Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1263805 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.

No Surprize

Seminole, FL

#927269 Jun 18, 2013
NJ raider 1 wrote:
<quoted text> Like I said, he said out of his own mouth, if he could end the war without ending slavery, he would. Now he may not be pro slavery but, he wasn't against it! A true leader would lay their life on the line for what they believe in like MLK. Lincoln just tried to appeal to both sides!
The New KKK has double since Obama has been elected, Libs are KKK every day, and twice on Sundays racist f*ck denigrate black people. Obama has done more to enslave blacks, Klan Parent Hood is killing blacks, the Klu Klux Klan loves Obama, the KKK would have committed suicide if Herman Cain was elected



The Government Cheese and Welfare Crowd...The Blind Lead You idiots...

It's the culture...
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#927270 Jun 18, 2013
Death of Tenzing wrote:
<quoted text>
Just as in the South, you've got black parts of town and white parts. The smaller the town the clearer the demarcation but the cities still have distinct divisions along lines of color. In small towns down here there still is a "wrong side of the tracks".
Suburbs of Northern cities are even more segregated than the cities.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#927271 Jun 18, 2013
Death of Tenzing wrote:
<quoted text>
Legalizing pot is just a by-product of smaller government. Meanwhile, you voted for Bush his second term after proving himself to be one of the LEAST fiscal conservatives in modern history; taking a surplus and turning it into the biggest deficit since WWII.
I'm sure you've got some principles in there somewhere, you just let the Republicans sucker you every time.
Bush vs. Kerry was an easy choice.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#927272 Jun 18, 2013
Death of Tenzing wrote:
<quoted text>
Out of that pile of BS let's just grab the low hanging fruit and go from there:
Before the Voting Rights Act of 1965 most blacks in the south were disenfranchised.
Go ahead, explain away.
All those states elected Democrats to Congress when blacks were disenfranchised and Republicans ever since.

Go ahead, explain away.
Whatever

Gering, NE

#927273 Jun 18, 2013
NJ raider 1 wrote:
<quoted text> Like I said, he said out of his own mouth, if he could end the war without ending slavery, he would. Now he may not be pro slavery but, he wasn't against it! A true leader would lay their life on the line for what they believe in like MLK. Lincoln just tried to appeal to both sides!
You need to re-read the quote from Wikipedia

"Lincoln often expressed moral opposition to slavery in public and private.[1] Initially, he expected to bring about the eventual extinction of slavery by stopping its further expansion into any U.S. territory, and by proposing compensated emancipation (an offer Congress applied to Washington, D.C.) in his early presidency. Lincoln stood by the Republican Party platform in 1860, which stated that slavery should not be allowed to expand into any more territories. Lincoln believed that the extension of slavery in the South, Mid-west, and Western lands would inhibit "free labor on free soil". In the 1850s, Lincoln was politically attacked as an abolitionist, but he did not consider himself one; he did not call for the immediate end of slavery everywhere in the U.S. until the proposed 13th Amendment became part of his party platform for the 1864 election.[2]"

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

Yes, Lincoln was morally against slavery. His initial attempts was to stop slavery expansion thinking that it would eventually abolish it. As the quote states he joined in support of the 13th Amendment when it became part of the Republican platform in 1864.

You are very misguided to think Dems were always pro-Civil Rights and the Reps were ever anti-Civil Rights
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#927274 Jun 18, 2013
leosnana wrote:
<quoted text>Strom Thurmond raped and impregnated the family's black made the same year that Fitzgerald wrote "The Great Gatsby." (Maher) Of course, you'll be glad to know he was a democrat when he committed the crime; he didn't become a Republican until 1964. lol
Hard to believe that our foremost grammar cop said "made."

How do you know it was rape?
Aunt Bettie Lou

Orlando, FL

#927275 Jun 18, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
Black migration to the North was for economic reasons, which were short-lived, leaving blacks trapped in poverty in the North.
Their plight was - and still is - very sad. The urban problems in Chicago and New York stemmed from blacks being turned away from even low skilled industrial work.

Being trapped in poverty is a sad and accurate statement.

Can there even be a possible solution?
NJ raider 1

Baltimore, MD

#927276 Jun 18, 2013
Whatever wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is your response just on the last page to the comment below-
Whatever wrote:
<quoted text>
"You do know Lincoln was Republican and it was the Dems who fought changes that allowed blacks more freedoms after the war. How does this fit into racist theory?"
I've noticed you have a thing for putting words in peoples mouths. Thus whole conversation didn't start on race, at least on my behalf. It started because one of you republicans continuously drifted in the past on a topic, I forget exactly what it was but, I simply stated that you all use the past as a reference but conveniently for get the 2 parties swapped. So what are you talking about? Go back & see for yourself. Now if you want my opinion, the racism you all show on this thread as republicans, one can definitely assume that theory of all republicans being racist. To me it has less to do with racism & more to do with you republicans feeling some sense of entitlement, "like Daddy knows best." It's commonsense that the 2 parties swapped identities. What use to be a blue South is now mostly red & vice versa in the north. What a coincidence!
Whatever

Gering, NE

#927277 Jun 18, 2013
Bill Ayers wants Obama tried at the Hague for war crimes.

So Progressives here, do you think Ayers is totally radical or do you agree?
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#927278 Jun 18, 2013
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
This is the 21st century. It is a shame that the zionist leaders of israel have chosen to adopt the genocidal policies of Nazi Germany. Unlike the United States which was disgusted by Hitler and pretty much stopped forced sterilization of the mentally ill and prisoners after World War I.(Except, of course, for the backwards Southern States which actully practiced eugenics up until the 60's.) Still, we have advanced in our fight for civil rights. Israel has not. That is a FACT.
Planned Parenthood continues to practice eugenics today.
Whatever

Gering, NE

#927279 Jun 18, 2013
Aunt Bettie Lou wrote:
Just want to make it crystal clear again that not all democrats were southern democrats and not all democrats tried to keep the CRA of 1964 from passing.
Just want to make that crystal clear again.
I think people in the middle of this discussion over stated their positions or implied things they did not mean to. You are right NOT all Dems were against the CRA, not all Southern Reps joined the Rep party because they were racist, etc.
Aunt Bettie Lou

Orlando, FL

#927280 Jun 18, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
Galt and Carol differ on abortion, an issue that is nothing but a red herring in electoral politics.
Democrats and Independents also differ within their parties on abortion.

It's not a partisan issue as some on the left seem to think it is.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#927281 Jun 18, 2013
Aunt Bettie Lou wrote:
<quoted text>
Their plight was - and still is - very sad. The urban problems in Chicago and New York stemmed from blacks being turned away from even low skilled industrial work.
Being trapped in poverty is a sad and accurate statement.
Can there even be a possible solution?
Return to the South where there is more economic opportunity and lower living costs.
Whatever

Gering, NE

#927282 Jun 18, 2013
NJ raider 1 wrote:
<quoted text> I've noticed you have a thing for putting words in peoples mouths. Thus whole conversation didn't start on race, at least on my behalf. It started because one of you republicans continuously drifted in the past on a topic, I forget exactly what it was but, I simply stated that you all use the past as a reference but conveniently for get the 2 parties swapped. So what are you talking about? Go back & see for yourself. Now if you want my opinion, the racism you all show on this thread as republicans, one can definitely assume that theory of all republicans being racist. To me it has less to do with racism & more to do with you republicans feeling some sense of entitlement, "like Daddy knows best." It's commonsense that the 2 parties swapped identities. What use to be a blue South is now mostly red & vice versa in the north. What a coincidence!
When I pulled forward your posts and they state as I said then that is not putting words in your mouth.

You went over the edge in your claims. Rather than attempt to regain credibility by either remaining silent or softening your claims you have made the wrong decision to continue to deny them and to continue finger pointing.

You cannot erase history but move forward from it. But you tread on troubled war when you claim Dems have always been pro-Blacks this will be quickly corrected.

Over reacting and making racist, bigoted claims was NOT the way to deal with it.
Aunt Bettie Lou

Orlando, FL

#927283 Jun 18, 2013
NJ raider 1 wrote:
<quoted text> I've noticed you have a thing for putting words in peoples mouths. Thus whole conversation didn't start on race, at least on my behalf. It started because one of you republicans continuously drifted in the past on a topic, I forget exactly what it was but, I simply stated that you all use the past as a reference but conveniently for get the 2 parties swapped. So what are you talking about? Go back & see for yourself. Now if you want my opinion, the racism you all show on this thread as republicans, one can definitely assume that theory of all republicans being racist. To me it has less to do with racism & more to do with you republicans feeling some sense of entitlement, "like Daddy knows best." It's commonsense that the 2 parties swapped identities. What use to be a blue South is now mostly red & vice versa in the north. What a coincidence!
Your premise that the two parties "swapped" is grossly inaccurate.

Your bias is just clouding your thinking.

The problems of urban poverty among blacks is now predominantly in the northern cities.

So does that mean the northern blue states are racists because of the urban poverty among blacks?

The southern red states became a mix of northerners and middle class southerners by the late 1960s after the black exodus. Why would that mean they are still racists?

Can you see where you're not really thinking this through?

“My Life Is A Shell Game”

Since: May 07

Lapeer, MI

#927284 Jun 18, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
One can desire to place some limits on acceptable behavior in the workplace without being homophobic.
If an Insurance Agent comes to work as a cross-dresser or a Dental Hygienist wants to dress S&M wearing a whip and black leathers, their employers have every right to fire them.

Sister Boom-Boom or RuPaul working the Pharmacy Counter at WalGreens would depress sales.

“My Life Is A Shell Game”

Since: May 07

Lapeer, MI

#927285 Jun 18, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
Walmart prices are low because of aggressive purchasing and low overhead, winning practices for any business.
Build a better mousetrap and the world beats a path to your door.

Socialists hate the concept.

They'd rather beat a path to the Magic Negro's Welfare Door.
Whatever

Gering, NE

#927286 Jun 18, 2013
NJ raider 1 wrote:
<quoted text> Now if you want my opinion, the racism you all show on this thread as republicans, one can definitely assume that theory of all republicans being racist.
Missed this gem on the first reading.

You have no room to complain about anyone here if you insist on making sweeping and in most cases unsupported claims against all of the opposition who post here.

You are as guilty as the other guy.

“My Life Is A Shell Game”

Since: May 07

Lapeer, MI

#927287 Jun 18, 2013
Fenris the Big Bad Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>
We should beat that French phag with a rubber hose.....
And if he likes it.....what next?
NJ raider 1

Baltimore, MD

#927288 Jun 18, 2013
Whatever wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to re-read the quote from Wikipedia
"Lincoln often expressed moral opposition to slavery in public and private.[1] Initially, he expected to bring about the eventual extinction of slavery by stopping its further expansion into any U.S. territory, and by proposing compensated emancipation (an offer Congress applied to Washington, D.C.) in his early presidency. Lincoln stood by the Republican Party platform in 1860, which stated that slavery should not be allowed to expand into any more territories. Lincoln believed that the extension of slavery in the South, Mid-west, and Western lands would inhibit "free labor on free soil". In the 1850s, Lincoln was politically attacked as an abolitionist, but he did not consider himself one; he did not call for the immediate end of slavery everywhere in the U.S. until the proposed 13th Amendment became part of his party platform for the 1864 election.[2]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln_...
Yes, Lincoln was morally against slavery. His initial attempts was to stop slavery expansion thinking that it would eventually abolish it. As the quote states he joined in support of the 13th Amendment when it became part of the Republican platform in 1864.
You are very misguided to think Dems were always pro-Civil Rights and the Reps were ever anti-Civil Rights
You're misguided sir. I clearly stated the opposite. Stop putting words in my mouth! Bettie Lou please tell him how this conversation started. I know he can look for himself but, he refuses to. I said in so many words"the Republican party use to be the Democrat party." Now your saying I said that Dems were always procivil right & the republicans were always against it. Not hardly sir!

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 Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 6 min litesong 54,326
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 11 min scirocco 70,147
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 12 min Jacques Ottawa 194,616
Truly evil folks 2 hr Concern Citizen 5
News Four Dead in Bridgeview Head-On Collision (Jul '14) 2 hr MyNameIsToby 75
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 3 hr PEllen 100,284
Chicago One Direction concert on the 23rd! 5 hr Tristascottcom 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages