Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1251812 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.

sonicfilter

Fishers, IN

#826374 Dec 20, 2012
Lincoln Duncan wrote:
<quoted text>
Republicans give us depression and recession
2008 Bush the latest
...and the last.

Judged:

13

13

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Realtime

Deltona, FL

#826375 Dec 20, 2012
flack wrote:
<quoted text> Your welcome. Saturday December 29 3:30 PM WVU-Syracuse
Yeah, Yankee Stadium__that should be pretty cool__not to mention cold.

If that kid had stayed in in Florida, at Florida or FSU he'd be playing for the national championship and probably have a Heisman or two on his mantle. Poise to spare and then some along with the best arm since Willie Joe.

He'll be around for a while, bet on it.

Judged:

13

13

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Nj raider 1

United States

#826376 Dec 20, 2012
THE DEBIL wrote:
<quoted text>
Oooooooookay... then.... you might be losin' me here... Just one question: does the Bible/Torah/Book of Morons speak to the illegal aliens or just the legal ones?
I gave you facts, scriptures & all, & your comeback was this nonsense. It ain't my job to convert the doubters. I myself dont claim 1 religion. Religion is just something to fight & have wars over. I'm also not dumb enough to believe that either humans just appeared or we evolved from monkeys. I'm also rational enough to listen & incorporate the pieces of the puzzle that fits. Now unless you have a better answer(& im dying to hear it) the bible explains how primitive man can move boulders weighing 40 to 80 tons at all, let alone miles on end.

“I've visited all 57 states!”

Since: Mar 12

Jivetown

#826377 Dec 20, 2012
Heart Disease 597,689
Malignant Neoplasms 574,743
Chronic Low. Respiratory Disease 138,080
Cerebro- vascular 129,476
Unintentional Injury 120,859
Alzheimerís Disease 83,494
Diabetes Mellitus 69,071
Nephritis 50,476
Influenza & Pneumonia 50,097
Suicide 38,364

Of the 2,468,435 people who died in 2010, less than 4/10th of 1%(< 9,873), or .004%, died as a result of a gun-related homicide.

So my Zombies think the rates went down in countries after a ban?

http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

Judged:

15

15

15

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
sonicfilter

Fishers, IN

#826379 Dec 20, 2012
The Folly of Blaming Video Games

Regulating digital violence cannot reduce crime.

....Most reassuring, however, are the long-term statistics. Video-game violence has been pervasive for the last two decades: The 1990s saw the introduction of popular blood-spattering fare such as Mortal Kombat and Doom, and since then game graphics have inched ever closer to photorealism. Total video-game sales have soared, and some of the most popular series (Grand Theft Auto, God of War) are incredibly violent. The people most likely to be violent, young males, are disproportionate consumers of these games. And yet violent-crime rates in this demographic have fallen. If games inspire violence, the effect is overwhelmed by larger trends.

Even setting the empirical debate aside, itís not clear what an American game-censorship policy would look like at this point. The industry has already created the Entertainment Software Ratings Board, which rates games using a system similar to that used for movies. Many retailers, of their own accord, refuse to sell violent games to minors.

What else is there to do? Given the sales numbers, it seems safe to assume that no amount of public pressure will force game companies to pull gory titles from the shelves. Suing game makers for the actions of their fans has not been an effective strategy either. And when the Supreme Court took up the issue, it held not only that video-game violence is a protected form of expression, but also that the First Amendment prevents laws against the sale of violent games to minors. Only two justices defended this rather modest restriction.

Certainly, parents should police their kidsí video-game selections and play time. There is no reason for a child to spend 15 hours a week spilling digital blood. Schools and parents alike should keep an eye out for children who take an abnormal interest in violence, no matter how they experience it.

But blaming violence on video games is unfair ó and, worse, unlikely to lead to effective policies.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/336116...

Judged:

16

16

16

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“I've visited all 57 states!”

Since: Mar 12

Jivetown

#826380 Dec 20, 2012
All women in the U.K. are now proficient cutting meat with their fingernails. Liberals rejoice!

Judged:

17

16

16

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Patriot

Longmont, CO

#826381 Dec 20, 2012
This is not an AR15!! You can see the shotgun shell come out!!! Share this, end the left wing lies NOW!!!!

http://youtu.be/wLrxSgkqJQc

Judged:

15

15

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
RUSH10ME

Chase City, VA

#826382 Dec 20, 2012
Obama 2016 wrote:
<quoted text>After the Federal Firearms Prohibition Act of 2013 is enacted, it won't be necessary.
Hey dummy guess what , the NRA has 8,ooo new members per day since the sandy hook shootings , thanks obama , your the best gun salesman since Sam Colt .

Judged:

15

14

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
proud2bwhite

Boonville, NY

#826383 Dec 20, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Did he call me & tell me he was coming to do this or did you want me to shoot every kid that approaches my house?
Maybe he would ring the doorbell. I would answer & see he was well armed and upon him telling me he wanted to kill my children. I guess you want me then to tell him to wait a minute until I get my AK47?
I wonder if the odds of your kids getting that AK47 & shooting themselves are higher that getting into a position where that ASK47 was the only saving means for someone wanting to enter your home & kill them?
Maybe I could place land mines around my home & tell my kids not to step on them?
you didn't answer the question you did the normal lib twist. Is the question to hard for you or is there no libtard sites that can give you an answer.
Realtime

Deltona, FL

#826385 Dec 20, 2012
sonicfilter wrote:
The Folly of Blaming Video Games
Regulating digital violence cannot reduce crime.
....Most reassuring, however, are the long-term statistics. Video-game violence has been pervasive for the last two decades: The 1990s saw the introduction of popular blood-spattering fare such as Mortal Kombat and Doom, and since then game graphics have inched ever closer to photorealism. Total video-game sales have soared, and some of the most popular series (Grand Theft Auto, God of War) are incredibly violent. The people most likely to be violent, young males, are disproportionate consumers of these games. And yet violent-crime rates in this demographic have fallen. If games inspire violence, the effect is overwhelmed by larger trends.
Even setting the empirical debate aside, itís not clear what an American game-censorship policy would look like at this point. The industry has already created the Entertainment Software Ratings Board, which rates games using a system similar to that used for movies. Many retailers, of their own accord, refuse to sell violent games to minors.
What else is there to do? Given the sales numbers, it seems safe to assume that no amount of public pressure will force game companies to pull gory titles from the shelves. Suing game makers for the actions of their fans has not been an effective strategy either. And when the Supreme Court took up the issue, it held not only that video-game violence is a protected form of expression, but also that the First Amendment prevents laws against the sale of violent games to minors. Only two justices defended this rather modest restriction.
Certainly, parents should police their kidsí video-game selections and play time. There is no reason for a child to spend 15 hours a week spilling digital blood. Schools and parents alike should keep an eye out for children who take an abnormal interest in violence, no matter how they experience it.
But blaming violence on video games is unfair ó and, worse, unlikely to lead to effective policies.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/336116...
True that, it's a bullshyte theory__recall the commotion created years ago by dungeons and dragons. Different sorts of people find different sorts of endeavors interesting. Fkn was always at the top of my list followed by fishing__I don't think that there are video "games" for those activities.

Judged:

15

15

15

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: May 11

Loysville, PA

#826386 Dec 20, 2012
proud2bwhite wrote:
<quoted text> you didn't answer the question you did the normal lib twist. Is the question to hard for you or is there no libtard sites that can give you an answer.
I did answer it but you evidently are too f*cking stupid to get it.

Judged:

12

12

12

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#826387 Dec 20, 2012
sonicfilter wrote:
The Folly of Blaming Video Games
Regulating digital violence cannot reduce crime.
....Most reassuring, however, are the long-term statistics. Video-game violence has been pervasive for the last two decades: The 1990s saw the introduction of popular blood-spattering fare such as Mortal Kombat and Doom, and since then game graphics have inched ever closer to photorealism. Total video-game sales have soared, and some of the most popular series (Grand Theft Auto, God of War) are incredibly violent. The people most likely to be violent, young males, are disproportionate consumers of these games. And yet violent-crime rates in this demographic have fallen. If games inspire violence, the effect is overwhelmed by larger trends.
Even setting the empirical debate aside, itís not clear what an American game-censorship policy would look like at this point. The industry has already created the Entertainment Software Ratings Board, which rates games using a system similar to that used for movies. Many retailers, of their own accord, refuse to sell violent games to minors.
What else is there to do? Given the sales numbers, it seems safe to assume that no amount of public pressure will force game companies to pull gory titles from the shelves. Suing game makers for the actions of their fans has not been an effective strategy either. And when the Supreme Court took up the issue, it held not only that video-game violence is a protected form of expression, but also that the First Amendment prevents laws against the sale of violent games to minors. Only two justices defended this rather modest restriction.
Certainly, parents should police their kidsí video-game selections and play time. There is no reason for a child to spend 15 hours a week spilling digital blood. Schools and parents alike should keep an eye out for children who take an abnormal interest in violence, no matter how they experience it.
But blaming violence on video games is unfair ó and, worse, unlikely to lead to effective policies.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/336116...
Diversions again.
The video games were just a symptom. If you've been paying attention here, you would have read where most blame the culture created by the so-called "progressives" who forced their preferred sets of norms and mores onto the population to replace the hated Ozzie and Harriet-type mores and norms that didn't produce a mass murder once a month.
You're watching too much so-called "mainstream" news. But, thanks for informing us as to what the indoctrinated Democrat party line bullshit will be to mislead the public.
By the way, did you take over, or under?

Judged:

13

13

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Realtime

Deltona, FL

#826388 Dec 20, 2012
Patriot wrote:
This is not an AR15!! You can see the shotgun shell come out!!! Share this, end the left wing lies NOW!!!!
http://youtu.be/wLrxSgkqJQc
Lets review your link__it was dark correct? The massacre occurred in the morning right?

What else you got chump???

OT__how's that Loosiana sinkhole coming along?

Since: May 11

Loysville, PA

#826389 Dec 20, 2012
Subversive Barry wrote:
Heart Disease 597,689
Malignant Neoplasms 574,743
Chronic Low. Respiratory Disease 138,080
Cerebro- vascular 129,476
Unintentional Injury 120,859
Alzheimerís Disease 83,494
Diabetes Mellitus 69,071
Nephritis 50,476
Influenza & Pneumonia 50,097
Suicide 38,364
Of the 2,468,435 people who died in 2010, less than 4/10th of 1%(< 9,873), or .004%, died as a result of a gun-related homicide.
So my Zombies think the rates went down in countries after a ban?
http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp
You people get f*cking dumber eery GD day of your uninformed pathetic little lives.

This is the absolutely DUMBEST argument being made by the absolutely DUMBEST people on the planet.

OMG, lets not do anything about 20 first graders getting slaughtered because more people die of heart disease.

Lets instead arm as many nutjobs with semi automatic rifles with 200 round clips.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#826390 Dec 20, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
I did answer it but you evidently are too f*cking stupid to get it.
The over-under for the number of murders in Chicago between Friday morning and the day after Christmas is... oh, say, 20. That's the number of children murdered in Connecticutt. Will there be more murders in Chicago over the Christmas weekend than children killed in Connecticutt, or fewer?
What's your pick? Over, or under?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#826391 Dec 20, 2012
Realtime wrote:
<quoted text>Lets review your link__it was dark correct? The massacre occurred in the morning right?
What else you got chump???
OT__how's that Loosiana sinkhole coming along?
You, too, dupe.

The over-under for the number of murders in Chicago between Friday morning and the day after Christmas is... oh, say, 20. That's the number of children murdered in Connecticutt. Will there be more murders in Chicago over the Christmas weekend than children killed in Connecticutt, or fewer?
What's your pick? Over, or under?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#826392 Dec 20, 2012
Lincoln Duncan wrote:
<quoted text>
Carol as Theologian while supporting the party that hates the poor.
A poor person doesn't have a cell phone.
A poor person doesn't have money to buy booze, drugs, guns, designer hoodies or tatoos.
Billion dollar drug cartels don't sell drugs in poor neighborhoods because there isn't any money in poor neighborhoods.
Poor people don't have the luxury to be idle all day and play basketball at midnight.
Poor people accept any job they can find.

If you see these things, you are not in a poor neighborhood.

There are no poor people in the United States. There are more beds and meals waiting than there are homeless. However, if you go into a homeless shelter on any night, you will find most of the beds empty because they aren't allowed to bring their booze and drugs into the place. Let's review. Poor people don't have money to buy booze or drugs.

By the way, dupe:

The over-under for the number of murders in Chicago between Friday morning and the day after Christmas is... oh, say, 20. That's the number of children murdered in Connecticutt. Will there be more murders in Chicago over the Christmas weekend than children killed in Connecticutt, or fewer?
What's your pick? Over, or under?
RUSH10ME

Chase City, VA

#826393 Dec 20, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
You people get f*cking dumber eery GD day of your uninformed pathetic little lives.
This is the absolutely DUMBEST argument being made by the absolutely DUMBEST people on the planet.
OMG, lets not do anything about 20 first graders getting slaughtered because more people die of heart disease.
Lets instead arm as many nutjobs with semi automatic rifles with 200 round clips.
Show us a two hundred clip , you can't you are just another liberal who wants the govt. to dictate your every move in life .
sonicfilter

Fishers, IN

#826394 Dec 20, 2012
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Diversions again.
The video games were just a symptom. If you've been paying attention here, you would have read where most blame the culture created by the so-called "progressives" who forced their preferred sets of norms and mores onto the population to replace the hated Ozzie and Harriet-type mores and norms that didn't produce a mass murder once a month.
You're watching too much so-called "mainstream" news. But, thanks for informing us as to what the indoctrinated Democrat party line bullshit will be to mislead the public.
By the way, did you take over, or under?
i just love conservative sites....

For one thing, games can serve as an outlet for violent tendencies, thus relieving these urges rather than incubating them, according to some research. This raises the possibility that game violence and real violence are substitutes: There is a statistical link between the two because violent people like both of them, but taking away video-game violence would actually increase real violence, because these people would lose an outlet.

If that sounds far-fetched, consider that pornography and rape seem to interact this way. Few would doubt that men obsessed with violent pornography are more likely to rape, or that the Internet facilitates menís pornographic obsessions. Yet the spread of Internet access was correlated with falling rape rates.

Relatedly, violent video games keep violent people occupied ó every minute they spend with a controller in their hands is a minute they donít spend hurting others. Some researchers claim that violent crime falls on days when a lot of people are in theaters watching violent movies; itís not hard to imagine something similar happening when violence-prone teens stay at home with Saints Row: The Third rather than going out to run amok.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/336116...

sounds like liberal talk to me.

National Review (NR) is a fortnightly magazine founded by the late author William F. Buckley, Jr., in 1955 and based in New York City. It describes itself as "America's most widely read and influential magazine and web site for conservative news, commentary, and opinion."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Review

so now i'm thinking it's conservative talk.
sonicfilter

Fishers, IN

#826395 Dec 20, 2012
Republicans: Donít Get Outbid On Taxes

In other words, Democrats really are pressing for some tax cuts that Republicans are not.

http://www.redstate.com/2012/12/20/republican...

the best pic EVER!

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) 22 min woodtick57 192,342
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 56 min Ratloder 70,147
News 3 dead, 5 wounded in Chicago as July 4th weeken... 2 hr reality is a crutch 1
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 2 hr Patriot AKA Bozo 53,994
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 4 hr Analog man 6,145
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 16 hr Sublime1 99,902
Word (Dec '08) 23 hr RACE 5,325
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages