Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1507805 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.

John Galt

Temecula, CA

#978701 Sep 8, 2013
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
You have no idea how many countries will join with Obama should he take military action against Syria. However, we KNOW for a FACT that Bush went to WAR with only three allies. Guess you must consider hi a bigger "Mad Man" than Obama. After all, Obama is not putting boots on the ground.
Bush had a declaration of war from Congress.

Obama will get his butt kicked by Congress.
Shoestrang

Radcliff, KY

#978702 Sep 8, 2013
"Under Attack" is a real wack job.huh? Don't u know they will come get you BOY!!!

“Bill Clinton could have ”

Since: May 10

Prevented this

#978703 Sep 8, 2013
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>ROTFLMAO! I don't think so son.
BTW, are you happy with the state sponsored abortion in israel?
Plan on doing anything about it? Or are you MORE than happy to let it continue with US funding?
are you, as the liberal crackhead of the thread, happy with the abortions in Israel?

*your pacemaker must be about ready to go.

“fairtax.org”

Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

#978704 Sep 8, 2013
Obama to address the nation Tuesday night. That means most likely if he intends military action it most likely will happen on Wednesday. 9/11
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#978705 Sep 8, 2013
USAsince1680 wrote:
Another conundrum.
First Israel provides intel to the U.S. against Assad. Next, they won't comment publicly on military action in Syria because they don't want to appear as though they are meddling in American affairs. AND THEN, "next week in Washington, hundreds of activists of the influential pro-Israel American Israel Public Affairs Committee will lobby Congress for military action in Syria." Do they honestly believe they have anyone fooled?
...a little more black Jew-hating to cover for their incompetent Messiah....

When in doubt, blame the Jews.

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#978706 Sep 8, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama is proceeding like a madman despite lopsided opposition by Congress and the American people.
A woman in Damascus said civilians would bear the brunt no matter what whether U.S. strikes tip the balance in the rebels' favor or leave the army with the upper hand.

"Either the American strike could end up too weak and the regime will take revenge against Damascenes. Or it could be too strong and the rebels will take over and make little effort to distinguish between collaborators and those who supported the revolution," she said.

http://news.msn.com/world/assad-forces-fear-r...

Leading from behind usually doesn't have a good outcome.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#978707 Sep 8, 2013
fetch almighty wrote:
<quoted text>WH Chief of Staff: U.S. Has No Military Allies for Syria Strike--None nada big fat zero. Can you count? to ZERO?
The FACT is Bush and the Iraq war, at the peak level of support, the coalition (not counting the British) consisted of 37 nations.
Bush 37
O'bama big fat ZERO.
Wrong, Kenya may support their favorite son...
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#978708 Sep 8, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
Bush had a declaration of war from Congress.
Obama will get his butt kicked by Congress.
I must have missed that. And so did bushie boy!

“Peace on Earth”

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#978709 Sep 8, 2013
Whatever wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know what dumbos site you got this from-really don't care.
You are WRONG
I have provided you this chart before showing the multinational coalition of 49 nations.
http://usiraq.procon.org/view.resource.php...
LMAO. " ProCon.org ", seriously? Do actual research for a change. Bush went to WAR with only three allies....Britain, Australia and Poland. Look it up, Dumbo.
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#978710 Sep 8, 2013
fetch almighty wrote:
<quoted text>are you, as the liberal crackhead of the thread, happy with the abortions in Israel?
*your pacemaker must be about ready to go.
I'm sure you are son.
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#978712 Sep 8, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
...a little more black Jew-hating to cover for their incompetent Messiah....
When in doubt, blame the Jews.
it's amazing what you can dream up when you try... or hate.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#978714 Sep 8, 2013
flack wrote:
Obama to address the nation Tuesday night. That means most likely if he intends military action it most likely will happen on Wednesday. 9/11
It will be 9/11 in the MidEast when the fool starts reading the teleprompter.

Obama's decision to consult Congress will be hailed by the media as brilliant military deception.

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#978715 Sep 8, 2013
By 284 A.D., Rome had diluted the value of their gold and silver coins by mixing the precious metals with less valuable metals like copper because of too much government spending. It took more and more coins to buy the same goods.)Prices continued to soar and merchants could not reap a profit, so even more shops closed. More and more citizens gave up and accepted welfare. One-fifth of the population lived on free-wheat handed out by the Roman government.

Rome would not even accept its own currency in taxes.

We're not to that point yet but sounds too familiar.

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#978717 Sep 8, 2013
Dangerous Badge wrote:
<quoted text> Listen ALL POLITICAL PARTIES ARE CROOKED . We will never move forward till America understands this . And the Bush story is true . The Bush Family are crooked and dangerous . But so are Obama and Clinton !
Some are more crooked than others, some have contributed more than others, some have been better problem solvers more than others, and some take a stand based on their convictions more than others.

I don't believe for one minute the Bush family could possibly be more crooked than some others.

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#978718 Sep 8, 2013
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>I must have missed that. And so did bushie boy!
Congress gave Bush the authority to use military force.

But, as you said, you must have missed that.

“Bill Clinton could have ”

Since: May 10

Prevented this

#978719 Sep 8, 2013
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
LMAO. " ProCon.org ", seriously? Do actual research for a change. Bush went to WAR with only three allies....Britain, Australia and Poland. Look it up, Dumbo.
KRAUTHAMMER: Left Mocked Bush For Going Into Iraq With 50 Allies But "Obama Can't Even Get One And A Half"

I don't think it is a sudden embrace of the separation of powers or a renewed interest in constitutional action in which he brings in the Congress.

On domestic issues, he hasn't shown any interest in that, and all of a sudden he develops religion on the eve of the supposed strike. The reason is, he was alone and naked in the world.

He didn't have Russia, he didn't have the U.N., didn't have the Security Council, he didn't have the Arabs who, yes, very much oppose but won't lift a finger and didn't even approve in the resolution of the Arab League support for unilateral or any kind of action against them, military action against Syria, and he lost our closest ally in Britain.

He had nobody. Here are Obama and the Democrats who mocked the Bush administration for unilateral intervention In Iraq where we had a coalition of almost 50 countries and he can't get one and a half. So he had to have the Congress, that's the reason he did that switch in the end. He knew how alone he was and how he needed cover."

Anti-war progressives Nancy Pelosi, Howard Dean, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and Harry Reid -- to name but a few -- all now support war in Syria. This gang of chickenhawks (always a favorite term during the Bush era) are banging the drums of war even though we have no idea whether anyone actually used chemical weapons and, if they were used, who used them; or who we're fighting for; or what the goal is; or whether a regional or global conflict will result; or how blowing up some camels helps U.S. national security interests.

All of those factors don't matter. This is about saving face for Barack Obama and keeping the attention off the litany of scandals -- Benghazi, IRS, NSA, James Rosen and AP wiretaps, Fast and Furious, and dozens more -- engulfing the administration.

These Democrat hacks are the worst of the worst. In fact, if the field of politics didn't exist, I find it difficult to imagine how they would earn honest livings.
Whatever

Scottsbluff, NE

#978720 Sep 8, 2013
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
LMAO. " ProCon.org ", seriously? Do actual research for a change. Bush went to WAR with only three allies....Britain, Australia and Poland. Look it up, Dumbo.
Good grief

http://usiraq.procon.org/sourcefiles/2003coal...
Whatever

Scottsbluff, NE

#978721 Sep 8, 2013
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
LMAO. " ProCon.org ", seriously? Do actual research for a change. Bush went to WAR with only three allies....Britain, Australia and Poland. Look it up, Dumbo.
Good grief

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-National_F...

“Bill Clinton could have ”

Since: May 10

Prevented this

#978722 Sep 8, 2013
LoisLane59 wrote:
By 284 A.D., Rome had diluted the value of their gold and silver coins by mixing the precious metals with less valuable metals like copper because of too much government spending. It took more and more coins to buy the same goods.)Prices continued to soar and merchants could not reap a profit, so even more shops closed. More and more citizens gave up and accepted welfare. One-fifth of the population lived on free-wheat handed out by the Roman government.
Rome would not even accept its own currency in taxes.
We're not to that point yet but sounds too familiar.
Not since the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991, and prior to that the fall of France in 1940, has there been so swift an erosion of the world influence of a Great Power as we are witnessing with the United States.

What is more worrisome than the fact that the United States has an inadequate president, is that the public still accords the incumbent a significant degree of support. If the American people, who have responded to intelligent leadership so often within living memory, has become so morally obtuse that it buys into this flimflam, the problem is more profound than I imagined.

http://www.nysun.com/foreign/collapse-of-amer...
Whatever

Scottsbluff, NE

#978723 Sep 8, 2013
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
LMAO. " ProCon.org ", seriously? Do actual research for a change. Bush went to WAR with only three allies....Britain, Australia and Poland. Look it up, Dumbo.
Good grief

You are wrong

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500257_162-544517...

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
Graduation in Detroit. 16 min Another Chance 1
News Scientists say they have proved climate change ... (Dec '08) 20 min Dudley 8,065
News Man charged with shooting near 26/Cal courthouse 1 hr former democrat 1
News Aurora man charged with kidnapping, murder of 1... 1 hr former democrat 1
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr District 1 239,230
News Chicago had a record year of dog poop complaints 10 hr Trump is the man 1
Trumps travel ban discussion 10 hr The truth is out ... 1

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages