Rush Limbaugh annd Alan Keyes Question Obama's Eligibility and Bill O' Reeilly Plays "cat in a sand box"

Rush Limbaugh, the nation’s top-rated radio talk-show host, briefly brought up the issue of Barack Obama’s potentially criminal use of a Connecticut-based Social Security Number, since the president has never lived in the Constitution State.
While speaking with a caller named Rob about Obama’s alleged deception of citizens, Limbaugh tossed out the question: “What are your thoughts on the fact Obama’s Social Security Number is from Connecticut and he’s never been there?”

Rob responded, “That’s what you call a red flag. A red flag is also, ‘First of all, I don’t need to give you my birth certificate,’ and then finally, ‘I’ll give you a copy,’ Oh, that’s a modern copy … We don’t need copies, we need originals.”
Rob continued, “How about releasing all of your college papers and let’s see what you really thought about America when you were in college? He’s deceiving us.”
“That’s true,” said Limbaugh. “They don’t want [us] to see what those term papers, doctoral theses and so forth actually were about, nor do they want us to see the grades. They don’t want us to see the grades.”
Rob had originally focused on Obama’s birth certificate, which Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio has investigated and believes is a likely forgery.
Find out all there is to know about Obama’s Connecticut Social Security Number in Jerome Corsi’s “Where’s the Birth Certificate,” both in hardcover and an additional ebook. And we also have the results of Sheriff Joe’s probe into Obama’s birth certificate!
“He says he was born in the United States,” said Rob. “He has not shown a genuine, authentic, viable, verifiable – in order to authenticate any document, you need to have the original.”
“Now wait just a second,” said Limbaugh. “They did release a birth certificate. Even Donald Trump said he’s satisfied with it.”
“The original? But a copy of anything you can’t be satisfied. You have to actually examine the original. … In order to have an expert authenticate it, you can’t go by a copy. You actually have to go by the ink on the paper, as well as many other things.”
Obama’s Social Security Number was not mentioned again in today’s radio exchange, but its discussion is notable because few members of the national media have treaded near that subject.

President Obama has never explained why he has a Conncecticut-based Social Security Number

As WND reported last August, Obama’s possibly criminal use of a Connecticut-based Social Security Number should become an important issue in his quest for re-election in 2012, said Alan Keyes, a former presidential candidate and ambassador in Ronald Reagan’s administration.
The first three digits of Obama’s SSN are 042. That code falls within the range of numbers for Connecticut, which according to the Social Security Administration has been 040 through 049.
“I believe that when you are confronted with a situation that is filled with these kinds of – what shall we call them – anomalies, disparities, it is reasonable common sense to want to try to get straight answers,” said Keyes.
“If you’re trying to ascertain whether or not somebody ought to be sitting with, as they used to say, their finger on the button of nuclear weapons that can blow up the world, their power extending to decisions that can collapse our economy, their influence extending to areas that can destroy the standards and moral conscience of our people in the eyes of the world, I think you might want to know who they were. It might be a good idea!”
Keyes’ comments came during an online interview with Stan Solomon, as he addressed an issue that has been avoided by the White House and almost completely ignored by national news agencies.
“Let’s say that you’re trying to establish someone’s identity for the purposes of an investigation and you come across a Social Security Number that has that person coming from a state that all the other records of their life indicate they’ve never been to,” Keyes explained.
“I think you would look at that as an anomaly that suggests, among other things, that you better probe a little harder to make sure that the identity that you’re dealing with is a real identity – that it’s not something that’s been in some sense fabricated for some particular purpose, because one of the things you want to do if you’re tracking somebody down is make sure you’re tracking them down, not following some phony figment down to dead ends. That’s common sense.”

Keyes thinks there are many Americans who are aware of this Social Security Number mystery and simply can’t understand why it’s not being addressed.
“Is it incompetence? Is it cowardice?” he asks rhetorically. “Is it just indifference and nonchalance of this elite in the courts and in politics, in the Congress and elsewhere?”
Steve Davis, police chief for Southport, Ind., was a co-host on the program, chiming in, “If anyone believes Barack Obama is gonna make an identity-theft commercial soon, forget it. It’s not gonna happen.”
Keyes then went on a scathing indictment of the current crop of political candidates and their apparent unwillingness to take on the issue.
“You know there’s hardly a one of them had the guts to stand forward and speak truly to the issues that are raised by these anomalies and to address the constitutional issues that are involved in [presidential] eligibility,” he said.
“And that, it seems to me, is a big strike against you because at the end of the day if you’re not willing to respect the requirements of integrity with regard to the most potently damaging office that it is in the gift of the American people to give, then I guess you’re willing to misinform and lie to them about just about anything. Because if you don’t care whether their vote for president – the most important vote they cast – can be cast with integrity, then you don’t care whether they’re represented or not.”
Keyes continued: “I know very few – I don’t care which party label they wear – who have had respect for the people, the respect for the Constitution, the respect for the requirements of real and true representation and choice in our elections to stand forward and deal with these matters forthrightly. They’ve allowed folks like myself and others who are outside the purview of government to kind of just twist in the wind. First they called us names and then they tried to tear us down, and as the facts and other things became evident and more and more people lined up, now they’re just silent and cowering in some dark corner, unable to voice their shame. And I think that’s where they belong, most of them.”
In June 2010, WND’s Washington correspondent, Les Kinsolving, asked former Obama Press Secretary Robert Gibbs specifically why Obama had a Connecticut-based SSN despite not having lived there, but Gibbs completely dodged the question and changed the subject, lamenting about inquiries over Obama’s birth certificate.

“There is obviously a case of fraud going on here,” said private investigator Susan Daniels. “In 15 years of having a private investigator’s license in Ohio, I’ve never seen the Social Security Administration make a mistake of issuing a Connecticut Social Security number to a person who lived in Hawaii. There is no family connection that would appear to explain the anomaly.”
Just this week, a California lawyer who has been leading the legal effort to probe Obama’s SSN made some progress in Hawaii.
As WND reported, attorney Orly Taitz secured an order from United States District Court Magistrate Judge Richard L. Puglisi demanding representatives of the Hawaii Department of Health appear in federal court Sept. 14 to show why Taitzshould be prevented from seeing whatever original 1961 documents theagency has on record regarding Barack Obama’s birth.
To date, most national media have refused to even mention the question of Obama’s possibly fraudulent Social Security Number.
On April 27, 2011, the day Obama released a scanned image of what he claims to be his long-form birth certificate from Hawaii, MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell angrily shouted down California attorney Orly Taitz to prevent her from exposing on national television what she claims is Obama’s Social Security crime:

Also in April of last year, some 11 months after WND began publicizing Obama’s Connecticut-based SSN, Bill O’Reilly of the Fox News Channel briefly addressed the issue while reading his viewer mail on the air.

Bill O’Reilly of the Fox News Channel

Unfortunately for O’Reilly, the news anchor falsely asserted the president’s father lived in Connecticut.
In his viewer email segment April 13, 2011, O’Reilly was asked: “What about Obama having a Connecticut Social Security Number? He never lived there.”
“His father lived in Connecticut for several years,” O’Reilly claimed, adding that “babies sometimes get numbers based on addresses provided by their parents.”
In reality, there is no evidence Barack Obama Sr. ever lived in Connecticut. He left Hawaii in 1962 to study at Harvard in Massachusetts and then returned to his home country of Kenya.
When WND publicized O’Reilly’s major error, the information vanished from the Fox News Channel’s website, as well as BillOReilly.com.
O’Reilly’s full explanation of the “truth” of Obama “myths” is here:

The BirtherReport.com website, responding to complaints by Fox podcast customers that O’Reilly’s Social Security claim, broadcast on Fox, had gone missing from the audio archive, trumpeted the headline: “Busted: Fox News scrubbed Bill O’Reilly’s 4/13 mailbag segment on Obama’s Social Security Number reserved for Connecticut applicants.” The site added, “Not only did Fox News scrub the podcast, they also left out the viewer email about Obama’s Social Security number at O’Reilly’s website. I report, you decide!”