Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1508443 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.

Truth is no SIN

New York, NY

#855121 Feb 6, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>Why not deal with the "here and now" and not crap that happened over a hundred years ago?

Cape Canaveral, FL

#855122 Feb 6, 2013
sonicfilter wrote:
Karl Rove defends super PAC, cites Todd Akin
Karl Rove roared back Tuesday night against tea party critics within his party who say his super PAC’s new initiative is aimed at undermining their candidates during Republican primaries.
“Some people think the best we can do is Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock — they’re wrong. We need to do better if we hope to take over the United States Senate. We need to get better conservative candidates and win,” Rove, a former White House adviser to President George W. Bush, said on Fox News.
Read more:
So Rove's new superpac is actually anti conservative ?
Truth is no SIN

New York, NY

#855123 Feb 6, 2013
Jane Says wrote:
<quoted text>it will be very interesting to watch the reaction of many middle class voters whose jobs will only insure the employee and not the family--and they will not be eligible for any Obamacare subsidies.
get ready to say it:
"told you so"
"WHO did you vote for?"
Ambiguity in Health Law Could Make Family Coverage Too Costly for ManyBy ROBERT PEAR
WASHINGTON — The new health care law is known as the Affordable Care Act. But Democrats in Congress and advocates for low-income people say coverage may be unaffordable for millions of Americans because of a cramped reading of the law by the administration and by the Internal Revenue Service in particular.
Under rules proposed by the service, some working-class families would be unable to afford family coverage offered by their employers, and yet they would not qualify for subsidies provided by the law.
The fight revolves around how to define “affordable” under provisions of the law that are ambiguous. The definition could have huge practical consequences, affecting who gets help from the government in buying health insurance.
Under the law, most Americans will be required to have health insurance starting in 2014. Low- and middle-income people can get tax credits and other subsidies to help pay their premiums, unless they have access to affordable coverage from an employer.
The law specifies that employer-sponsored insurance is not affordable if a worker’s share of the premium is more than 9.5 percent of the worker’s household income. The I.R.S. says this calculation should be based solely on the cost of individual coverage for the employee, what the worker would pay for “self-only coverage.”
Critics say the administration should also take account of the costs of covering a spouse and children because family coverage typically costs much more.
In 2011, according to an annual survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation, premiums for employer-sponsored health insurance averaged $5,430 a year for single coverage and $15,070 for family coverage. The employee’s share of the premium averaged $920 for individual coverage and more than four times as much,$4,130, for family coverage.
Under the I.R.S. proposal, such costs would be deemed affordable for a family making $35,000 a year, even though the family would have to spend 12 percent of its income for full coverage under the employer’s plan.
The debate over the meaning of affordable pits the Obama administration against its usual allies. Many people who support the new law said the proposed rules could leave millions of people in the lower middle class uninsured and frustrate the intent of Congress, which was to expand coverage.
“The effect of this wrong interpretation of the law will be that many families remain or potentially become uninsured,” said a letter to the administration from Democrats who pushed the bill through the House in 2009-10. The lawmakers include Representatives Henry A. Waxman of California and Sander M. Levin of Michigan.
Bruce Lesley, the president of First Focus, a child advocacy group, said:“This is a serious glitch. Under the proposal, millions of children and families would be unable to obtain affordable coverage in the workplace, but ineligible for subsidies to buy private insurance in the exchanges” to be established in each state.
Truth is no SIN

New York, NY

#855125 Feb 6, 2013
History 101 wrote:
<quoted text>
No fear there, old crone, not one person reads your spams and, since you haven't the skill to write yourself you're reduced to copying the words of others. In other words, you're a drone.
lololol and you respond to a drone what does that make you lololol bye more spamming to do you are lonely awwwww
Truth is no SIN

New York, NY

#855126 Feb 6, 2013
How Much of the European Contribution to the African-American Genome Comes From Females?
Virtually all African Americans have some detectable European genetic admixture. Some carry few Euro DNA markers and some have many; but overall, about 17 percent of the collective African-American gene pool comes from Europe. What fraction of that 17 percent comes from European females? Can DNA tell? The short answer is “no”. Let’s see why not.

The question arises because it is fraught with ethno-political implication. Many Americans see Blacks and Whites as mutually hostile groups. About half of those who see “races” as adversarial blame Whites for the challenges facing the African-American community, challenges such as gaps in net worth, test-scores, and criminality. They attribute these challenges to White-on-Black racism past and present. The other half blames Blacks for their own plight, attributing it to an oppositional culture that idolizes victimization and disdains diligence. The former ideology sees the European genetic contribution as resulting from the rape of Black female slaves by White male slaveowners. If much of the European DNA in the African-American genetic enclave were to actually come from European females, it would weaken this ideology.

Unfortunately, how much of the European contribution to the African-American gene pool came from which sex may not be answerable via DNA studies. First, let’s look at autosomal markers. Then we shall consider paternal and maternal haplotype lineages.

Some autosomal DNA markers are more common in west Africa or in Europe, enabling laboratories to estimate your continent-of-ancestry admixture ratios. So you can say with some confidence that the mean subsaharan admixture among self-identified White Americans is under 5 percent and the mean Euro admixture among self-identified Black Americans is about 17 percent. See this for yourself in the following scatter diagram.


Indianapolis, IN

#855127 Feb 6, 2013
Realtime wrote:
<quoted text>So Rove's new superpac is actually anti conservative ?
anti-crazy person-conservative.

lost cause.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#855128 Feb 6, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Bush was actually still President in 2007 & 2008.
Bush left office with the debt at 10.8 trillion.
No wonder the country is on a path to destruction. You idiot Democrats don't even know how government works.
I'll educate you.
Only Congress has the authority to borrow money.
The Democrats took control of all the purse strings of government in January, 2007, when the total debt was 8.5 trillion dollars, up only 3.5 trillion dollars since the dot-come bust and the Arabs declaring war on the United States.
Since, the Democrats have doubled that debt.
Truth is no SIN

New York, NY

#855129 Feb 6, 2013
The Puzzle: Northern Europeans are Uniquely Depigmented
“White,” of course, is a a social designation. The question really is,“Why are northern Europeans depigmented?” Here is a map of human skin tone. The natives of northern Europe are oddly light-skinned. They are paler than anyone else on earth.

Most people know that it has something to do with sunlight, UV, latitude, and vitamin D. Here is a map of solar UV at the surface taken from satellite. It matches the skin-tone map everywhere but Europe.

The closer you are to the equator, the darker your skin. This is because humans are extraordinarily sensitive to sunlight on the skin. Humans lack fur.

It Has Something to do With Solar UV and Oceans
UV rays produce vitamin D and reduce folate when they hit naked skin. And embryos are terribly vulnerable to both substances in the mother. When it comes to sunlight and skin tone, furless humans are balanced on a knife-blade.

Too much UV penetrating the skin (too pale-skinned under intense sunlight) increases Vitamin D but reduces folate. Lack of folate causes neural tube defects in the fetus, causing such congenital abnormalities as craniorachischisis, anencephalus, and spina bifida, leading to many miscarriages.

On the other hand, too little UV penetrating the skin (too dark-skinned under dim sunlight) increases folate but reduces vitamin D. Lack of vitamin D causes skeletal neonatal abnormalities (skull, chest, and leg malformations), rickets being the best known. Again, this causes miscarriages.

And so, humans adapt very quickly to solar UV. Prehistoric groups that migrated towards the equator got darker. Prehistoric groups that migrated away from the equator got lighter.
History 101

Orlando, FL

#855130 Feb 6, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
So, when Sean Penn travels to Iran, or Cuba, or Venezuela to give support to our enemies, a high-ranking government official can make the decision to assassinate him without any specific criteria or any warning?
However, there are some fundamental problem with the way you formulated the "question." (surprise, surprise.)

When Sean Penn travels to Iran (did he?) or Cuba or Venezuela,(did he?) he doesn't go there to 'support "our" enemies.' in the first place he's part of the word "our," in your sentence, is he not? And secondly, who says he would go to those places to give support to our (sic) enemies? You see the problem? you framed the question to produce a particular question so it's not really a question at allll is it, johnny boy? don't you pathetic old clowns ever get tired of playing this game?

Who is the republican strategist who gets paid to go on Fox News and re-define the language so as to generate particular answers? Is it Kurtz? Luntz? Some sort of German gutter name like that..
Truth is no SIN

New York, NY

#855132 Feb 6, 2013
But this explanation fails for Europe. Northern Europeans are lighter than everyone to the south (Mediterraneans), to the east (Mongols and east-Asians), to the west (Native Americans across the Atlantic), and to the North (Inuit, Sammi, Chukchi, Aleut).

Clearly, there once was a factor at work in Europe other than dim sunlight.

Here is another map of skin tone. Again, the blob surrounding the Baltic Sea is like nothing else on the planet. That this pale population surrounds the Baltic gives the first hint. It must have something to do with the oceans.

Skin, Hair, and Eyes: Neoteny
Baltic depigmentation is not just in the skin. Here is a map of hair color. The pigment “melanin” colors hair as well as skin. Adult blondes are native only to the same unique region.Children around the world are often blonde, but their hair darkens at puberty. So it is not just northern European adult skin that lacks pigment. It is also adult European hair.
The Baltic depigmentation is not just in the skin and hair. Here is a map of eye color. Melanin colors eyes, as well as skin and hair. Adults with blue eyes are native only to the same unique region.

(Babies around the world are often born with blue eyes, but their eyes darken within a few months.)

So it is not just northern European skin and hair that lack pigment. It is also northern European eyes. Skin, hair, eyes: adult European pigmentation resembles that of children elsewhere. This gives the second hint–neoteny.When Did it Happen?
To solve the puzzle, find out when it happened. When did the inabitants of the Baltic region lose their melanin? It must have happened after 16 KYA (16 thousand years ago). The Baltic region was covered by ice before then and nobody lived there.

In fact, it happened after 13 KYA. Cave art from that time always shows normally pigmented people. Notice that in this painting from 13 KYA, the hunters are the same color as the deer.

It must have happened before 4.6 KYA because depigmented people first began to appear in art at that time. These Egyptian statues were painted in 2613 BC. They portray Prince Rahotep and his consort Nefret, of the Old Kingdom, early Fourth Dynasty. Notice that he is brown but she is pink.

And so, the next step in solving the puzzle is to ask,“What happened in Europe between 13 KYA and 4.6 KYA?”

What happened was the invention and spread of agriculture. Before 10 KYA people everywhere lived by hunting and gathering. Then, almost simultaneously, cereal growing was invented in four spots around the globe:

Iraq (wheat, barley, rye), China (rice), Nigeria (sorghum), and Mexico (corn or maize).

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#855133 Feb 6, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
I posted it to show the drones were utilized under President Bush & many civilians were also killed in the process.
You f*cking loons act as though this is some Obama came up with.
As far as targeting American citizens by the government, it happens all the time.
If a US citizen is threatening to do harm/ has done harm to people & they can not be captured to prevent further harm, then they are killed or wounded.
The police do it all the time.
We have the cleric go & join terrorists & actively recruit suicide bombers to attack US assets.
You take him out if you can because invading Yemen to try to capture is too risky.
If a US citizen joined the Taliban & was attacking US forces, I guess you would jump up & say " Stop, you can't shoot that attacker - he is a US citizen. OMG OMG OMG". Yep, I guess, according to you, we should just allow him to kill as many soldiers as possible until we can capture him & put him on trial.
The same with the sniper in the clock tower.
Are we discussin armed drones?

And, does the govenment have the right to invade my privacy without just cause? In other words, can the government spy on the private property of the American public in general, without evidence of a crime?

The liberal courts have always objected to this. So, why today it is these same liberals that are promoting this?

That, by itself, is so suspicious it convinces me that it shouldn't be done.
Truth is no SIN

New York, NY

#855134 Feb 6, 2013
It is Connected With Eating Cereal
What does skin tone have to do with eating cereal? Even in darkness, humans get vitamin D from eating meat and fish. Otherwise they could never inhabit the arctic.

This USDA chart shows the vitamin D content of various foods. All meats have some vitamin D. Fish have very high amounts. But grains have no vitamin D at all.

People who eat grains do not get vitamin D from food; they must get it from sunlight.

This usually works out fine because grains grow only where it is warm. And this means only in latitudes with bright sunlight, with one exception.

People who live in low latitudes, where they can live off grains, get plenty of sunlight. People who live in dim sunlight cannot grow grains, and so they get vitamin D from the meat and fish that they eat.

The Gulf Stream is the Cause
The exception? There is only one spot on the planet where grains will grow despite sub-arctic sunlight.

It is where the warm waters of the Gulf Stream wash ashore. The Baltic is the only place on earth where ocean currents keep it warm enough to grow grain despite dim sunlight.

When the inhabitants of this region switched to grain about 6 KYA, they suddenly got insufficient vitamin D to survive. They had stopped eating mostly meat and fish in a place where sunlight was too dim to produce vitamin D in normally pigmented skin.

And so they adapted by retaining into adulthood the infantile trait of extreme paleness. Blonde hair and blue eyes were other infantile traits that were just swept along accidentally.

For the detailed text of this topic, complete with footnoted references, citations, and all the peer-reviewed material, visit The Paleo-Etiology of Human Skin Tone. AND THIS ANSWERS YOUR HERE AND NOW WHY YOU LOOK THE WAY YOU DO lolololol hahahahah


Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

#855135 Feb 6, 2013
Happy Birthday President Reagan!
Truth is no SIN

New York, NY

#855136 Feb 6, 2013
HIDE YOUR DAUGHTERS LOLOLOLHAAHAh The Rate of Black-to-White “Passing”

n early twentieth-century South Carolina, at the height of the Jim Crow era when the one-drop rule was supposedly the law of the land, Louetta Chassereau, an orphaned infant of known, documented, but invisible African ancestry was placed in a White orphanage and adopted by a White family. As the little girl matured, her White adoptive family became influential in the White community. She married very well indeed, to a wealthy White man (F. Capers Bennett), in an upscale White church (Spring Street Methodist Church in Charleston). Throughout her marriage to Bennett, she voted in White primaries (Democrat), her children attended White schools and when they grew up, joined White churches (two became Episcopalians and two were Methodists). The godparents of her children were White (Mr. and Mrs. I. M. Fishburne), he being the president of the local Farmers & Merchants Bank. The problem came when Mr. Bennett died. His will left all to his beloved wife, Louetta. But his relatives contested the man’s will on the grounds that their long and fruitful marriage had been illegal all along, because Louetta had started life as a Black baby. In a terse opinion, Bennett v. Bennett,1940 South Carolina,(most of which is the above summary), South Carolina Supreme Court Justices Milledge L. Bonham, D. Gordon Baker, E. L. Fishburne, Taylor H. Stukes, and L. D. Lide ruled that over her lifetime, Louetta had become irrevocably White, and they dismissed the will contestation unanimously.1
too rich I LOVE AMERICA one cousin calls the other cousin ofay while the others say nasty word lololol AMERICA AMKERICA
dem buying votes

New York, NY

#855138 Feb 6, 2013
Sharon Jasper could be the poster child for Obama's re-election campaign. Ms. Jasper has lived on the dole 57 of her 58 years. She was moved out of the St. Bernard housing project after hurricane Katrina. Her current home is a voucher-backed apartment in a private residence. Speaking to a New Orleans Times-Picayune reporter, Jasper said, "'s pitiful what people give you."

Ms. Jasper, the key word is "give." We taxpayers do not owe you anything. How dare you whine and complain?

This ungrateful, arrogant, entitlement-minded woman called her apartment a "slum." Jasper allowed a photographer to tour her subsidized apartment. She complained about missing window screens, a slow leak in a sink, a warped back door, and a few other details of her residence. Otherwise, Jasper's apartment appeared to have been recently renovated.

Jasper's "slum" also featured hardwood floors and a 60-inch HD TV.

At a New Orleans City Council meeting about whether or not to tear down the dilapidated St Bernard projects, Ms. Jasper verbally attacked a white male in attendance, saying, "I will not be treated like a slave!" and "Back up and Shut up! Shut up, white boy! Shut up, white boy!"

Sharon Jasper should be ashamed of herself. Jasper's shamelessness confirms how deeply our culture is infected with an entitlement mindset. Please do not write me about how I am beating up on the poor. I am not. I have known Sharon Jasper in various forms all of my life, including in my own family. I have witnessed firsthand the devastating toll cradle-to-grave government dependency has taken on the human spirit and the wasted lives left in its wake. So please, do not preach to me about liberals' good intentions or tell me I simply do not support my fellow blacks.

Read more:
Follow us:@AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
dem buying votes

New York, NY

#855139 Feb 6, 2013
Sharon Jasper epitomizes the type of voter Obama seeks and is working to create. With more Americans than ever on food stamps and half the country receiving government assistance in some form or another, Obama is cloning Sharon Jasper. Unquestionably, Obama is putting all his re-election eggs into his Sharon Jasper basket.

As callous, self-serving and heartless as drug dealers, the Democrats are government-dependency dealers. Hooking as many Americans as possible on government dependency secures the Democrats' voting bloc of government-dependency junkies. Every election, Democrats will promise to increase the dosage of freebies.

But somewhere down the road, workers/taxpayers will revolt! "Screw it! I ain't workin' no more for the government to take it and give it away."

I cannot begin to express how painful it is for me to see lazy, "triflin'" (as my mom used to call them) do-nothings getting over on hardworking taxpayers and being celebrated by the president of the United States. Obama treats deadbeat entitlement junkies like saints, superior to working Americans. Mr Obama, we are a not a bunch of slackers. We are Americans, doggone-it! We work! Quoting Larry the Cable Guy, we "git-r-done"!

I will tell you who are the "real" saints: the small business owner I met in Kansas. For ten years,(think about that for a moment, ten years), a few of his employees earned more than he did in his meat-processing business. Through failures and personal and financial hardships, he kept the business going. Today, he employs 500 people. This small businessman is a hero! And yet, Obama has targeted this man's extremely hard-earned wealth for redistribution, all the while portraying him as a selfish villain. Despicable. Mr. Obama, that's anti-American!

Read more:
Follow us:@AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
dem buying votes

New York, NY

#855142 Feb 6, 2013
Some of you patriots still do not get it. You write me long e-mails explaining the sins of Newt and Santorum and how if Ron Paul does not win the nomination, you're sitting this election out. Well, that is just plain wrong and crazy. While I have my favorite, at this stage of the game, I will support whoever wins the nomination! What part of "Obama will end America as we know it" do you not understand?

The argument that the "wrong Republican" in the White House is just as bad as Obama confirms a naivety of the depths of Obama's far-left radical- and Rev. Jeremiah Wright-inspired hatred for America. Obviously, you do not comprehend the seriousness of the unique situation we find ourselves in as Americans. On their worst day, none of our candidates are as devastating to our freedom, liberty, and culture as Obama is.

And to all you people who write me saying both political parties are corrupt and so what's the point in Tea Partying, voting, or even trying, I will not embrace your defeatist attitude. When ten out of twelve spies for Israel said they could not defeat the giants, God called their report "evil." To all you folks who say America is too far gone and we should simply give up, I say take your "evil" report elsewhere!

I love my country and trust God too much to surrender the greatest nation on the planet to those who would destroy her. Don't know 'bout y'all, but I'm fightin' for my country 'til the Lord takes me home.

Mr. Obama, Sharon Jasper is not America! We will not allow you to turn us into a nation of Sharon Jaspers! Sharon Jasper is not my America!

Read more:
Follow us:@AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
History 101

Houston, TX

#855143 Feb 6, 2013
Here, let me show you an example, you pathetic old simpleton. When George Bush Junior invades Iraq to give aid to our enemies should we blow him up with a drone strike in Dallas or whatever pathetic place it is he "lives" in? What's the difference?

Indianapolis, IN

#855145 Feb 6, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Are we discussin armed drones?
And, does the govenment have the right to invade my privacy without just cause? In other words, can the government spy on the private property of the American public in general, without evidence of a crime?
The liberal courts have always objected to this. So, why today it is these same liberals that are promoting this?
That, by itself, is so suspicious it convinces me that it shouldn't be done.
GOP and Feinstein join to fulfill Obama's demand for renewed warrantless eavesdropping

The California Democrat's disgusting rhetoric recalls the worst of Dick Cheney while advancing Obama's agenda

The Democratic Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Dianne Feinstein, took the lead in attacking Wyden, Merkley, Udall and Paul with the most foul Cheneyite accusations, and demanded renewal of the FISA law without any reforms. And then predictably, in virtually identical 37-54 votes, Feinstein and her conservative-Democratic comrades joined with virtually the entire GOP caucus (except for three Senators: Paul, Mike Lee and Dean Heller) to reject each one of the proposed amendments and thus give Obama exactly what he demanded: reform-free renewal of the law (while a few Democratic Senators have displayed genuine, sustained commitment to these issues, most Democrats who voted against FISA renewal yesterday did so symbolically and half-heartedly, knowing and not caring that they would lose as evidenced by the lack of an attempted filibuster).

In other words, Obama successfully relied on Senate Republicans (the ones his supporters depict as the Root of All Evil) along with a dozen of the most militaristic Democrats to ensure that he can continue to eavesdrop on Americans without any warrants, transparency or real oversight. That's the standard coalition that has spent the last four years extending Bush/Cheney theories, eroding core liberties and entrenching endless militarism: Obama + the GOP caucus + Feinstein-type Democrats. As Michelle Richardson, the ACLU's legislative counsel, put it to the Huffington Post: "I bet [Bush] is laughing his ass off."

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#855146 Feb 6, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, drones existed then. A variety of guided drones were used in Vietnam, to include some with video cameras for guidance.
And that's why Ayers was bombing all those government targets while Nixon was president.
Where the fuck did you ever get the idea that Ayers was a friend of Nixon?
You've got to show me this...
You're dumb enough to consider blimps to be drones!!

The only drones in Vietnam were reconnaissance drones. DUH

Drones with missiles, etc are a recent innovation.

Ayers was a friend of Nixon.

Right after you prove that Ayers was bombing with drones during the Nixon Admin, I'll explain his friendship with Nixon,(From whom he got the drones) LOL!!

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) 18 min Tuffet t 239,356
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 52 min They cannot kill ... 10,496
Obama has LEAK under sink. 1 hr TROY the Plumber 36
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 2 hr Raymond 63,546
News Scientists say they have proved climate change ... (Dec '08) 2 hr Patriot AKA Bozo 8,066
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 3 hr CrunchyBacon 105,055
This doesn't seem fair to me. 7 hr Publishers R Fasc... 9

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages