might have committed a crime! You are saying the media people should take offense on behalf of a politician, instead of investigating him. I wasn’t aware that their job description had changed like that.

    4) Again you show you have been closing your eyes and sticking your fingers in your ears. In the very same press conference where he criticized the birth certificate, Arpaio presented evidence that Obama’s draft registration was forged, and that evidence was actually much easier to understand than the evidence about the birth certificate. If you refuse to click on links from places that say things you disagree with, you will tend to suffer from something called “confirmation bias”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s