Barack Obama, our next President

"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 ... Full Story

Since: May 11

Loysville, PA

#837937 Jan 12, 2013
Eman wrote:
<quoted text>
Has he nominated a woman? Would haves are what fairy tales are made of.
He would have nominated Rice.

Republicans said they would block Rice.

I guess its Republicans that hate women.

Since: Nov 09

Pharr, TX

#837938 Jan 12, 2013
The argument that civilians need assault weapons to protect themselves from the government is absurd. Who, exactly, are you going to shoot? A police officer? A Marine? There is no Palace Guard. Politicians aren't going to knock on your door to take your gun. Some of you have said our military will turn on the government and support "the people". Who are the people? And if that is correct then why did you need the assault rifle?
If, as many of you claim, there is a civil war then you will be taking on the full force of the United States military with your rifles. That should thin out the idiot gene pool.
carol

Orlando, FL

#837939 Jan 12, 2013
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey stupid! The mortgage lenders like Countrywide and Indy Mac who made those toxic loans were never under any regulations. Are you all of a sudden a proponent of bigger government?
Bill Clinton deregulating the Community Reinvestment Act in 1995 started this mortgage crisis.

Lenders were pressured into giving home loans to unqualified people under the name of "Affordable Housing" or else get a visit from the ACLU.

You can search "Community Reinvestment Act" on YouTube and see video of Bush, McCain & Greenspan warning of serious problems while democrats Barney Frank, Maxine Waters and Chris Dodd are defending the CRA and Fannie Mae.

Both sides are guilty of allowing to happen.

But you should think twice before calling someone stupid.
carol

Orlando, FL

#837940 Jan 12, 2013
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>lol! Yes son. That's because cons feel they are above the heap!
Bravo on the recognition!
You just congratulated debil pretending to be me. He stole my name and my location.

Proving he's making a fool out of all of you.

FYI.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#837941 Jan 12, 2013
Why Republicans should watch their language

This coming week, House Republicans will gather in Williamsburg, Va., to discuss what went wrong in 2012. I’ve attended more than a dozen such congressional retreats since 1993, and I can already imagine how the conversations will go. Someone will undoubtedly come to the microphone to declare that what the GOP needs is a better brand, missing the essential point that candidates and political parties are about reputation, trust and ideas. You can’t sell them like soap or detergent.

But what you say in defense of those ideas matters, and what people hear matters even more.

Congressional Republicans are currently defined as nothing more than opponents of the president and friends of the powerful. This isn’t my opinion — it’s America’s opinion. My polling firm asked voters nationwide on election night to identify who or what the GOP was fighting for. Twice as many said “the wealthy” and “big business” than “hardworking taxpayers” or “small business.”

Their image is even worse today. The congressional Republicans’ message during the “fiscal cliff” debate last month was confused and chaotic. The debt-ceiling vote next month and the budget debate after that promise more of the same — unless House and Senate Republicans stop bickering and start coordinating and talking differently.

Just saying “no” to the president has its limits. House Republicans, since they have a megaphone that Senate Republicans don’t , will continue to be diminished until they start defining and stop being defined.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-re...

remember during the campaign when the nutjobs kept saying Obama was Wall Street even though Wall Street was supporting Mitt?

it's no wonder Mitt lost with all of that 'help' from the right wing 'media'.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#837942 Jan 12, 2013
Today, the most vociferous defenders of gun rights tend to be white, rural males who oppose any regulation. But theirs was once the ardently held position of radical African Americans. Notably, in the 1960s, Black Panthers Bobby Seale and Huey Newton toted guns wherever they went to make a point: Blacks needed guns to protect themselves in a country that wasn’t quite ready to enforce civil rights.

In one remarkable incident in May 1967, as recounted in The Atlantic by UCLA law professor Adam Winkler, 24 men and six women, all armed, ascended the California capitol steps, read a proclamation about gun rights and proceeded inside — with their guns, which was legal at the time.

Needless to say, conservatives, including then-Gov. Ronald Reagan, were suddenly very, very interested in gun control. That afternoon, Reagan told reporters there was “no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons.”

The degree of one’s allegiance to principle apparently depends mainly on who is holding the gun.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/kathle...

i kinda like the 'give a gun to a janitor' idea.

i bet FOX does too.....today.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#837944 Jan 12, 2013
WH responds to petition to build the Death Star:

OFFICIAL WHITE HOUSE RESPONSE TO
Secure resources and funding, and begin construction of a Death Star by 2016.
This Isn't the Petition Response You're Looking For
By Paul Shawcross

The Administration shares your desire for job creation and a strong national defense, but a Death Star isn't on the horizon. Here are a few reasons:

• The construction of the Death Star has been estimated to cost more than $850,000,000,000,000,000. We're working hard to reduce the deficit, not expand it.
• The Administration does not support blowing up planets.
• Why would we spend countless taxpayer dollars on a Death Star with a fundamental flaw that can be exploited by a one-man starship?

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/isn...

so cool.

Since: May 11

Loysville, PA

#837945 Jan 12, 2013
carol wrote:
<quoted text>
Bill Clinton deregulating the Community Reinvestment Act in 1995 started this mortgage crisis.
Lenders were pressured into giving home loans to unqualified people under the name of "Affordable Housing" or else get a visit from the ACLU.
You can search "Community Reinvestment Act" on YouTube and see video of Bush, McCain & Greenspan warning of serious problems while democrats Barney Frank, Maxine Waters and Chris Dodd are defending the CRA and Fannie Mae.
Both sides are guilty of allowing to happen.
But you should think twice before calling someone stupid.
Carol has fallen to the CRA lie.

Banks hated F & F because they thought F & F held an advantage in the marketplace.

So they went to their lap dog, Bush. Bush tried to pull off a huge power grab by trying to put F & F under White House control. Even Republicans told Bush to shove that idea.

I am calling you stupid.
TheIndependentMa jority

East Bernstadt, KY

#837946 Jan 12, 2013
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>Sometimes, that's what happens when you disobey orders!
They shouldn't have harrassed and manipulated the NATIVE American contintental people to start with. They weren't bothering anyone.

Retribution 'Ah say--a red blood uprising of revenge-Brits and other Euro smallpox carrying insects be damned lol.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Conroe, TX

#837949 Jan 12, 2013
B Rabbit wrote:
<quoted text> Hey, look, I was just waiting around for a bit to see if anyone here knew a poster called, "carol," and I noticed your post. Are you a lawyer by any chance?
Engineer and geologist.
Next?
TheIndependentMa jority

East Bernstadt, KY

#837950 Jan 12, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
They share the common problem of government interference in medical care being a disaster.
Just look at how much WORSE it is already.

One person making just a bit over minimum wage a year-will have approx 10,400-10,5000 a year to "live on".

An "average" starting price for free market health insurance @ current rates- 500 p/mth--on up to 1100-1200 for anything beyond one single payer.

So REALITY should be pretty obvious-it would take over HALF a min wage earners Annual income just to purchase a single option plan--it would take ALL of a minimum wage earners Annual income--PLUS additional debt, to purchase anything beyond.

HELLOOOOOOO--anybody home, with a real CLUE, there in the now shameless, robbinghoodieticwink, thieving, greedy palmed hands of duh grubbermint vultures.
The broke back mules before rotten apple carts of taking ebven MORE AWAY from WORKING class folks for NOTHING-is NOT going to work.

SHAME on them!!! Shame on them for just STEALING MORE out of honest wage earners pockets, to line the pockets less desirable, and far LESS honorable elements!!

Are they REALLLY that ignorant to the socio-economic realities of the above the tables, lower end working wage earners, or are they just that w/out compassion, and that greedy, that they just don't care.
I honestly don't see how they can lay their heads down at night, and not be concerned about this shitbill they have let pass through, with out any TRUE reform FOR the Working folks, other than just more STEALING from honest wage earners for NOTHING.

SHAME ON THEM!!!!!!!!!!
TheIndependentMa jority

East Bernstadt, KY

#837952 Jan 12, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Engineer and geologist.
Next?
This Obamacareless DB??

My opine in short-It's incomplete, rendering it imcompetent and needs tossed OUT of the bill writing halls like the rotten to the core potatoe that it is.
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#837953 Jan 12, 2013
VeganTiger wrote:
<quoted text>
Was Von Staffenberg and the REAL opposition to the nazis socialists? WHat about the White Rose student movement?
Facts are very simple, the leftists in Germany at that entire period (before the war of course) were just as oppressive as the nazis and their takeover would probably have been the Sovjet state model. Also, who staged coups after WW1 and BEFORE the nazis. It wasn't "conservatives"...
The fact that Von Papen was conservative doesn't make a difference. At that time the nazis were not in power and later on he was politically castrated and the conservatives were quiet. After all, they had seen what the nazis had done to socialists already.
So, yes, the nazis were a typical leftist model. Their SA were essentially unemployed people of mostly worker background. They could have joined the communists. As a matter of fact, many prominent nazis had leftist background before 1932...
Sorry, I didn't mean to argue with you. I never do with liberals, because you will NEVER change your mind and neither will I (based upon what YOU say). It is more fruitful to inform like-minded than fight stalemates..
lol! Yes, the "restless" people were more of the leftist... much like the American Revolution.

Von Pappen would be more along the lines of a compromiser. Then again, he was also an opportunist. Which is why he would be caught in the middle. But the conservatives liked Hitler.... at first anyway. Their problem was they thought they could control him.... you know, the way industrialists usually think.

But were the nazis leftist? Hmmmmmm...... when one looks at the political parties they enslaved and the rise of totalitarian power in the civilian and military fronts, the rise of industry and the flow of cash, it's hard to make that case. If the case you're making about the SA is because the nazis offered work, then once again you support the position of the industrialists!

I'm not sure what you mean by "prominent" nazis. From an ideological standpoint, I just don't see it. After all, most of the pomp and circumstance they created came during Hitler's rise.

Don't worry about arguing. History usually makes my case for me with conservatives trying to "explain" their facts against it. And it's not so much that I prefer to "preach to the choir." I have been wrong before (ex... Germany was already losing the war when Normandy occurred). So as far as I'm concerned, it's an open book for perusal and not a speed reader.

The biggest difference in your statement from what I can see is you prefer to base your history on politics. And that's fine. Everyone does to some extent.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Conroe, TX

#837955 Jan 12, 2013
OldRaider wrote:
The argument that civilians need assault weapons to protect themselves from the government is absurd. Who, exactly, are you going to shoot? A police officer? A Marine? There is no Palace Guard. Politicians aren't going to knock on your door to take your gun. Some of you have said our military will turn on the government and support "the people". Who are the people? And if that is correct then why did you need the assault rifle?
If, as many of you claim, there is a civil war then you will be taking on the full force of the United States military with your rifles. That should thin out the idiot gene pool.
It's simple. The police exist for the sole purpose of protecting me. They merely determine what instrument is necessary for my protection. And, I have every right to protect myself. Therefore, the police have determined that I need every weapon they need for my protection.

... that is, unless the police exist for some other purpose.

Then, yes, we will need protection from them.

And, dufus, the Navy and Marines have internal directive prohibiting them from engaging in combat with Americans in the United States.

The government is what is described in the Constitution. If someone attempts to set up a dictatorship so they can write their own whim as laws, and orders the Armed Forces to attack the population, I believe they will uphold their oath and defend the Constitution.

You seem to hold to the fascist principle that the head of state defines the government.
Thus, you're a fascist. Fascism is prohibited by the Constitution.

You're also a lying treasonous fraud. It's no surprise you oppose the Constitution. You spent your entire life hating the United States. Your current desire to institute a fascist government is no surpirse.
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#837956 Jan 12, 2013
VeganTiger wrote:
<quoted text>
SKILL is the absolute perfect description here. Everybody seem hung up on the number superiority, but fact is that had the sioux's not managed to split the 7th, they would likely have lost. In close combat one on one, they were about equal, but at semi-close distance as Big Horn soon became there was no way Custer could have made it differently. All indicates that he had timed upon reunification of the Regiment.
Also, has anyone studied the Nez Perez escape from the feds from Southern Idaho towards Canada. The guy was a genius and he even had studied Napoleon.
Indians were experts in capitalizing on ignorant vanity and arrogance in the battles they won. Geronimo would never have been caught if he hadn't turned himself in. And what did they do to him? Disarmed, dispossessed in reservation for rest of his life. They knew fort sure how to fight asymmetrical warfare. Hopefully the same battle sites won't be "needed" again towards the same enemy...
Hmmmmmm..... did they split it? Or was that the way Custer "organize" his attack?
TheIndependentMa jority

East Bernstadt, KY

#837958 Jan 12, 2013
carol wrote:
<quoted text>
You just congratulated debil pretending to be me. He stole my name and my location.
Proving he's making a fool out of all of you.
FYI.
Not to worry Carol-Some of us can tell the stench of the REAL con wafting through lol..........

(SHAME on YOU Debil!!!!!!!!!! Now pay that manipulated givverment dolluh back!)
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#837959 Jan 12, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
The divine right of kings...or petty tyrants.
lol! So bushie wasn't a petty tyrant for invading iraq then, right?

I still hear whispers of revenge for his dad from time to time.
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#837960 Jan 12, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
Diversification prevents those problems
Never invest too much with your employer, as in Enron.
Worldcom was an obvious scam.
Brokerage firms are lousy investments.
Next question.
I'm not sure that was an option at the time. But even then, sound financial advice was trumped by illegal management practices.

Your statements clearly don't address the point, but that's pretty much what I expected.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Conroe, TX

#837961 Jan 12, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Carol has fallen to the CRA lie.
Banks hated F & F because they thought F & F held an advantage in the marketplace.
So they went to their lap dog, Bush. Bush tried to pull off a huge power grab by trying to put F & F under White House control. Even Republicans told Bush to shove that idea.
I am calling you stupid.
And that explains Barney Frank's coxucking boyfriend being put on the board, the legal threat to tie lenders up in court because of what was called "red lining", the 1999 New York Times article describing Bill Clinton coercing the private banking industry to institute the Democrats' Marxist subprime housing mortgage underwriting program, the Democrats trading their support for the war in Iraq for no effective oversight of the CRA that was obviously failing in 2003, and the economic collapse of 2008 after 2 years of oversight by Democrats Dodd and Frank.
Thanks for clearing all that up.
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#837962 Jan 12, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
They share the common problem of government interference in medical care being a disaster.
lol! Can you provide a good example?

Or are you pretty much stuck based on your opinion?

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
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 3 min JOEL 71,140
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 4 min IBdaMann 49,256
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 16 min Guru 181,951
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 2 hr KiMare 51,267
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 2 hr Yumpin Yimminy 68,897
French researchers find new strain of HIV virus... (Aug '09) 3 hr dango64 6
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 4 hr PEllen 98,858
Chicago Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 1:21 pm PST

NBC Sports 1:21PM
Brandon Marshall on Dominic Raiola: Dirty player, worse person
NBC Sports 1:23 PM
Lions' Raiola suspended 1 game for stomping on opponent - NBC Sports
Bleacher Report 1:31 PM
Allen (Knee) to Get MRI; Considered Day-to-Day
ESPN 2:14 PM
Bears' Marshall blasts Raiola: A dirty player
NBC Sports 4:10 PM
PFT Whiparound: Jay Cutler will return in Week 17