Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1264913 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.

SHADOW

Boerne, TX

#955467 Jul 28, 2013
USAsince1680 wrote:
FACTS FROM THE FBI:
In 2011, there were 4,000 whites arrested for murder or manslaughter (293 juveniles) and 4,149 blacks (351 juveniles.
In 2011, there were 9,504 whites arrested for forcible rape (1,284 juveniles) and 4,811 blacks (753 juveniles).
In 2011, there were 194,981 whites arrested for aggravated assault (17,372 juveniles) and 102,597 blacks (13,176 juveniles).
In 2011, there were 670,678 whites arrested for Larceny-theft (124,185 juveniles) and 281,197 blacks (66,504 juveniles).
In 2011, there were 151,934 whites arrested for burglary (28,388 juveniles) and 71,244 blacks (18,347 juveniles).
In 2011, there were 624,330 whites arrested for "other assaults" and 304,083 blacks.
In 2011, there were 783,564 whites arrested for drug abuse (83,508 juveniles) and 371,248 blacks (26,531 juveniles).
In 2011, there were 788,175 whites arrested for driving under the influence (7,026 juveniles) and 111,480 blacks (417 juveniles).
In 2011, there were 312,105 whites arrested for "liquor laws" (61,403 juveniles) and 51,445 blacks (4754 juveniles).
In 2011, there were 339,019 whites (7578 juveniles) arrested for Drunkenness and 64,268 blacks (852 juveniles).
What does this tell us? With only 59.5% of the prison population being white...they are grossly under represented.
http://www.bop.gov/news/quick.jsp#2
Now go back and look at the total numbers of both whites and blacks and see the startling percent of total blacks that do these crimes.
There are many more whites in the US than black.
You LIE by ommition uSmsinceforever. you are sick.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#955468 Jul 28, 2013
Death of Tenzing wrote:
<quoted text>
Excellent, that'd put an end to a whole bunch of counter-productive nonsense. Give them the Territory of South Florida, they seem fond of it. A lot could just stay there as they did for two thousand years before the establishment of the Nation of Israel.
Mixing Israelis with NYC Bocajews would create a civil war.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#955469 Jul 28, 2013
endeavor wrote:
<quoted text>
Up mighty early, aren't you, Perfesser Fartsack? Did an unchanged Depends wake you?
Let's see, Eman, over 500 dumbass posts like this in just two weeks since July 13 using this new login. At this rate it won't take you long to reach another 25,000 you no-life moron.
Mission accomplished!
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#955470 Jul 28, 2013
Drudge Headline"

"Weiner Vows to Stick It Out"
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#955471 Jul 28, 2013
Realtime wrote:
<quoted text>Those numbers can't possibly be accurate for Vietnam and I suppose other wars as well. Certainly one in five Vietnam era vets didn't end up in prison and even more certainly those men didn't make up i/5 of the US prison population.
There are various sites that debunk many of the "Myths of Vietnam."
During the late sixties America's courts offered service to nation as an alternative to long jail and even prison sentences and also, many a father marched his son to the recruiters office as a way to get them away from drugs, a girl etc. Many Vietnam vets were doomed from day one to get themselves or worse, a good soldier, badly injured of killed.
True that many of that eras vets found their way to prison__but not that many.
Your fellow travelers on the left will say anything to paint veterans in a bad light.

Your observation that enlistment was often an alternative to jail for minor offenses is correct, and not a bad idea.
LCN Llin

United States

#955472 Jul 28, 2013
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>so you are now saying that people preferred & wanted the Great Depression to continue which is what FDR's Social & Economical policies did was prolong the Great Depression.
You might read a volume to two of history to see the error of your post.
sonicfilter

Fishers, IN

#955473 Jul 28, 2013
SHADOW wrote:
<quoted text>
Now go back and look at the total numbers of both whites and blacks and see the startling percent of total blacks that do these crimes.
There are many more whites in the US than black.
You LIE by ommition uSmsinceforever. you are sick.
do you know that 84% of the whites who are murdered were killed by a white person?

i hear that the Dems in Congress will soon be calling for a special committee to investigate the epidemic of white on white crime. i can't wait for FOX to start yelling about the 'faux' scandal.
Tits Magee

Luxembourg

#955474 Jul 28, 2013
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
J'aime votre philosophie de la vie et vos tentatives pour nous faire voir que nous nous trompons.
Ils ont tort, vous n'avez pas tort. Vous êtes juste très timide, très prudent. Mais à l'intérieur se cache l'âme d'un tigre. Peut-être que je veux mourir au bout de vos mains?

“We doing better...”

Since: Jul 08

we've got to do more

#955475 Jul 28, 2013
Realtime wrote:
<quoted text>Those numbers can't possibly be accurate for Vietnam and I suppose other wars as well. Certainly one in five Vietnam era vets didn't end up in prison and even more certainly those men didn't make up i/5 of the US prison population.
There are various sites that debunk many of the "Myths of Vietnam."
During the late sixties America's courts offered service to nation as an alternative to long jail and even prison sentences and also, many a father marched his son to the recruiters office as a way to get them away from drugs, a girl etc. Many Vietnam vets were doomed from day one to get themselves or worse, a good soldier, badly injured of killed.
True that many of that eras vets found their way to prison__but not that many.
These were the facts from the study present in the 2004 study. Of course, the Justice Department in 2004 would have been Gonzales, right? What fact of law didn't he misrepresent/misinterpret in order to give Dumbya & Co. what they wanted...torture, rendition, stop loss? OTOH, my dad served in Vietnam and lost some friends there, but had two within that 1986 time limit that killed guys in property disputes, which made the study somewhat feasible to me; however, both were acquitted.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#955476 Jul 28, 2013
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>you missed the point yes the can and they proved it with Nestor and legal.
Property Rights: The Hidden Issue of Social Security Reform
By Charles E. Rounds Jr.
April 19, 2000
Executive Summary
One of the most enduring myths of Social Security is that a worker has a legal right to his Social Security benefits. Many workers assume that, if they pay Social Security taxes into the system, they have some sort of legal guarantee to the system’s benefits. The truth is exactly the opposite. It has long been law that there is no legal right to Social Security. In two important cases, Helvering v. Davis and Flemming v. Nestor, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Social Security taxes are simply taxes and convey no property or contractual rights to Social Security benefits.
As a result, a worker’s retirement security is entirely dependent on the political decisions of the president and Congress. Benefits may be reduced or even eliminated at any time. Given the program’s looming financial crisis, benefit cutbacks are increasingly likely. Therefore, the entirely political nature of Social Security places workers’ retirement security at considerable risk. Indeed, Congress has already arbitrarily reduced Social Security benefits of some groups of workers. Moreover, because Social Security benefits are not a worker’s property, they are not inheritable.
In contrast, a privatized Social Security system, based on individual accounts, would provide workers with the benefits and the safeguards of true ownership.
http://www.cato.org/publications/social-secur...
No they can't. I gave you the link to the court decision. I suggest you read IT instead of relying on a libertarian think tank that prints only half the truth.

The Nestor case was a very specific case and the court addressed that in their decision...they said, "THIS IS NOT TO SAY, HOWEVER, THAT CONGRESS MAY EXERCISE ITS POWER TO MODIFY THE STATUTORY SCHEME FREE OF ALL CONSTITUTIONAL RESTRAINT."

They went on to say that the Due Process clause of the constitution would apply and "interpose a bar" if the action of Congress manifested itself as "utterly lacking in rational justification." They went on to explain that in the Nestor case Congress was only justified because it was determined it was "rational for Congress to have concluded that the public purse should not be utilized to contribute to the support of those deported..."

You people are so gullible.

Judged:

10

10

9

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#955477 Jul 28, 2013
LCN Llin wrote:
<quoted text>
You might read a volume to two of history to see the error of your post.
no you might want to read a volume to two of history to see the error of your post and go back to 1937 when the SCOTUS issued there ruling that Social Security is a tax just like any other tax and no such thing as a Social Security Trust Fund and Remember Taxes are the Property of the Federal Government and if you remember it was Jimmy Carter & Congress that were the last ones to reduce Social Security Benefits.

Michael Tanner Talks about Social Security

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Social Security’s Sham Guarantee

By Michael D. Tanner

May 29, 2005

http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/s...

Judged:

13

13

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Tits Magee

Luxembourg

#955478 Jul 28, 2013
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
Je ne me souviens pas de cette façon.
C'est parce que vous ne vous souvenez pas de moi dans mon uniforme resplendissant ... ou, peut-être hors de lui? Sûrement vous souvenez de mon épée gravée?

Judged:

14

14

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Shabbetai Tzvi

Waynesboro, MS

#955479 Jul 28, 2013
Fenris the Big Bad Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>
Every last Israeli should gather up their belongings and immigrate to the US. Its just a matter of time; Israel is a lost cause....
Oy...

Judged:

15

15

15

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#955480 Jul 28, 2013
Tits Magee wrote:
<quoted text>
Ils ont tort, vous n'avez pas tort. Vous êtes juste très timide, très prudent. Mais à l'intérieur se cache l'âme d'un tigre. Peut-être que je veux mourir au bout de vos mains?
Au moins vous n'avez pas dire que j'ai eu l'âme d'un cougar. Cela aurait eu un sens totalement différent.:0)

Judged:

15

14

14

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Waxman

Windsor, CT

#955482 Jul 28, 2013
USAsince1680 wrote:
FACTS FROM THE FBI:
In 2011, there were 4,000 whites arrested for murder or manslaughter (293 juveniles) and 4,149 blacks (351 juveniles.
In 2011, there were 9,504 whites arrested for forcible rape (1,284 juveniles) and 4,811 blacks (753 juveniles).
In 2011, there were 194,981 whites arrested for aggravated assault (17,372 juveniles) and 102,597 blacks (13,176 juveniles).
In 2011, there were 670,678 whites arrested for Larceny-theft (124,185 juveniles) and 281,197 blacks (66,504 juveniles).
In 2011, there were 151,934 whites arrested for burglary (28,388 juveniles) and 71,244 blacks (18,347 juveniles).
In 2011, there were 624,330 whites arrested for "other assaults" and 304,083 blacks.
In 2011, there were 783,564 whites arrested for drug abuse (83,508 juveniles) and 371,248 blacks (26,531 juveniles).
In 2011, there were 788,175 whites arrested for driving under the influence (7,026 juveniles) and 111,480 blacks (417 juveniles).
In 2011, there were 312,105 whites arrested for "liquor laws" (61,403 juveniles) and 51,445 blacks (4754 juveniles).
In 2011, there were 339,019 whites (7578 juveniles) arrested for Drunkenness and 64,268 blacks (852 juveniles).
What does this tell us? With only 59.5% of the prison population being white...they are grossly under represented.
http://www.bop.gov/news/quick.jsp#2
How can you say that based on just the above counts?

How many are repeat offenders?

You think based on emotion, simpleton.

For crimes other than murder, aggravated assault & rape, a first time offender may just get a suspended sentence, unless they are a repeat offender or have a rap sheet.

What I find astonishing is only 13.1% of the population was black as of 2012:

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000...

What's even more astonishing is 18% of the inmate breakdown have Mexican Citizenship!!!!

http://www.bop.gov/news/quick.jsp#2

Yet, you on the left want to let them all in so you fascists can get the vote!

You better stick to slogans & stay generic using the race card.

You obviously are not a deep thinker, simpleton. You are what they call, a useful idiot, libtard.

Judged:

18

18

17

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#955483 Jul 28, 2013
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
No they can't. I gave you the link to the court decision. I suggest you read IT instead of relying on a libertarian think tank that prints only half the truth.
The Nestor case was a very specific case and the court addressed that in their decision...they said, "THIS IS NOT TO SAY, HOWEVER, THAT CONGRESS MAY EXERCISE ITS POWER TO MODIFY THE STATUTORY SCHEME FREE OF ALL CONSTITUTIONAL RESTRAINT."
They went on to say that the Due Process clause of the constitution would apply and "interpose a bar" if the action of Congress manifested itself as "utterly lacking in rational justification." They went on to explain that in the Nestor case Congress was only justified because it was determined it was "rational for Congress to have concluded that the public purse should not be utilized to contribute to the support of those deported..."
You people are so gullible.
You Pseudo Liberals are gullible and all legal which Jimmy Carter Cut & reduced Social Security benefits but didnt eliminate them.

and here is an article since you dont remember Jimmy Carter doing it and Obama suggesting the same reducing Social Security.

Fri Apr 12, 2013 at 06:26 AM PDT.

President Obama Has Made Himself a Lame Duck

It's true that President Obama isn't the first Democratic president to propose cuts to Social Security. Jimmy Carter successfully cut Social Security.

A proposal from President Jimmy Carter in 1977 proposed indexing changes that effectively cut benefits for future retirees.
Right. Carter not only changed the index, he proposed doing so in a way that reduced benefits more than chained-CPI would. Carter also scaled back eligibility rules for Social Security's disability insurance.

How'd that work out for Democrats?

Update

Carter's Social Security cuts left the door wide open for Ronald Reagan and the Republican Party to become the defenders of Social Security. Carter's mistakes in Iran were his own but Carter's cuts to Social Security hurt the Democratic party for a generation.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/04/12/1201... #

Judged:

13

13

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Realtime

Deltona, FL

#955484 Jul 28, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
Your fellow travelers on the left will say anything to paint veterans in a bad light.
Your observation that enlistment was often an alternative to jail for minor offenses is correct, and not a bad idea.
It was the worst idea imaginable during war. Many of those guys were back home in a month or two via a casket, many more are still sitting around VA hospital chewing up tax dollars__Yes, the Vietnam war is still being paid for.

It was so bad in 1968 and 1969 that the infantry company commanders wanted draftees only and, depending on the jurisdiction the offenses were not minor in any regard.

Judged:

13

13

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#955485 Jul 28, 2013
Realtime wrote:
<quoted text>Those numbers can't possibly be accurate for Vietnam and I suppose other wars as well. Certainly one in five Vietnam era vets didn't end up in prison and even more certainly those men didn't make up i/5 of the US prison population.
There are various sites that debunk many of the "Myths of Vietnam."
During the late sixties America's courts offered service to nation as an alternative to long jail and even prison sentences and also, many a father marched his son to the recruiters office as a way to get them away from drugs, a girl etc. Many Vietnam vets were doomed from day one to get themselves or worse, a good soldier, badly injured of killed.
True that many of that eras vets found their way to prison__but not that many.
Read about the lies of your leftwing buddies, from a Justice Department site with a link:

Veterans are much less likely to be in prison or jail than non-veterans.

"In 1998 there were an estimated
25,062,400 veterans in the United
States population, including 225,700
veterans held in the Nation’s prisons
and jails. Males comprised 95% of all
veterans and 99% of those veterans in
prison and jail. Among adult males in
1998, there were 937 incarcerated
veterans per 100,000 veteran
residents, up from 571 per 100,000 in
1985. Despite the increase, male
veterans were incarcerated at less than
half the rate of adult male nonveterans
(1,971 per 100,000) in 1998.
Since 1985 the number of U.S. veter-
ans has declined by nearly 3 million, an
average decline of 1% per year. The
number of male veterans dropped from
26,962,000 in 1985 to 23,834,100 in
1998, while the number of female
veterans rose from 1,044,700 to
1,228,300. The number in prison or jail
rose from 154,600 in 1985 to 225,700
in 1998, an increase of 46%. However,
during this period the number of
nonveteran inmates rose 172%. Veter-
ans accounted for 12% of all inmates
in 1998, down from 21% in 1985.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/vpj.pdf

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Waxman

Windsor, CT

#955486 Jul 28, 2013
Sasha Cohen wrote:
<quoted text>The next time your daughter is drugged, raped and kidnapped by a white man, just tell them that it was a black man and have the FBI look for her based on that description.
Why did you say something this bizarre?

Why would you suggest someone commit a crime.

Your remark is absurd and juvenile.

Judged:

16

16

16

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Waxman

Windsor, CT

#955487 Jul 28, 2013
White House doubles down on vow Obama won't agree to more spending cuts

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/07/28/wh...

Yet this is what the American people have had to do with Median income down significantly for the middle class for the last four years.

America does not want to become Detroit, Obama.

Judged:

16

16

16

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
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 13 min Dr Guru MD CEO CF... 194,790
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 30 min Michael Satterfield 100,318
abby8-4-15 31 min abby 10
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 2 hr forgotten memories 6,263
News Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 3 hr CDC 52,074
amy 8-4 3 hr blunt advice 4
Song Title Game (Dec '11) 4 hr boundary painter 1,199
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages