Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Springs man's claim to have Obama records starts buzz

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 10:27 AM
Original message
Springs man's claim to have Obama records starts buzz

http://www.gazette.com/articles/springs-115381-colorado-obama.html

<snip>
A Colorado Springs “birther,” retired Air Force Col. Gregory Hollister, has Internet blogs abuzz with what may be an illegal foray into an online Social Security data base and how he obtained a copy of President Barack Obama’s draft registration from 1980.

“Col. Greg Hollister, USAF (Ret.) contacted the Selective Service, falsely impersonated President Obama, improperly registered his own address as President Obama’s address, and by this false impersonation and identity theft he managed to obtain a duplicate registration acknowledgement card with President Obama’s Selective Service information on it,” a blogger posted on gratewire.com last week. “This may violate several federal criminal statutes, and apparently caused the federal record of President Obama’s address with the Selective Service to be altered to show that he lives in Colorado Springs, CO.”

<snip>
Hollister said the Social Security number on what he says is Obama’s draft registration begins with the numbers 042, which would be issued to someone born in Connecticut, not Hawaii.

Last week, California attorney Orly Taitz, who has led the legal challenges to Obama’s citizenship, filed an amended complaint in her latest lawsuit demanding Obama’s Social Security records, attaching as an exhibit the draft registration mailed to an address in Colorado Springs, according to the Reality Check Radio Blog.

...more




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
1. Bilious Birfer Baloney (R)
Edited on Wed Mar-30-11 10:35 AM by SpiralHawk
The RepubliBirfers violate laws and ethics up the wazoo, and produce a total ZERO of evidence, proving abolsutely nothing. Then they get their Republicon Diapers stankily soiled in a Major Twist of Excitement about the Vapid Crap they are smearing all over their, um, brains, or what have you.

Bwaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha. Too funny. What total assinine Suckers (R) they are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfranklin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 10:34 AM
Response to Original message
2. Connecticut? I think he actually accessed Bush's records...
which would be amazing since they were scrubbed from the system by Alberto Gonzalez and Karl Rove.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Webster Green Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Kenyaticut?
Uh Oh!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. A Meme is born ! +1,000
Edited on Wed Mar-30-11 10:42 AM by SpiralHawk
Kenyaticut !!!

Actually, the Algonquin relatives of yesteryear called it 'Quinnehtukqut' but the imperialist invaders from Europe were too dumb and arrogant to handle the truth -- a lot like the Latter Day RepubliBirfers who are disgracing the one time at least marginally honorable Republicon partee...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
global1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #2
18. Tell Me More About The Scrubbing Of Bush's Records By Gonzalez & Rove......
are you talking his military records or something else? Now you've peaked my curiosity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfranklin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. there were many stories about this during the Bush occupation of the White House
As the presidential campaign planning began in Texas, Lieutenant Colonel Bill Burkett of the Texas Guard said he overheard orders from the Governor's office to "scrub" Mr. Bush's records. Burkett said he listened as Joe Allbaugh and Dan Bartlett, both of whom went to Washington with the president, told Major General Daniel James, commander of the Texas Guard, to "make sure there is nothing embarrassing in the governor's file." Burkett, who was chief advisor to General James, also said he was present when the records were surrendered for scrubbing.

After he took office, Commander in Chief George W. Bush promoted Daniel James to CO of the U.S. National Guard in Washington.

http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/03/06/05_moore.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
global1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. I've Read This Account Of The Scrubbing On The Link You Provided Before.....
I was reacting to you comment about Gonzales and Rove. Did they have any part in this or any other scrubbing of Bush's records?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfranklin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. At some point Gonzales went through the Texas records...
September 1996: Bush called to jury duty, and accepts, saying it is a "feeble excuse" to say he's too busy or important. But he is then assigned to a DUI case, and might be asked under oath if he had ever been arrested for drunk driving. Bush asks to be dismissed from jury the night before the trial, and is helped by Alberto R. Gonzales, Bush's legal counsel. Bush later appoints Gonzales to the Texas Supreme Court, and later still to White House counsel. Gonzales is a candidate for a Supreme Court seat if a vacancy arises.

http://www.blogd.com/bushrecord.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sinkingfeeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 10:35 AM
Response to Original message
3. Apparently these nuts cannot read or refuse to believe what the SSA says about those numbers.
Edited on Wed Mar-30-11 10:38 AM by sinkingfeeling
http://www.ssa.gov/history/ssn/geocard.html


Number Has Three Parts

The nine-digit SSN is composed of three parts:

•The first set of three digits is called the Area Number
•The second set of two digits is called the Group Number
•The final set of four digits is the Serial Number
Area Number

The Area Number is assigned by the geographical region. Prior to 1972, cards were issued in local Social Security offices around the country and the Area Number represented the State in which the card was issued. This did not necessarily have to be the State where the applicant lived, since a person could apply for their card in any Social Security office. Since 1972, when SSA began assigning SSNs and issuing cards centrally from Baltimore, the area number assigned has been based on the ZIP code in the mailing address provided on the application for the original Social Security card. The applicant's mailing address does not have to be the same as their place of residence. Thus, the Area Number does not necessarily represent the State of residence of the applicant, either prior to 1972 or since.

Generally, numbers were assigned beginning in the northeast and moving westward. So people on the east coast have the lowest numbers and those on the west coast have the highest numbers.


Edited because I can't subtract.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kip Humphrey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #3
13. Also, for the younger folks,
Back then, SSNs were not required to be issued upon birth, as they are today, but were only issued when you applied. Back then, SSNs were generally required to apply for an individual passport (was not required for children on their parent's passport), to apply for a job, or to apply for a bank loan. I didn't get a SSN until I was 15.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mariana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #13
26. They're still not required to be issued at birth.
The parents get an application form when the child is born, but they can toss the form in the trash if they want to. Most fill it out, of course. It's handy to have a SS# when you're claiming the kid as a dependent on your income tax return.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #13
28. I got mine to attend college.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #3
19. Absolutely. I do some genealogy and this is often the case. People
I KNOW who were born in one state have ss numbers issued in other states. Just another idiot thinking he knows what is what.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fried eggs Donating Member (178 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #3
25. I didn't get a social security number
until I was 9 years old, and when my mom did apply for my number it was in a different state than the one I was born.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxsolomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 10:35 AM
Response to Original message
5. Connecticut's in the US of Goddamn A, too
Last time I checked, which was 5th grade.

Do these folks have jobs?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeybee12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 10:35 AM
Response to Original message
6. This guy needs to be locked up...nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DCKit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. For sure, when all his documents are revealed as forgeries.
As much as this birther might want to believe this is a political statement, forgery is a federal offense.

The Secret Service should have some fun with this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mz Pip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 10:37 AM
Response to Original message
7. I hope this guy
does some serious jail time. that guy who hacked into Palin's emails was convicted. What Hollister did is far worse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sheepshank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
9. ahhh the Connecticut thang
has been know for quite some time.

Back in the day, people did NOT file for a newborn's ss# immediately upon the birth of the child. Often not for several years. The ss# reflects the resident state at the time of application not the state of birth....dicks. I'd remember reading here that there was verification of a Conn residency for Obama mothers. Col. dickwad deserves to be thrown in prison for being a fool...hopefully it will stop him from breeding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DCKit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. My dad didn't file until I was eight. All five of us have sequential SS numbers.
In short, you are correct.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #11
16. Same here - my mom got mine when she opened a little savings acct
Edited on Wed Mar-30-11 11:09 AM by RamboLiberal
for me at a bank and it was required. Probably when I was past 6-7.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Historic NY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #9
17. I filed for one when I was 15 also...turn out my parents deceased..
Edited on Wed Mar-30-11 11:22 AM by Historic NY
did when I was born. They gave me and my twin brother new copies of our originals. Years later I discovered one of those metal stamped card amongst family items.

Now if I can only find my hospital footprint cards I can be a completely certified citizen :think::crazy::rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demonaut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
12. delete
Edited on Wed Mar-30-11 10:54 AM by Demonaut
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sinkingfeeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. You must have been born between March 29, 1957 and Dec. 31, 1959.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_Service_System

On July 2, 1980, however, President Carter signed Proclamation 4771, Registration Under the Military Selective Service Act, retroactively re-establishing the Selective Service registration requirement for all 18–26 year old male citizens born on or after January 1, 1960.<10> Only men born between March 29, 1957, and December 31, 1959, were completely exempt from Selective Service registration.<11> The first registrations after Proclamation 4771 took place on Monday, July 21, 1980, for those men born in January, February and March 1960 at U.S. Post Offices. Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays were reserved for men born in the later quarters of the year, and registration for men born in 1961 began the following week.<12>

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibertyLover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. Actually, you still have to register with Selective Service if you
are male and have turned 18. You have 30 days from the date of your 18th birthday to do so. From Wikipedia:

On March 29, 1975, President Ford signed Proclamation 4360, Terminating Registration Procedures Under Military Selective Service Act, eliminating the registration requirement for all 18–25 year old male citizens.<9>

On July 2, 1980, however, President Carter signed Proclamation 4771, Registration Under the Military Selective Service Act, retroactively re-establishing the Selective Service registration requirement for all 18–26 year old male citizens born on or after January 1, 1960.<10> Only men born between March 29, 1957, and December 31, 1959, were completely exempt from Selective Service registration.<11> The first registrations after Proclamation 4771 took place on Monday, July 21, 1980, for those men born in January, February and March 1960 at U.S. Post Offices. Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays were reserved for men born in the later quarters of the year, and registration for men born in 1961 began the following week.<12>

So it looks like President Obama was following the law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kingofalldems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 01:33 PM
Response to Original message
22. Col. Queeg
Ah, the strawberries, that's where I had them.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mohinoaklawnillinois Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. Good one, Why is it that it seems all the whackjobs in the
US military seem to be almost universally US Air Force. Is there something in the water in Colorado Springs or what? :evilgrin:

Or is it that Curtis LeMay mindset is still instilled in them..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TroglodyteScholar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. The USAF is, for the most part, a hypercapitalist, fundamentalist evangelical death cult.
It's very in-your-face if you've experienced it first-hand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 06:55 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC