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
N Korea

AOL

#887329 Apr 12, 2013
The world needs to keep an eye on Korea.
Whatever

Gering, NE

#887330 Apr 12, 2013
MONTANA wrote:
Your persistent, laughably naive illusions that you retards have any say in what happens next, have ever really had any, is just that -- an illusion ...Fata Morgana. Don't you feel it, even if you can't articulate it, even the most primitive grunt? It's called powerlessness. It's what your natural state has been all along. It was only all the dirty money that kept people like you afloat, and reproducing -- that and a surfeit of bad food and worse water.
Buh bye ...
Feel better? So much anger inside of you!
Buh bye .....
Whatever

Gering, NE

#887331 Apr 12, 2013
nobamaredux wrote:
Biden claimed a $2,000 deduction for junk that he gave to Goodwill. Another loophole penetrated.
Wasn't it the Clinton's that claimed donated underwear?
Whatever

Gering, NE

#887332 Apr 12, 2013
N Korea wrote:
The world needs to keep an eye on Korea.
Absolutely
okc

Atlanta, GA

#887333 Apr 12, 2013
okc
NJ raider 1

Washington, DC

#887336 Apr 12, 2013
Whatever wrote:
<quoted text>
Feel better? So much anger inside of you!
Buh bye .....
Don't do it bro! If you can erase it, erase it! This retarded bytch will never stop stalking you. Drowning you with oceans of nonsense like the babble of a gnostic oracle who eats, sleeps, & shits cocaine. Hope your rich. You may have just signed a check you can't cashfor real!

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Whatever

Gering, NE

#887337 Apr 12, 2013
NJ raider 1 wrote:
<quoted text> Don't do it bro! If you can erase it, erase it! This retarded bytch will never stop stalking you. Drowning you with oceans of nonsense like the babble of a gnostic oracle who eats, sleeps, & shits cocaine. Hope your rich. You may have just signed a check you can't cashfor real!
TOPIX is nothing more to me than a pass through. I don't have major control issues so I don't feel the need to stalk threads 24/7 as some here do. I don't know the person, but according to you she is an angry person who takes her frustrations out on others. I was wondering if this really helps her feel better about herself. I doubt it.
NJ raider 1

Baltimore, MD

#887338 Apr 13, 2013
You'll find out soon enough bro, just as son as she reads your post. I understand your position but, you gotta come out guns a blazing. Alot of folks on this thread is on the opposite end of mentally stable. I've never seen you on here before so, it's only right I give you a fair warning!

Judged:

10

10

9

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
PDUPONT

Northampton, MA

#887340 Apr 13, 2013
SapphireInBlue wrote:
President Obama, Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Former President Clinton all decided within the same month to con gays for their votes.
Unless they all 3 sat down together and did some major soul searching on the issue of gay marriage after all 3 were adamantly opposed to it just one month earlier.
Nah...that's even funny.
Ciou.
HEY STUPID! The President came out in favor of marriage equality in May 2012 and the Clintons in May 2013. Same month but a year apart dimwit. Where's the con/ Admitting that all citizens have equal rights?
You're an idiot and a bigot Carol!

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
NJ raider 1

Washington, DC

#887341 Apr 13, 2013
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
HEY STUPID! The President came out in favor of marriage equality in May 2012 and the Clintons in May 2013. Same month but a year apart dimwit. Where's the con/ Admitting that all citizens have equal rights?
You're an idiot and a bigot Carol!
There are laws of nature. How can you argue against that Dupont. Alot of my thinking leans liberal, not all, but alot. But liberals tend to go to far. This has less to do with rights for them, & more to do with making them feel normal. That's like rewarding a Childs bad behavior. There's no way anybody can argue against the laws of nature, or are you saying that humanity has been wrong since the beginning of time? You can say equal rights when they've been denied by God the rights of traditional marriage, the right to bare kids. Laws of nature Dupont! Even magnetic pull recognizes the law of opposites. Lol! No name calling Dupont, state your case against the laws of nature. Please don't compare being gay to being black. It's apples & oranges & rather offensive!

Judged:

10

10

9

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
PDUPONT

Northampton, MA

#887342 Apr 13, 2013
Aunt Mattie Pearl wrote:
<quoted text>
No one cares what you do. You are a menace to individual rights, democracy, a free society and competition in the market place.
Please stay where you're going. Hope it's North Korea. We won't be seeing you again.
Since the hell when are you such a champion of individual liberties liar? You've bragged about voting against the right of your fellow citizens to enter into a civil marriage. You shill for the party that tried to deny citizens the right to vote. The only right you seem to favor is the right to buy military style weapons whose only purpose is to efficiently kill as many people as possible.
You don't really care about democracy either hypocrite. You're a sad devotee of Ayn Rand who hated democracy. Like her you are an egocentric sociopath.
Free market competition? Don't make me laugh. The right wing doesn't want competition, it wants monopoly. When the Walton family moves one of its monstrosities into an area it destroys the competition with low priced goods from countries that pay slave wages and pays its own employees crap as well.
You're an idiot Carol!

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
PDUPONT

Northampton, MA

#887344 Apr 13, 2013
SapphireInBlue wrote:
<quoted text>
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing."
- Adolf Hitler
On November 11, 1938, the Minister of the Interior, Wilhelm Frick, passed Regulations Against Jews' Possession of Weapons. This regulation effectively deprived all Jews of the right to possess firearms or other weapons.
In 1935, Jewish residents were no longer considered citizens to prevent any resistance under the 1938 German Weapons Act.
The 1938 revisions introduced restrictions specifically to prohibit Jews from holding firearms but made it easier for the one-party nazi regime to gain acquisition and transfer of rifles and shotguns as the possession of ammunition.
And then there's China...
Although gun laws in China are becoming difficult to enforce, China's weapons laws are among the world's toughest. Its blanket ban on private ownership of rifles, pistols and even gun replicas is a core tenet of social policy.
Need more?
By the way, Obama has been hellbent on destroying the Republican Party and any and all opposition with the help of his Cheerleaders. Doesn't the notion of a "one-party" system and that one party demonizing law-abiding gun owners even raise a little red flag?
For one thing stupid no one's talking about taking away guns in general, just common sense regulation of military assault weapons which have no other purpose than to kill a lot of people in a very short time and requiring background checks so that a criminal can't just go to a gun show and buy a gun.
Who as governor of California signed the Mulford Act into law that prohibited the carrying of loaded firearms in public or in vehicles? That would be Ronald Reagan.
Who urged passage of the 1994? Again, that would be Ronald Reagan.
Who as governor of Massachusetts signed into law one of the toughest gun laws in the country? Mitt Romney.
By the way nitwit what party took a blood oath to obstruct any legislation no matter how beneficial to the American people and the economy so that they could hobble Obama and make him a one term president? That would be the GOP and they failed.
Your idiocy knows no bounds Carol.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
PDUPONT

Northampton, MA

#887346 Apr 13, 2013
NJ raider 1 wrote:
<quoted text> There are laws of nature. How can you argue against that Dupont. Alot of my thinking leans liberal, not all, but alot. But liberals tend to go to far. This has less to do with rights for them, & more to do with making them feel normal. That's like rewarding a Childs bad behavior. There's no way anybody can argue against the laws of nature, or are you saying that humanity has been wrong since the beginning of time? You can say equal rights when they've been denied by God the rights of traditional marriage, the right to bare kids. Laws of nature Dupont! Even magnetic pull recognizes the law of opposites. Lol! No name calling Dupont, state your case against the laws of nature. Please don't compare being gay to being black. It's apples & oranges & rather offensive!
Same sex pairings are also common among animals. So your assertion that that it's against the laws of nature falls flat.
1. www.telegraph.co.uk › Science › Science News
o Similar
The bottom line is that the opinions of a dwindling number of people like you are not a sufficient reason to deny a certain group of taxpaying citizens equal rights and protections under the law as guaranteed in the Constitution.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
sonicfilter

Fishers, IN

#887347 Apr 13, 2013
Tea party Republicans in New Hampshire want to press criminal charges against state legislators who voted to repeal the state's Stand Your Ground law and kick them out of office.

Two Republican members of the state House of Representatives and a former state GOP chairman have filed a petition to remove 189 members of the state House and file criminal charges against them for their March 27 vote to repeal the controversial gun law. The group claims that the vote violates the lawmakers' oath of office, unconstitutionally challenges the Second Amendment and fails to adhere to state constitutional protections on life.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/12/new-...

so it's not hard to see why the Tea Party polls at 8% favorable.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
sonicfilter

Fishers, IN

#887348 Apr 13, 2013
Why Republicans Should Embrace Change

Nate Cohn lays out the dismal future for the Republican Party if it tries to get by with its present electoral coalition:

The problem for Republicans is simple: They built relatively durable, ideological coalitions immediately before a new generation of socially moderate and diverse voters completely upended the electoral calculus. In 2012, voters over age 30 went for Romney by 1.5 points—a result that shouldn’t surprise observers of the Bush elections. But the persistent and narrow GOP lean of the 2000 and 2004 electorates was overwhelmed by Obama’s 24-point victory among 18-to-29-year-olds. Democratic success with young voters is a product of demographics, not just Obama’s fleeting appeal or Bush’s legacy. Just 58 percent of 18-to-29-year-old voters were white in 2012 and 19 percent said they have no religious affiliation; in comparison, 76 percent of voters over 30 were white and only 10 percent were non-religious.

The ascent of millennial voters has turned the Bush coalition into a coffin—and the coffin could be sealed in 2016. It was frequently observed that a Romney victory would have required a historic performance among white voters, provided that Obama could match his ’08 performance among non-white voters. Bush’s 2004 performance among white voters wouldn’t get it done anymore. In 2016, the math gets even more challenging. If the white share of the electorate declines further, Republicans won’t just need to match their best performance of the last 24 years among white voters, they’ll also need to match their best performance of the last 24 years among non-white voters. If they can’t make the requisite 16-point gain among non-white voters—a tall order, to say the least—then the next Republican candidate will enter truly uncharted territory, potentially needing to win up to 64 percent of the white vote just to break 50 percent of the popular vote.

But there’s an ever better reason for Republicans, and conservatives, to change: GOP policies of the past decade proved utterly bankrupt. An activist foreign policy, tax cuts and financialization, and more heat than light on social issues produced a nation at the end of the Bush years deep in recession, mired in two occupations (one of which continues to this day), and trending away from traditional values. It’s hard to imagine a rout more comprehensive, and it occurred after “conservative” Republicans had held Congress for most of two full presidential terms.

Why would a party even want to go back to that? Why would any but the most hell-bent ideologue want to stick with what hasn’t worked? The GOP might make some terrible missteps in trying to reform, but no one should want it to return to the Bush era and the high-water mark of post-1960s conservatism, even if the party could still win elections playing its old hand. Luckily, philosophical conservatism is deeper and more capacious than the Bush coalition and its failed ideology. A new audience for timeless sources, newly applied, is what the thinking conservative ought to aspire to.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/mccart...

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
sonicfilter

Fishers, IN

#887349 Apr 13, 2013
As families of the victims of the Newtown, Conn., massacre watched from the Senate gallery on Thursday, 68 senators, including 16 Republicans, voted to break a conservative filibuster to allow debate to begin on a bill that would expand background checks for most gun sales.

That a procedural vote was considered a breakthrough demonstrated how hard it has been to get even the most fundamental, common-sense reform of the nation’s inadequate gun laws past the gun lobby. Groups like the National Rifle Association still don’t want a background-check bill to come to a vote, but at least a few Republicans (and almost all Democrats) recognized how popular the bill is, and how politically unwise it would be to kill the effort before it reached the Senate floor.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/12/opinion/the...

Judged:

12

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“wake up”

Since: Jan 10

utica ny

#887350 Apr 13, 2013
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
For one thing stupid no one's talking about taking away guns in general, just common sense regulation of military assault weapons which have no other purpose than to kill a lot of people in a very short time and requiring background checks so that a criminal can't just go to a gun show and buy a gun.
Who as governor of California signed the Mulford Act into law that prohibited the carrying of loaded firearms in public or in vehicles? That would be Ronald Reagan.
Who urged passage of the 1994? Again, that would be Ronald Reagan.
Who as governor of Massachusetts signed into law one of the toughest gun laws in the country? Mitt Romney.
By the way nitwit what party took a blood oath to obstruct any legislation no matter how beneficial to the American people and the economy so that they could hobble Obama and make him a one term president? That would be the GOP and they failed.
Your idiocy knows no bounds Carol.
military assault weapons are regulated ,you can't buy one now.. it is already illegal to sell guns to criminals. it doesn't matter who passes or supports gun controll as it is unconstitutional reguardless of party .
My AK never killed anyone my M1 never made a choice of its own and my SKS won't shoot by itself. None of my guns are assault weapons

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
NJ raider 1

Elizabeth, NJ

#887351 Apr 13, 2013
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
Same sex pairings are also common among animals. So your assertion that that it's against the laws of nature falls flat.
1. www.telegraph.co.uk › Science › Science News
o Similar
The bottom line is that the opinions of a dwindling number of people like you are not a sufficient reason to deny a certain group of taxpaying citizens equal rights and protections under the law as guaranteed in the Constitution.
Where in the constitution does it say man & man & man shall have the same rights as man & woman in regards to marriage? When it speaks on equal rights, it's speaking on the rights of individuals, not the rights of groupings. The constitution also says,"the right to bear arms shall not be infringed apon, yet it's illegal for felons to possess firearms. It's becoming more & more clear Dupont, you want to get rid of the whole damn thing, because you're arguing for more gun laws. Now I'm not against the newly proposed gun laws, but I think it's rather hypocritical of you to use the constitution to push gay marriage, but argue in opposition of the 2nd amendment when it already restricts a group of tax passing citizen their right guaranteed by the constitution. I brought that up because, the majority of felons in America are black, due to unequal rights for blacks to start off with. Now we both know that is fact so, why the big push for gays equal rights, over the rights of others? I don't see you exalting the same energy to get blacks their equal rights guaranteed by the constitution!

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Lily Boca Raton Fl

Boca Raton, FL

#887352 Apr 13, 2013
sonicfilter wrote:
Why Republicans Should Embrace Change
Nate Cohn lays out the dismal future for the Republican Party if it tries to get by with its present electoral coalition:
The problem for Republicans is simple: They built relatively durable, ideological coalitions immediately before a new generation of socially moderate and diverse voters completely upended the electoral calculus. In 2012, voters over age 30 went for Romney by 1.5 points—a result that shouldn’t surprise observers of the Bush elections. But the persistent and narrow GOP lean of the 2000 and 2004 electorates was overwhelmed by Obama’s 24-point victory among 18-to-29-year-olds. Democratic success with young voters is a product of demographics, not just Obama’s fleeting appeal or Bush’s legacy. Just 58 percent of 18-to-29-year-old voters were white in 2012 and 19 percent said they have no religious affiliation; in comparison, 76 percent of voters over 30 were white and only 10 percent were non-religious.
The ascent of millennial voters has turned the Bush coalition into a coffin—and the coffin could be sealed in 2016. It was frequently observed that a Romney victory would have required a historic performance among white voters, provided that Obama could match his ’08 performance among non-white voters. Bush’s 2004 performance among white voters wouldn’t get it done anymore. In 2016, the math gets even more challenging. If the white share of the electorate declines further, Republicans won’t just need to match their best performance of the last 24 years among white voters, they’ll also need to match their best performance of the last 24 years among non-white voters. If they can’t make the requisite 16-point gain among non-white voters—a tall order, to say the least—then the next Republican candidate will enter truly uncharted territory, potentially needing to win up to 64 percent of the white vote just to break 50 percent of the popular vote.
But there’s an ever better reason for Republicans, and conservatives, to change: GOP policies of the past decade proved utterly bankrupt. An activist foreign policy, tax cuts and financialization, and more heat than light on social issues produced a nation at the end of the Bush years deep in recession, mired in two occupations (one of which continues to this day), and trending away from traditional values. It’s hard to imagine a rout more comprehensive, and it occurred after “conservative” Republicans had held Congress for most of two full presidential terms.
Why would a party even want to go back to that? Why would any but the most hell-bent ideologue want to stick with what hasn’t worked? The GOP might make some terrible missteps in trying to reform, but no one should want it to return to the Bush era and the high-water mark of post-1960s conservatism, even if the party could still win elections playing its old hand. Luckily, philosophical conservatism is deeper and more capacious than the Bush coalition and its failed ideology. A new audience for timeless sources, newly applied, is what the thinking conservative ought to aspire to.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/mccart...
We must be grateful for their ignorance
Lily Boca Raton Fl

Boca Raton, FL

#887353 Apr 13, 2013
NJ raider 1 wrote:
<quoted text> Where in the constitution does it say man & man & man shall have the same rights as man & woman in regards to marriage? When it speaks on equal rights, it's speaking on the rights of individuals, not the rights of groupings. The constitution also says,"the right to bear arms shall not be infringed apon, yet it's illegal for felons to possess firearms. It's becoming more & more clear Dupont, you want to get rid of the whole damn thing, because you're arguing for more gun laws. Now I'm not against the newly proposed gun laws, but I think it's rather hypocritical of you to use the constitution to push gay marriage, but argue in opposition of the 2nd amendment when it already restricts a group of tax passing citizen their right guaranteed by the constitution. I brought that up because, the majority of felons in America are black, due to unequal rights for blacks to start off with. Now we both know that is fact so, why the big push for gays equal rights, over the rights of others? I don't see you exalting the same energy to get blacks their equal rights guaranteed by the constitution!
I'd bet money that you've been cruising around gay porn sites

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

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) 8 min JOEL 71,192
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 15 min PEllen 98,873
Dear Abby 12-25 25 min PEllen 1
amy 12-25 27 min PEllen 1
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr Homo Erectus 49,309
Incredible Shots Of Chicago From The Internatio... 1 hr reality is a crutch 1
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 2 hr Learn to Read 182,038
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 1:40 pm PST

NBC Sports 1:40PM
Cutler realizes Bears could be in for changes - NBC Sports
NBC Sports 8:22 PM
Bears re-sign Austen Lane to replace Willie Young
Bleacher Report10:09 PM
Bears vs. Vikings: Breaking Down Minnesota's Game Plan
Bleacher Report 4:00 AM
Breaking Down Colts' Game Plan vs. Titans
Bleacher Report 5:00 AM
Can't-Miss Picks and Matchup Guide