Barry's Social Security Number Challenged

[88GT]

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/general_political_discussion/222252-roberts_judgement_doesnt_pass_the_smell_test.html

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/general_political_discussion/222105-if_healthcare_law_is_a_tax_is_it_now_invalid.html

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/general_political_discussion/221583-interesting_article_on_supreme_court_and_obama_care.html

I figured you'd try and trot out a bunch of threads discussing the ruling. Sorry, not good enough. Since you made the claim, you can take the time to go through them and identify the specific INGO member(s) who have bellied up to the bar of Republican loyalty at all costs and are doing their best to justify Roberts's decision as a good thing.

You repeat this claim that INGO is full of Republican shills. Yet you never seem to be able to produce the evidence. Unless of course you think that casting a vote for the R candidate is being a shill for him. In which case, you are as clueless as you come across.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Drugs produce cultural and social rot, and destroy families? Wait a second, that is like saying guns kill people, and all of us here know darn well that PEOPLE kill people. I think you have it backwards. People that abuse drugs and destroy their families are the scumbags. Plenty (millions and millions) of people smoke pot, or drink beer, and live moral lives.

But that's what we're talking about here...the scumbags that use these substances and cause themselves or their families to become their neighbors'/communty's problems. I suppose many abused drugs have beneficial uses--just like guns do. A coca plant by itself, like a gun is certainly no harm to anyone. But when I take it and refine it to produce crack, there is one or two uses for it: to trade and to alter your mental/physical state. That's where your analogy runs thin.

And that's where the "Drugs produce cultural and social rot, and destroy families" assertion comes from. Maybe you know a different type of people than I do, but nobody I know that has (and probably still do) consumed such drugs didn't harm their own health and left their families (or themselves) on the door steps of relatives and/or some publicly (taxed) financed program to care for, raise, feed, clothe, etc.

 

[TruxLupus]

So now we have idiot elected officials who don't know anything about the SSN system, and believing the first thing they see in a spam chain e-mail. Great. That inspires such confidence my government.

snopes.com: Jean Paul Ludwig Obama SSN

The "MSM" won't bother to look it up because it's a bull**** rumor started by a chain-email. The media's job is to pursue facts, not wild outlandish crap with no basis in reality invented by birthers.

 

[Fletch]

Maybe you know a different type of people than I do, but nobody I know that has (and probably still do) consumed such drugs didn't harm their own health and left their families (or themselves) on the door steps of relatives and/or some publicly (taxed) financed program to care for, raise, feed, clothe, etc.

The vast majority of illegal drug users don't report their drug use. I'll give you 3 guesses as to why.

Imagine for a moment that the ONLY information we had on alcohol was from cops dealing with drunks and inebriated drivers and liquored-up dudes shooting their families. That's where the state of things is with illegal drugs.

The only information we have in general circulation is on the extreme bad end. We have very little info on the people who do the equivalent of cracking open a beer after a long day, only they do it with a pipe or needle or pills. Those people do exist, though, and I've met far more of them than I have the dregs. I'd bet you know a fair number of them yourself, you just don't know that you know them -- because people won't talk about stuff like that if they think there's even the faintest possibility that their drug-warrior friend might drop a dime on them.

 

[Carmelbythecorn]

So now we have idiot elected officials who don't know anything about the SSN system, and believing the first thing they see in a spam chain e-mail. Great. That inspires such confidence my government.

snopes.com: Jean Paul Ludwig Obama SSN

The "MSM" won't bother to look it up because it's a bull**** rumor started by a chain-email. The media's job is to pursue facts, not wild outlandish crap with no basis in reality invented by birthers.

I remember a story in this "fact seeking" MSM about George HW Bush traveling on a Navy plane to Iran to keep the hostages from being released in 1980 to ensure RR's election. There were no facts to support the allegation, but the MSM said the absence of facts demanded an investigation.

Is this the same 'fact seeking" MSM you think exists or is there another?

If the MSM actually acknowledged (rather then disparaged) any of these "birther*" claims - just once - and in a credible and objective way put forth their findings, would that not put this to rest once and for all?

* your terminology

 

[Carmelbythecorn]

The vast majority of illegal drug users don't report their drug use. I'll give you 3 guesses as to why.

Imagine for a moment that the ONLY information we had on alcohol was from cops dealing with drunks and inebriated drivers and liquored-up dudes shooting their families. That's where the state of things is with illegal drugs.

The only information we have in general circulation is on the extreme bad end. We have very little info on the people who do the equivalent of cracking open a beer after a long day, only they do it with a pipe or needle or pills. Those people do exist, though, and I've met far more of them than I have the dregs. I'd bet you know a fair number of them yourself, you just don't know that you know them -- because people won't talk about stuff like that if they think there's even the faintest possibility that their drug-warrior friend might drop a dime on them.

I think you are right on this Fletch. I imagine that we would be shocked if we knew how many people smoked their relaxation (rather than popping the can lid).

 

[netsecurity]

But that's what we're talking about here...the scumbags that use these substances and cause themselves or their families to become their neighbors'/communty's problems. I suppose many abused drugs have beneficial uses--just like guns do. A coca plant by itself, like a gun is certainly no harm to anyone. But when I take it and refine it to produce crack, there is one or two uses for it: to trade and to alter your mental/physical state. That's where your analogy runs thin.

And that's where the "Drugs produce cultural and social rot, and destroy families" assertion comes from. Maybe you know a different type of people than I do, but nobody I know that has (and probably still do) consumed such drugs didn't harm their own health and left their families (or themselves) on the door steps of relatives and/or some publicly (taxed) financed program to care for, raise, feed, clothe, etc.

Drugs don't make people leave their families, or spend their bank accounts, or commit crimes. Those people are already scumbags, and their heavy drug use is just an indicator of that. Even when they don't have drugs, they are still going to behave that way. Police use drug laws to arrest people every day, because they are not good at gathering any other kind of evidence than the kind in our pockets. That's why we jail more of our population than any other country, and it is sickening how many lives are ruined over a bag of drugs. What if said scumbag grows up, and learns from his mistakes, and tries to pay child support--not gonna happen, because he can only find employment at McDonald's now.

 

[hornadylnl]

Drugs don't make people leave their families, or spend their bank accounts, or commit crimes. Those people are already scumbags, and their heavy drug use is just an indicator of that. Even when they don't have drugs, they are still going to behave that way. Police use drug laws to arrest people every day, because they are not good at gathering any other kind of evidence than the kind in our pockets. That's why we jail more of our population than any other country, and it is sickening how many lives are ruined over a bag of drugs. What if said scumbag grows up, and learns from his mistakes, and tries to pay child support--not gonna happen, because he can only find employment at McDonald's now.

Your libertarianism is showing.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

What if said scumbag grows up, and learns from his mistakes, and tries to pay child support--not gonna happen, because he can only find employment at McDonald's now.

We have decisions to meke in life. Some of them have long term ramifications. There's plenty of information out there warning people of the legal implications of using drugs...if they know the information and do it anyway Like it says on somebody's sig line: play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Or is it 'stupid ought to hurt'.

 

[TruxLupus]

I remember a story in this "fact seeking" MSM about George HW Bush traveling on a Navy plane to Iran to keep the hostages from being released in 1980 to ensure RR's election. There were no facts to support the allegation, but the MSM said the absence of facts demanded an investigation.

Is this the same 'fact seeking" MSM you think exists or is there another?

If the MSM actually acknowledged (rather then disparaged) any of these "birther*" claims - just once - and in a credible and objective way put forth their findings, would that not put this to rest once and for all?

* your terminology

I said that's what their job is, I didn't say whether or not they actually do it.

Running a story on how this is a completely fabricated chain-email rumor would be no different than running a story saying "Breaking News: Ghosts Aren't Real!" Great way to make yourself a laughing stock.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

The only information we have in general circulation is on the extreme bad end. We have very little info on the people who do the equivalent of cracking open a beer after a long day, only they do it with a pipe or needle or pills. Those people do exist, though, and I've met far more of them than I have the dregs. I'd bet you know a fair number of them yourself, you just don't know that you know them -- because people won't talk about stuff like that if they think there's even the faintest possibility that their drug-warrior friend might drop a dime on them.

I cannot deny this may occur somewhere, with some people. But I can say from my experience, from the people I've known, it does not.

 

[Fletch]

We have decisions to meke in life. Some of them have long term ramifications. There's plenty of information out there warning people of the legal implications of using drugs...if they know the information and do it anyway Like it says on somebody's sig line: play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Because "legal/illegal" is the only measure worth considering, right?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Because "legal/illegal" is the only measure worth considering, right?

Legal/illegal is subject to societal approval. If you do not wish to conduct your affairs in the manner in which the "community" you choose to reside have prescribed (rightly or wrongly), you must bear the weight of the consequences of your decisions.

All communities of people will construct rules to govern peoples' lives. I'm a firm believer that the more civil and considerate the manner people conduct their business, the more they take care of their own responsibilities, the lesser the need is for rules to dictate that conduct.

 

[Fletch]

Legal/illegal is subject to societal approval. If you do not wish to conduct your affairs in the manner in which the "community" you choose to reside have prescribed (rightly or wrongly), you must bear the weight of the consequences of your decisions.

All communities of people will construct rules to govern peoples' lives. I'm a firm believer that the more civil and considerate the manner people conduct their business, the more they take care of their own responsibilities, the lesser the need is for rules to dictate that conduct.

I'm a firm believer that there are some things that the community should never be allowed to dictate, because it's none of the community's business. Theft and assault? Yes, by all means we need rules for that. Food or drugs I ingest for whatever reason? Never.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I'm a firm believer that there are some things that the community should never be allowed to dictate, because it's none of the community's business. Theft and assault? Yes, by all means we need rules for that. Food or drugs I ingest for whatever reason? Never.

In theory I agree.

But when I have to pay for your health care, when somebody wants to start a program that helps drug dependant-dead-beat-dads get back to "normal", etc., then it becomes my business. It becomes the communities' business.

Now. If you want to eat yourself into a mountain and your diabetes forces the doctors to cut off your legs, and I am not forced by threat of imprisonment to pay for it...fine. Eat away. I'm with you, brother! Same way with drugs. If you want to ruin your health snorting whatever, lose your job, let your kids go hungry, and unsheltered--and then nannies don't confiscate taxes from your neighbors and I to pay for rehab, AFDC, or whatever the right .gov program there is, in theory it sounds great. But you can't have it both ways.

 

[hornadylnl]

Legal/illegal is subject to societal approval. If you do not wish to conduct your affairs in the manner in which the "community" you choose to reside have prescribed (rightly or wrongly), you must bear the weight of the consequences of your decisions.

All communities of people will construct rules to govern peoples' lives. I'm a firm believer that the more civil and considerate the manner people conduct their business, the more they take care of their own responsibilities, the lesser the need is for rules to dictate that conduct.

And we have a bill of righs to put a check on societal approval. What happens when the majority of society thinks you shouldn't have the right to bear arms, a fair trial, the right to be secure in your person and effects, etc?

The single biggest failure in the constitution was not ensuring property rights. Without property rights, liberty is at te mercy of the majority.

 

[hornadylnl]

In theory I agree.

But when I have to pay for your health care, when somebody wants to start a program that helps drug dependant-dead-beat-dads get back to "normal", etc., then it becomes my business. It becomes the communities' business.

Now. If you want to eat yourself into a mountain and your diabetes forces the doctors to cut off your legs, and I am not forced by threat of imprisonment to pay for it...fine. Eat away. I'm with you, brother! Same way with drugs. If you want to ruin your health snorting whatever, lose your job, let your kids go hungry, and unsheltered--and then nannies don't confiscate taxes from your neighbors and I to pay for rehab, AFDC, or whatever the right .gov program there is, in theory it sounds great. But you can't have it both ways.

Real property rights address those concerns. But people don't want real property rights because they couldn't dictate to others how to live.

 

[Fletch]

In theory I agree.

But when I have to pay for your health care, when somebody wants to start a program that helps drug dependant-dead-beat-dads get back to "normal", etc., then it becomes my business. It becomes the communities' business.

Now. If you want to eat yourself into a mountain and your diabetes forces the doctors to cut off your legs, and I am not forced by threat of imprisonment to pay for it...fine. Eat away. I'm with you, brother! Same way with drugs. If you want to ruin your health snorting whatever, lose your job, let your kids go hungry, and unsheltered--and then nannies don't confiscate taxes from your neighbors and I to pay for rehab, AFDC, or whatever the right .gov program there is, in theory it sounds great. But you can't have it both ways.

Sounds to me like your problem is with the government, not with drug users.

 

[jedi]

Interesting, but it seems weak. I wonder if the number was simply reused because it was available?

Q20: Are Social Security numbers reused after a person dies?A: No. We do not reassign a Social Security number (SSN) after the number holder's death. Even though we have issued over 453 million SSNs so far, and we assign about 5 and one-half million new numbers a year, the current numbering system will provide us with enough new numbers for several generations into the future with no changes in the numbering system.

Social Security history Frequently Asked Questions

 

[jgreiner]

My SSN number is prefixed to Tennessee. I wasn't born there. It just happened to be the state I resided in when I did get a SS card. I'd take anything out of World Nut Daily with a big chunk of salt. Joe Farrah went around the bend many years ago and he's been feeding the birthers for some time now.

Obama never lived in CONN....never visited there. Not around the time it was issued.