Customer Discussions > Barack Obama forum

SSN: # 042-68-4425


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 53 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Apr 17, 2012 3:41:19 AM PDT
G. Petersen says:
Subject: SSN# 042-68-4425

Just who does it belong to!!! Jean Paul Luwig or Barack Hussein Obama SSN#
042-68-4425

WOW, read this, it's short - very interesting.

An intensive investigation has revealed the identity of the man whose
Social Security Number (SSN) is being used by President Obama: Was Jean
Paul Ludwig , who was born in France in 1890, immigrated to the United
States in 1924, and was assigned SSN 042-68-4425 (Obama's current SSN) rec'd
on or about March 1977.

Mr. Ludwig lived most of his adult life in Connecticut . Because of that,
his SSN begins with the digits 042, which are among only a select few
reserved for Connecticut residents.

Barack H. Obama never lived or worked in that state! Therefore, there is no
reason on earth for his SSN to start with the digits 042. None whatsoever!

Now comes the best part!

J.P. Ludwig spent the final months of his life in Hawaii , where he died.
Conveniently, Obama's grandmother, Madelyn Payne Dunham, worked part-time in
the Probate Office in the Honolulu Hawaii Courthouse, and therefore had
access to the SSNs of deceased individuals.

The Social Security Administration was never informed of Ludwig's death, and
because he never received Social Security benefits there were no benefits to
stop and therefore, no questions were ever raised.

The suspicion, of course, is that Dunham, knowing her grandson was not a
U.S. Citizen, either because he was born in Kenya or became a citizen of
Indonesia upon his adoption by Lolo Soetoro, simply scoured the probate
records until she found someone who died who was not receiving Social
Security benefits, and selected Mr. Ludwigs Connecticut SSN for Obama.

Just wait until Trump gets past the birth certificate and onto the issue of
Barry O's use of a stolen SSN. You will see leftist heads exploding, because
they will have no way of defending Obama. Although many Americans do not
understand the meaning of the term "natural born" there are few who do not
understand that if you are using someone else's SSN it is a clear indication of fraud. he actually is using 33 SS#'s and getting lots of money without paying the high tax rate that most high earner's do. His mother had 2 SS#'s ....gratis of his maternal grandmother.

If the voters of this great nation can succeed in bringing this lying, deceitful cheating, corrupt, impostor to justice it will be the biggest and best news in decades for our country and the world.

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald
the end of the republic." Benjamin Franklin.

If you can just say "oh well; ho hum" after reading this you get what you
deserve.

Posted on Apr 17, 2012 1:23:57 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 18, 2012 7:56:56 AM PDT
Lientje says:
Well, ,thank you. I do think that I deserve Barack Obama. Why didn't he show up sooner.

And we can go on with this discussion, but first you might cite your information. And then show us a little something that would suggest that you have gotten a 2nd opinion or piece of proof to verify what is being said.

Let's say this though. While "many Americans do not understand the meaning of the term 'natural born' (that would include all of us because it has not been determined by the Supreme Court) there are few who do not understand that if you are using someone else's SSN, it is a clear indication of fraud." Yes. And Obama is not one of those who does not have a clear understanding of that. He also has a clear understanding that if he used it, while being such an obvious person of interest, with such a huge following of haters watching his every move, that he would get caught if in fact he is using a false SS.

The person who wrote that blog is the lying, deceitful, cheating, corrupt jerk who will say anything to get rid of Obama.

Prove otherwise, if you can. You haven't done so far - by a long shot.

Posted on Apr 17, 2012 1:35:24 PM PDT
Lientje says:
OK OK. Once again, I am doing your homework for you.

Social Security Death Index: Jean Paul Ludwig SSN - 045-26-8722. (not the same, is it). Last Residence: 96816 Honolulu, Hawaii.
Born 17 Feb 1890. Died Jun 1981. State & Year of SS - Connecticut, 1951.

In reply to an earlier post on May 4, 2012 9:36:07 AM PDT
C. Gonzales says:
He repeated this lie months ago and I caught him on it.

In reply to an earlier post on May 4, 2012 9:36:41 AM PDT
C. Gonzales says:
I caught you on this lie last year. Ludwig's social isn't the one listed above.

Posted on May 30, 2012 6:09:21 AM PDT
Anna Maria says:
I read that the deceased Ludwig fellow had two SSN's, and that the one supposedly used by Obama is one of them. If the allegations regarding Obama's SSN and place of birth and true citizenship are nothing more than laughable nonesense, why is the state of Georgia taking it so seriously that they are running it through their court system and considering not including him on their 2012 presidential ballot? AM

Posted on May 30, 2012 7:19:12 AM PDT
Esgaldil says:
Anna Maria - What case in Georgia are you referring to?

In reply to an earlier post on May 30, 2012 9:11:12 PM PDT
Lientje says:
Anna Maria: Where did you read this?

And while it is one thing to accuse Obama of having more than one SS #, it is something else to say that he used them. Just how much money or how many jobs did he have? Again, it is one thing to say that he gave it to someone else to use, but it is ridiculous to say he used it himself.

Posted on May 30, 2012 9:41:59 PM PDT
dont they reuse them after a person has been dead for n years ?
they dont have enough unless they add digits
and they dont have the cojones to make every program in the world be changed
that would cost more than the year 2000 fiasco

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2012 6:48:20 AM PDT
C. Gonzales says:
Oh yes when the theory about ludwig is proven to be horse dung then claim Ludwig had two socials. No proof of that claim and there's nothing tying Ludwig to Obama. The state of Georgia isn't taking this seriously they already put him on the ballot and the case was decided against the birthers already.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 15, 2012 1:40:03 AM PDT
G. Petersen says:
Great post Anna. Well said.
We will see more and more evidence of this,
it is and indication of good vs. evil and it is
manifesting itself in the political realm.

See this video of Reagan speaking:

Reagan Warned Us About Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3hY1eagq88&feature=related

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 16, 2012 9:44:41 AM PDT
Sc--w the supreme court ruling on "natural Born", it's in the Constitution lady.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 16, 2012 10:52:29 PM PDT
G. Petersen says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Jun 17, 2012 12:03:27 AM PDT
Esgaldil says:
The words are in the Constitution, but what do they mean? Are babies delivered by C-section excluded from the Presidency the same way they are exempt from Macbeth's protection against men of woman born?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 17, 2012 8:22:11 AM PDT
Read the words, they're not open to interpretation. I can't believe how often people who know nothing of what they are talking about will use semantics to cover the fact! Words mean what they convey in plain language, there are no hidden meanings.

Posted on Jun 17, 2012 12:39:21 PM PDT
Esgaldil says:
Every time I've heard "natural born" in plain language, it has meant "innately talented" or "genetically predisposed" - Natural Born Killers, a natural born liar, et cetera. I think we can dispense with that reading of the words.

Two questions then remain - What did the Founders mean when they wrote those words into the Constitution? What is the legal meaining of the phrase? I think a reasonable argument can be made that the answer to the second question should in the best of all possible worlds be the same as the answer to the first, but either way, some interpretation is necessary because the plain language of 2012 is not the plain language of 1787, and not every phrase found in the Constitution is explained by the Constitution itself.

Posted on Jun 17, 2012 12:52:43 PM PDT
Oh brother! I guess I will have to go on keeping it simple and you can go on muddying the water, or whatever makes you happy. Me thinks thou hast a need for complication. I'll close with a kind word from one human being to another, love.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 17, 2012 10:08:58 PM PDT
Lientje says:
G. Petersen: So Reagan Warned us About Obama. Now that is one large ironic laugh.
Reagan talks about the economy, and he is the one who started sending it down the drain.
Don't bother to pull out figures about how rosy things were back then. They were for a while.
They were probably until somewhere around the 2nd term of Bush. And then all of a sudden
we had the piper to pay. This idea that you can cut taxes and make money for the government,
may work for a very limited amount of time, but at some time the piper needs to be paid. And
we are paying for it now.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 17, 2012 10:13:52 PM PDT
Lientje says:
Gottashootalot. Does that mean that you have to shoot your mouth off a lot, or that you have
to shoot those guns that you surround yourself with, and kiss each night before you tuck in.

As I said before, the definition of "natural born" has never been determined officially by the Supreme Court,
and I certainly am not asking you what your opinion of it is.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 17, 2012 10:15:01 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 17, 2012 10:19:15 PM PDT
Lientje says:
Gottashootalot:
Read the words, they're not open to interpretation.

*****
They are open to interpretation.

More importantly, Obama was born in the United States so there is nothing to interpret.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 7:12:08 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 18, 2012 7:23:49 AM PDT
I won't bother to repeat myself, it's an excercise in futility, however I will try to answer some of your queries. You're half right concerning my pseudo name, I do have a lot of guns and I do enjoy shooting them. Even though this is off topic I feel a need to address it. I am surrounded by my guns, although I don't kiss them goodnight every night, only when I compare them to humans of your sort. I sense in you a deep abiding love for this President of ours. Perhaps you will get lucky and Michelle will leave him and then you can kiss him goodnight each night. I shall now quote a great American and I trust you will understand why there will be no further responses to your drivil. "Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." Mark Twain

Posted on Jun 18, 2012 7:52:57 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 24, 2012 11:16:27 PM PDT
Lientje says:
Gottashootalot: "I sense in you a deep abiding love for this President of ours"
******

I sense that you have no sense at all.

I have a deep abiding love for the principles (most of them) of the Democratic Party. And I have that because I believe that the principles (most of them) are also Christian principles, which also have worked their way into our Constitution. I have found only two "rights" that people have which are actually God Given. One is to go to heaven after this life is over. And the other is to form an earthly government. I am not afraid of government. And I am not afraid of my fellow man. Both entities have been known to cause great harm. But my assumption is to thank God for both and to
do what I am commanded to do towards both, until I KNOW that one or the other is out to do me harm.

I don't lie or assume the worst about our leaders - any of them - until I know it to be the case. That is just an aside to address what is happening on a constant basis. If anyone wants to believe that financial success is more important than one's fellow man, then go ahead. If anyone wants to believe that owning and shooting guns makes you a man, go ahead.

If you want to spend your time lying about a duly elected President, knowing that you haven't an ounce of proof that he is foreign born, that he is Muslim, that he has committed voter fraud and is promoting it today, that he has a million social security numbers which he took out himself (and I'm still trying to figure out the value of that - why would anyone do that?), that he is a tyrant and dictator, and he is gay, and he is sleazeball who promotes violence in the streets, and is a communist, then I am here to argue with you, until you are no longer relevant to the argument. In other words, until he is elected to
his 2nd term.

Posted on Jun 18, 2012 8:21:34 AM PDT
Lientje says:
obama admits he wants to be a dictator: obama doesn't know we are a Republic

The 2012 Elections Are Cancelled!

Court Orders Obama To Resign In 90 Days

why is the usa bankrupt?

Obama ensures his fraudulent re-election.

Confirmed: Obama's Birth Certificate Fake, Video

*******
Is there a one of these Pronouncements that you actually buy into? And you are telling me I have no sense !!!

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 19, 2012 9:33:38 PM PDT
G. Petersen says:
Well said, but like you alluded to, it is often a wasted effort. Nothing penetrates granite.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 22, 2012 9:21:42 AM PDT
C. Gonzales says:
Which explains why you never admit you're wrong Garland
‹ Previous 1 2 3 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Barack Obama forum (897 discussions)

ARRAY(0x9d8410c0)
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Barack Obama forum
Participants:  15
Total posts:  53
Initial post:  Apr 17, 2012
Latest post:  Jul 11, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 1 customer

Search Customer Discussions