| Visitors Now: | |
| Total Visits: | |
| Total Stories: |
| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
A Possible Explanation For Obama’s Connecticut Social Security Number
By Jack Cashill
As I reported on Tuesday, Barack Obama has yet to provide an explanation for how he came to have a Social Security number that begins with the Connecticut prefix “042.”
Filmmaker Joel Gilbert read the piece. He has been in Hawaii doing follow-up research on his insightful new documentary, Dreams from My Real Father, and he sent me the single best explanation I have yet to see.
What intrigued me about this story from the moment Ohio private investigator Susan Daniels first came across Obama’s Connecticut SSN was the ineptness of the left-wing explanations.
“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, too.
For the second, Linkins cited the argument of Carole Gilbert (no relation to Joel Gilbert) in the Yahoo-related “Associated Content.” Said Carole 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 at all 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.
On the respectable right, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly finessed this claim. “[Obama's] father lived in Connecticut for several years,” O’Reilly said inaccurately on air last April. He added that “babies sometimes get numbers based on addresses provided by their parents.” Wrong again.
