Barack Obama, our next President

Full story: Hampton Roads Daily Press

"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 ...

Comments (Page 40,605)

Showing posts 812,081 - 812,100 of1,033,326
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
TSM

El Paso, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880740
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Homer 2016 wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, that was then and this is now.
Okay let me hear your theory, why is most of the south Republican today when it used to be Democrat?
Since Malcolm made those comments… Nothing has changed since the 60s Blacks still economically depress and still voting for Democrats!!
carol

Orlando, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880741
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Homer 2016 wrote:
<quoted text>
I've yet to see any critical thinking from you, you take everything at face value, although you are good at spinning things to suit your needs.
Well, I do when reason dictates it. What's the point in thinking about things that have already been well thought out? Don't be so foolish, Homer!

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880742
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Conservative justices stress federal overreach in gay marriage case

""A majority of Supreme Court justices expressed concern about a federal law that excludes same-sex couples from marriage in the court's second gay marriage case in history on Wednesday. The probing questions from both wings of the court suggest the law could be struck down in a victory for the gay rights movement, just a day after it appeared unlikely the court would decide the Proposition 8 California case in a way that affirmed gay marriage.
At the arguments, the court's conservative leaning justices asked pointed questions about whether the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act intrudes into states' traditional right to regulate marriage, while the more liberal justices seemed amenable to the argument that DOMA discriminates against gay people and was passed with the intention of excluding an unpopular group. The law prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages even in the nine states and District of Columbia that allow them.
Key swing vote Anthony Kennedy, who has written two landmark opinions upholding gay rights, seemed unconvinced by the argument advanced by attorney Paul Clement that DOMA defines marriage as only between opposite-sex couples to avoid confusion. Clement said that the federal government has an interest in "uniformity," and passed the law to avoid having to treat same-sex couples differently based on whether they live in states that allow gay marriage or not. But Kennedy pointed out that DOMA excludes gay couples from marriage in more than 1,100 federal statutes and laws, which has a substantial impact on the "day to day life" of gay couples and their children. He said the law does not provide uniformity because it affects "only one aspect of marriage."
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg interjected that excluding married couples from sick leave, tax benefits, Social Security survivor benefits, and hundreds of other federal benefits and obligations relegates same-sex couples to a "skim milk marriage," that is substantially worse than what heterosexual couples have access to.
Kennedy joined with conservative colleagues Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito in asking tough questions about whether the federal government was overreaching with the statute. Kennedy said DOMA did not seem to recognize states's "historical" responsibility for marriage and said he thinks the central question of the case is whether the federal government has the authority to regulate marriage.""

----------

You nitwits are on the verge of losing another of your social hatred issues!!~

I'm lovin' it!!
carol

Orlando, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880743
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Jane Says wrote:
<quoted text>Pissing on the Constitution. what the Obama administration has made into an art form.
Well, we know good art when we see it and Obama pissing isn't it. My dad could sign his name in the snow, right down to dotting the "i." Oh it all seems so long ago now...
Jane Says

New York, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880744
Mar 27, 2013
 
dem wrote:
<quoted text>
Lol!
Doubling down on carols dumb.
Hey idiot there are approx. 3 million people in Chicago.
I don't know 2,998,000 of them.
next you'll say Carol was socially promoted, like she's an inner city Democrat.

and we're not surprised 2,998,000 people shun you.
carol

Orlando, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880745
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

You know, Jane, I was just wondering... do you think George Bush set up an easel in the tub or did he just draw his toes from memory? You don't suppose there are photos somewhere? I imagine it gets lonely spending your entire retirement in Texas?

“fairtax.org”

Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880746
Mar 27, 2013
 
It's going to be fun listening to the howls of anger and disgust the rest of this year as the sheeple start to realize they have been duped!!! LMAO!!!

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880747
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Never occurred to you that most blacks disagree with the radicalism of Malcolm X??

Or is your stupidity that overwhelming??

Macolm X never had the support of black Americans.

Malcolm X was a revolutionary and a Radical Muslim. For you to use him as a prop only shows what a moron you are.

Still seething over Rmoney's loss, I see.

Deal with it, you uneducated fool!!
TSM wrote:
<quoted text>
Since Malcolm made those comments… Nothing has changed since the 60s Blacks still economically depress and still voting for Democrats!!
Jane Says

New York, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880748
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Nuculur option wrote:
Conservative justices stress federal overreach in gay marriage case
""A majority of Supreme Court justices expressed concern about a federal law that excludes same-sex couples from marriage in the court's second gay marriage case in history on Wednesday. The probing questions from both wings of the court suggest the law could be struck down in a victory for the gay rights movement, just a day after it appeared unlikely the court would decide the Proposition 8 California case in a way that affirmed gay marriage.
At the arguments, the court's conservative leaning justices asked pointed questions about whether the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act intrudes into states' traditional right to regulate marriage, while the more liberal justices seemed amenable to the argument that DOMA discriminates against gay people and was passed with the intention of excluding an unpopular group. The law prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages even in the nine states and District of Columbia that allow them.
Key swing vote Anthony Kennedy, who has written two landmark opinions upholding gay rights, seemed unconvinced by the argument advanced by attorney Paul Clement that DOMA defines marriage as only between opposite-sex couples to avoid confusion. Clement said that the federal government has an interest in "uniformity," and passed the law to avoid having to treat same-sex couples differently based on whether they live in states that allow gay marriage or not. But Kennedy pointed out that DOMA excludes gay couples from marriage in more than 1,100 federal statutes and laws, which has a substantial impact on the "day to day life" of gay couples and their children. He said the law does not provide uniformity because it affects "only one aspect of marriage."
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg interjected that excluding married couples from sick leave, tax benefits, Social Security survivor benefits, and hundreds of other federal benefits and obligations relegates same-sex couples to a "skim milk marriage," that is substantially worse than what heterosexual couples have access to.
Kennedy joined with conservative colleagues Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito in asking tough questions about whether the federal government was overreaching with the statute. Kennedy said DOMA did not seem to recognize states's "historical" responsibility for marriage and said he thinks the central question of the case is whether the federal government has the authority to regulate marriage.""
----------
You nitwits are on the verge of losing another of your social hatred issues!!~
I'm lovin' it!!
yeah, yeah. and gay marriage will be legal and no longer an issue. and then liberals will demand that men be able to marry underage boys, and rightwingers will object because they're "hateful" and "discriminate." and then that will go to court and pass and no longer be an issue. and then liberals will demand that the words "bride" and "groom" discriminate, because what if a man wants to marry his dog or his pet gerbil? does it matter what sex the animal is? rightwingers will always be so stuffy and outdated.

it'll just never end.
lily boca raton fl

Boca Raton, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880749
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

carol wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for waving your liberal sign of intolerance once again.
He was most definitely suspended. Only because of public outcry did these liberals tuck their tails between their legs, apologize and reverse the decision.
But you would have fired that lifeguard for saving a person's life because of a liberal politically correct policy and then gone crawling back to offer him his job back after another public outcry and other lifeguards quitting in protest.
Liberals do the right thing only when doing the wrong thing backfires.
Maybe you can explain that to me. I've never quite understood that mentality.
Pretty sure you would know.
I call bullshyt
Homer 2016

Bethlehem, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880750
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

dem wrote:
<quoted text>
Glad you are here to teach the history teacher history.
I just wish someone would get a hold of all her former students. Can you imagine the historical inaccuracies they are out there spreading through the populace? Although judging from the rightwingers posts on here the damage is probably insurmountable.

Class, what happened after Hitler crashed the Santa Maria into Plymouth Rock, what happened to all the tea?
carol

Orlando, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880751
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Jane Says wrote:
<quoted text>next you'll say Carol was socially promoted, like she's an inner city Democrat.
and we're not surprised 2,998,000 people shun you.
Huh? Is he Amish? No one's ever answered my question, are there any black Amish? Latino?(Pimped out buggy?)

Since: May 11

Chambersburg, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880752
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

mdbuilder wrote:
<quoted text>
Democrats have been the instigators and propagators of all the racial strife in America since it began. What you are essentially saying is, if we'd had no southern democratic slave states, we wouldn't have had a Civil War. I couldn't agree more.
How did you right whiners get so GD dumb?

Republicans from the South all voted no on the Civil Rights Act.
Jane Says

New York, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880753
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

carol wrote:
You know, Jane, I was just wondering... do you think George Bush set up an easel in the tub or did he just draw his toes from memory? You don't suppose there are photos somewhere? I imagine it gets lonely spending your entire retirement in Texas?
if you're really curious, see how Lily handles spending her entire life alone in FL posting on topix and then you'll know. the neighbors call her the Howard Hughes of Boca Raton.
lily boca raton fl

Boca Raton, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880754
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Homer 2016 wrote:
<quoted text>I said forefathers not founding fathers, Carol with her typical spin. And you missed the point as usual.
I never made reference to a specific individual but a group of individuals(our forefathers).
I've yet to see any critical thinking from you, you take everything at face value, although you are good at spinning things to suit your needs.
Critical thinking is not permitted with evangelicals. I'm serious.
It has been banished in Texas public schools. They think it's against the Lord.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880755
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

dem wrote:
<quoted text>
Still sour grapes from your crushing defeat last November, old man?
Pun intended.
Naw, It's you low information voters, ie.'Obama Money et al, that have a vote.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880756
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Homer 2016 wrote:
<quoted text>Cheers, good stuff Sonic.
I give up trying to teach rightwingers history, let them live in their fantasy world.
as long as it keeps keeping them out of the WH more power to 'em.
Jane Says

New York, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880757
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Homer 2016 wrote:
<quoted text>I just wish someone would get a hold of all her former students. Can you imagine the historical inaccuracies they are out there spreading through the populace? Although judging from the rightwingers posts on here the damage is probably insurmountable.
Class, what happened after Hitler crashed the Santa Maria into Plymouth Rock, what happened to all the tea?
they might not know anyway. i think the Obama administration has been injecting his name into every history book and rewriting events as if he was there and not born in Kenya.

“fairtax.org”

Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880758
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Nuculur option wrote:
Conservative justices stress federal overreach in gay marriage case
""A majority of Supreme Court justices expressed concern about a federal law that excludes same-sex couples from marriage in the court's second gay marriage case in history on Wednesday. The probing questions from both wings of the court suggest the law could be struck down in a victory for the gay rights movement, just a day after it appeared unlikely the court would decide the Proposition 8 California case in a way that affirmed gay marriage.
At the arguments, the court's conservative leaning justices asked pointed questions about whether the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act intrudes into states' traditional right to regulate marriage, while the more liberal justices seemed amenable to the argument that DOMA discriminates against gay people and was passed with the intention of excluding an unpopular group. The law prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages even in the nine states and District of Columbia that allow them.
Key swing vote Anthony Kennedy, who has written two landmark opinions upholding gay rights, seemed unconvinced by the argument advanced by attorney Paul Clement that DOMA defines marriage as only between opposite-sex couples to avoid confusion. Clement said that the federal government has an interest in "uniformity," and passed the law to avoid having to treat same-sex couples differently based on whether they live in states that allow gay marriage or not. But Kennedy pointed out that DOMA excludes gay couples from marriage in more than 1,100 federal statutes and laws, which has a substantial impact on the "day to day life" of gay couples and their children. He said the law does not provide uniformity because it affects "only one aspect of marriage."
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg interjected that excluding married couples from sick leave, tax benefits, Social Security survivor benefits, and hundreds of other federal benefits and obligations relegates same-sex couples to a "skim milk marriage," that is substantially worse than what heterosexual couples have access to.
Kennedy joined with conservative colleagues Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito in asking tough questions about whether the federal government was overreaching with the statute. Kennedy said DOMA did not seem to recognize states's "historical" responsibility for marriage and said he thinks the central question of the case is whether the federal government has the authority to regulate marriage.""
----------
You nitwits are on the verge of losing another of your social hatred issues!!~
I'm lovin' it!!
Seems like they are saying it's a state's right problem. HAHAHAHA!!! Now if they uphold prop 8 it will be returned to the states. Let me be clear. The government has no business in the marriage business.(federal,state, or local) Let me also be clear. You can marry your dog as far as I'm concerned.
Jane Says

New York, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#880759
Mar 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

carol wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, we know good art when we see it and Obama pissing isn't it. My dad could sign his name in the snow, right down to dotting the "i." Oh it all seems so long ago now...
not by liberal standards unless there is excrement on the Virgin Mary and/or some ants crawling all over Jesus or some other well known Christian.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 812,081 - 812,100 of1,033,326
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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 Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••