Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1251227 comments on the Hampton Roads Daily Press story from Nov 5, 2008, titled Barack Obama, our next President. In it, Hampton Roads Daily Press reports that:

"The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep," Obama cautioned. Young and charismatic but with little experience on the national level, Obama smashed through racial barriers and easily defeated ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Hampton Roads Daily Press.

Gunner

Cromwell, CT

#787550 Oct 29, 2012
Lily Boca Raton FL wrote:
Since he came into office, Republicans have consistently attacked President Obama for supposedly being anti-business. As ThinkProgress noted last week, the data shows that this charge is nonsense.
In fact, as the financial website Motley Fool noted today, President Obama is far and away the best president for corporate profits since 1900:/
What a load of progressive crap.

And in case you forgot, liberals "consistently attacked" Bush for EVERYTHING he did.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#787551 Oct 29, 2012
fred wrote:
<quoted text>
Nazis were socialist in every sense. Hitler imposed state control over every aspect of life. That's anti conservative.
I'm sorry fred, but I have to give up trying to educate you on civics when you can't even see the tip of your nose. If you believe that social control is anti-conservative, then what do you think the "religious right" tries to do?.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#787552 Oct 29, 2012
cway wrote:
<quoted text>
Sheer conjecture.
Gorbachev was a true reformer, not a traditional communist.
And that is proven by the attempt of the hardliners to overthrow him in a coup.
You have no idea how much I know about Russia, idiot.

The Soviet Union economy was in shambles. The Cold War drained every republic, and there just wasn't enough to fight the Cold War and provide things like housing, sufficient food, cars, clothes, and everything you take for granted. The people in the republics just quit doing as much to support Moscow and the Soviet Union's socialist system.
Russia had no other choice other than to disassemble the Soviet Union, or do to the Soviet republics what they did to eastern Europe.
There was no re-uniting the Soviet Union after Gorbachev disassembled it. But, the core of the Soviet Union had always been Russia, and the hardliners weren't going to give up the Soviet Union and Russia, too. So, they staged a coup. It didn't work because the Russian people were opposed to it. There were many Russians that had a lot of pride in what Russia accomplished, and it was incredible. But, they weren't willing to revert to the old, totalitarian system (like the Democrats are tying to bring to our country). Yeltsin, as president of Russia, stood down the old Soviet guard.
Today, Gorbachev is not respected in Russia because Russians did have some pride in themselves, and he was instrumental in dismembering the Soviet Union, which was an embarrassment to Russia. However, everyone in Russia likes the life they have today more than the life they had then.

Ti ne znayesh nichevo. Za Ti kaneess.
O Baloney

New York, NY

#787553 Oct 29, 2012
fred wrote:
<quoted text>
The whole cast of Mad Men are going to die of lung cancer.
fred used to smoke like a chimney and can smell the cig smoke.
Romney will need to have the White House drapes fumigated from Obama's cigarette smoke. Thank God he's hardly ever there, but Air Force One, Vegas Hotels and Comedy Central must reek.
fred

Milford, CT

#787554 Oct 29, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
With Mitt, there would be no GM or Chrysler anywhere.
The Kenyan left them to die and flew off to Vegas to party with Beyonce

http://cdn.pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content...
Gunner

Cromwell, CT

#787555 Oct 29, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
With Mitt, there would be no GM or Chrysler anywhere.
LOL...if Obama wins a second term, it wouldn't be surprising if he had to bail GM out again.
carol

Orlando, FL

#787556 Oct 29, 2012
Homer wrote:
<quoted text>How could that possibly upset me?
Guess it didn't.

Hope you vote for Romney. You'll be happy you did.
Homer

Bethlehem, PA

#787557 Oct 29, 2012
new yawk wrote:
that's what louisianna govenor kathleen blanco and mayor ray nagin believed when they refused to declare a state of emergency and decalre mandatory evacuation.
i'm going to digress ... knowing the minds of the player, we'll once again read how the delay in action regarding hurricane katrina was ALL bush's fault, when in fact NONE of it was his fault.
a few facts just to refresh those memories who continue to blame president bush for the hurricane katrina debacle:
* max mayfield of the national hurricane center took the unprecedented action of calling blanco and nagin personally to PLEAD with them to begin MANDATORY evacuation of new orleans and they said they would "take it under advisement".
* now this is where it gets down to the nitty-gritty FACTS!
president bush spent friday afternoon and evening with his advisors and administrators drafting all of the paperwork required for a state to request federal assistance ( and not be in violation of the posse comitatus act or having to enact the insurgency act ).
just before midnight friday evening, the president called govenor blanco and pleded with her to sign the request papers so the federal government and the military could legally begin mobilization and call up. he was told "they" didn't think it necessary for the federal government to be involved yet.
after the president's final call to the govenor she held meetings with her staff to discuss the "political ramifications" of bringing federal forces. it was decided if they allowed federal assistance it would make it look as if they had failed so it was agreed upon that the feds should not be invited in.
saturday before the storm hit, the president again called blanco and nagin and requesting they please sign the papers requesting federal assistance, that they declare the state an emergency area, and begin mandatory evacuation. after a personal PLEA from the president nagin agreed to order an evacuation, but it would not be a full mandatory evacuation and the govenor still refused to sign the papers requesting and authorizing federal action.
* in frustration the president declared the area a national disaster area BEFORE the state of louisianna did so he could legally begin some advanced preparations. rumor has it that the president's legal advisors were looking into the ramifications of using the insurgency act to bypass the constitutional requirement that a state request federal aid before the federal government can move into state with troops, but that had not been done since 1906 and the constitutionality of it was called into question.
* throw in the fact that over half of the federal aid for the past decade for new orleans to that for the past decade for levee construction, maintenance, and repair was diverted to fund a marina and support the gambling ships.
well, although quite lengthy, this should do it for you homer.
<quoted text>
Bah, most over-hyped storm in recent memory. Bush was a bum. He spent our money invading/blowing up/rebuilding Iraq instead of spending the monies on the levees.

If I were Bush I could never sleep at night knowing the damage I'd done to New Orleans due to Katrina and the rest of America due to failed policies.

We may never fully recover from the Bush years.
Razors Edge

Oak Lawn, IL

#787559 Oct 29, 2012
I guess CNN is really making an effort to reposition itself in the center, as some other news businesses are starting to do. I mean, the writing’s on the wall that it’s at least a 50% chance that Obama won’t win the election, so the majority of people (at least half as of now) are NOT fans of Barack Obama. So they have to look at their market shares as a business, and face it, CNN’s business model could use a drastic face-lift!

We’ve been seeing it more and more, it’s gradually becoming apparent that the Kool-Aid is wearing off. The honeymoon with Obama is history, and his staunch defenders in the media are reaching for the coffee as they start to wake up to a new reality. And you know what? I think they’re starting to like it! I think they’re starting to see that this long, depressing economic stagnation is about to give way to a new optimism, led by the optimistic leadership of Governor President Mitt Romney! Ahh! Feels good just to say it! President Romney! Go ahead, try it! You’ll like it!

All of the major media will soon be scrambling to shift to supporting the new president, while distancing themselves from the loser, lame duck ex-president who’s been failing to get the country moving forward again. There may be a few exceptions. Will MSNBC go out of business, or will they still be the mouthpiece of the Democrats, the Progressives. Will that sell? I suppose it will. Once the dust settles, there will still be a market for the opposition. After all, guys like Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert became famous as opposition comedians when Dubya was the prez. They’ll probably be delighted to have a president they can actually attack and ridicule to the howls of derisive laughter from their oh so cool non-conservative fans. How do I know? I confess… I used to be one of them. Oh, the shame!

But seriously, the fun is just starting for us. If, as most of us now predict, Mitt Romney wins this election, things will start to perk up almost instantly. Businesses will heave a huge sigh of relief and start looking forward to making money again, so they’ll start stocking the shelves. Of course, that means manufacturing and importers, shipping and receiving, and all connected businesses will have to start taking on more help to move the merchandise, and with those folks making more money, they’ll be spending more, so the stores will need more clerks, more office staff, etc. And the snowball just keeps growing as it rolls, turning into an avalanche of prosperity! Ooh! I’m hyperventilating just thinking about it!

As the momentum continues over the next few weeks, keep an eye on the media. Watch as they start becoming more centered, hedging their bets. They’ll be backing away from Obama, they’ll stop defending and protecting him, more and more. Romney will start getting more favorable and fair coverage. And as the media cover their asses, just in case Romney wins, they’ll be helping Romney win! They can’t help it. It’s just contagious as hell!

Romneymania is the next big thing! Get your Romney gear! Romney t-shirts, Romney coffee mugs, Romney ball caps, and Romney running shoes! Coming to a kiosk near you!

And just in time for the holidays, you’ll probably be seeing sweatshirts that read,“I was HOT for Romney before Romney was COOL!” Hell, I’d buy one! For my wife, that is. I mean I like Romney a LOT, but not THAT way!

Dump the Chump! Romney 2012..
Lily Boca Raton FL

Boca Raton, FL

#787560 Oct 29, 2012
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry fred, but I have to give up trying to educate you on civics when you can't even see the tip of your nose. If you believe that social control is anti-conservative, then what do you think the "religious right" tries to do?.
Fred is President of the Dan Quayle club; need you know more?
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#787562 Oct 29, 2012
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, when Romney goes to the White House, Obama has made sure the Muslim Brotherhood will be there waiting on him, dupe.
Anti-Muslim activists on the Right have consistently warned that the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated the Obama administration. But if their unhinged McCarthyism is to be believed, then Mitt Romney’s campaign has been penetrated by the Muslim Brotherhood as well, as Romney’s campaign has named George Salem, Samah Norquist and David Ramadan “National Co-Chairs of Arab Americans for Romney.”

Pamela Geller labeled George Salem’s Arab American Institute a “nototrious anti-Israel Israel [sic] organization” composed of “Islamic supremacists” and led by a “Jew hater.” She even suggested that the AAI seeks “Jewish annihilation” by backing Mideast peace efforts.

Geller, Frank Gaffney, Robert Spencer, William Murray, Andrea and James Lafferty and others sent a letter to Edwin Meese demanding he withdraw his endorsement of Virginia Del. David Ramadan because of his purported ties to Muammar Gadaffi and “radical views,” including his support for the right to build the Park 51 Islamic Community Center. James Lafferty said Ramadan is an “extremist” who should not even “be allowed to continue to live in the United States,” and Geller said he is a “stealth jihadist” and a “Muslim Brotherhood plant.”

Perhaps no chair of Romney’s committee is despised more than Samah Norquist, wife of conservative leader Grover Norquist. Glenn Beck and Jerry Boykin have said that Norquist is a lackey for the Muslim Brotherhood and according to anti-Muslim activists like Gaffney and David Horowitz, Norquist secretly converted to Islam and joined the Muslim Brotherhood at the behest of his wife. Conservative attorney Cleta Mitchell wrote in a report for the American Conservative Union that she is “certain that Mr. Gaffney’s hatred [for Norquist] is further fueled by the fact that Grover is married to a Muslim-American woman (who also has worked for the United States government in very responsible positions, I might add!).”

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/has-mus...

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#787563 Oct 29, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
With Mitt, there would be no GM or Chrysler anywhere.
Chryslers suck. Chysler should have been allowed to die a natural death decades ago instead of being on the dole.

" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Chrys... ;

A sh!tty product should not continue to be financed by the taxpayers.

Screw GM too.
headlines

AOL

#787564 Oct 29, 2012
.

****Hurricane SANDY Judgment on Wash DC - NY

&fe ature=plcp

.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#787565 Oct 29, 2012
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree that the Executive office should be held by a moderate. Romney has made both moderate and conservative pledges - which way is he going if he is elected? Nobody knows. Don't make promises that aren't yours to keep, carol.
Cutting deductions will result in a net increase in taxation for middle class families, while lowering tax rates will result in lower taxation for the wealthy - SIGNIFICANTLY lower, even including the elimination of deductions. As complex as the tax code is, that math is simple.
How about some reality in your logic....

Here's the real-world fact.
The people you Democrats call "rich" don't even have enough money to pay for what you want to do even if you taxed their earnings at 100 percent.
Secondly, the Democrats don't have any plans to decrease the size of govenment. In fact, their plan is to continually increase the size of government.
So, because money doesn't grow on trees, and if it did there aren't enough trees in the world to support the Democrats' idiotic plan, EVERYONE is going to have to pay more taxes.

The choice is simple.
With Democrats, it will be a lot of taxes to pay for not only the current debt, but the continually increasing debt, and then more to pay for the continually increasing expenditures.

With the Republicans, the government gets smaller. It will require less taxes to pay for the Republican plan of a smaller government than to pay for the Democrats' government totalitarian intent.

Either way, that 47 percent of American households that currently don't pay income taxes is going to get smaller. The country can't support the country with only half of the people paying taxes.

Democrats plan to borrow until the government defaults. In other words, until the government collapses.
Republicans plan to decrease the size of government and save us from ourselves.

Should be an easy choice if you're interested in the United States lasting beyond this generation.

Romney wins in a landslide.
Homer

Bethlehem, PA

#787569 Oct 29, 2012
carol wrote:
<quoted text>
Guess it didn't.
Hope you vote for Romney. You'll be happy you did.
I wouldn't vote for Romney if you put a loaded gun to my head.

Homer will not be responsible for the final nail in the coffin of the middle class.

Peppy has his new pet all ready for the big storm -

http://www.angelrstone.com/wp-content/uploads...

“fairtax.org”

Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

#787570 Oct 29, 2012
O Baloney wrote:
<quoted text>Romney will need to have the White House drapes fumigated from Obama's cigarette smoke. Thank God he's hardly ever there, but Air Force One, Vegas Hotels and Comedy Central must reek.
And get rid of all them yellow Muslim drapes he's got hanging everywhere.
American Lady

Danville, KY

#787571 Oct 29, 2012
Slain SEAL’s father to Obama:‘Better to die the death of a hero than it is to live the life of a coward’[VIDEO]

http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/29/slain-seals...
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#787572 Oct 29, 2012
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
How do you interpret a spontaneous demonstration from the video feed?
You really need to stop doing those hallucinogens when you watch video feeds of Americans being hung out to dry by the White House and killed by Al Qaeda.
Really. How did you interpret a spontaneous demonstration from the vidoe of Al Qaeda attacking the US consulate compound?
I've got to hear this one....
I don't have the arrogance to act like I'm capable of interpreting it. So .....

CIA documents that will be the basis of testimony to the House Intelligence Committee this week support United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice's early account of the attacks the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, writes columnist David Ignatius in The Washington Post.

“Talking points” prepared by the CIA on Sept. 15, the same day that Rice taped three television appearances, support her description of the Sept. 11 attack as a reaction to Arab anger about an anti-Muslim video prepared in the United States, Ignatius reported on Saturday.

Citing CIA documents, he wrote that a senior intelligence official said the analysts’ judgment was based in part on monitoring of some of the Benghazi attackers, which showed they had been watching the Cairo protests live on television and talking about them before they assaulted the consulate.

His reporting supports Obama administration claims that early intelligence reports pointed to a connection between the attacks and a crude, anti-Islam video published online by an amateur U.S. filmmaker once convicted of bank fraud.

According to the CIA account,“The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the U.S. Consulate and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.”

http://www.nationaljournal.com/2012-president...

If only there was one side to every story we'd all be watching FOX. But we're not.
Homer

Bethlehem, PA

#787573 Oct 29, 2012
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
How about some reality in your logic....
Here's the real-world fact.
The people you Democrats call "rich" don't even have enough money to pay for what you want to do even if you taxed their earnings at 100 percent.
Secondly, the Democrats don't have any plans to decrease the size of govenment. In fact, their plan is to continually increase the size of government.
So, because money doesn't grow on trees, and if it did there aren't enough trees in the world to support the Democrats' idiotic plan, EVERYONE is going to have to pay more taxes.
The choice is simple.
With Democrats, it will be a lot of taxes to pay for not only the current debt, but the continually increasing debt, and then more to pay for the continually increasing expenditures.
With the Republicans, the government gets smaller. It will require less taxes to pay for the Republican plan of a smaller government than to pay for the Democrats' government totalitarian intent.
Either way, that 47 percent of American households that currently don't pay income taxes is going to get smaller. The country can't support the country with only half of the people paying taxes.
Democrats plan to borrow until the government defaults. In other words, until the government collapses.
Republicans plan to decrease the size of government and save us from ourselves.
Should be an easy choice if you're interested in the United States lasting beyond this generation.
Romney wins in a landslide.
I just have one question, when in the history of the republic has the government gotten smaller under Republican leadership? Answer me now!
fred

Milford, CT

#787574 Oct 29, 2012
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry fred, but I have to give up trying to educate you on civics when you can't even see the tip of your nose. If you believe that social control is anti-conservative, then what do you think the "religious right" tries to do?.
The religious right stand for individual freedom and oppose the imposition of secular humanism by the state, also known as the legalization of sin. duh

You couldn't educate a flea ..ya nimrod.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 14 min WelbyMD 192,148
Dear Abby July 3, 2015 15 min Kuuipo 2
News Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 19 min Mark 52,021
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 33 min ritedownthemiddle 53,950
News Should we really be OK with the surgical remova... 34 min sarabella 92
Tony Rezko's great friends, BH Obama & Valerie ... 1 hr Hillary luvs Rezko 4
Amy July 3, 2015 1 hr PEllen 1
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 3 hr Michael Satterfield 99,892
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages