Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1567181 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.

Since: May 11

Newville, PA

#1034745 Dec 4, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
... idiots.
sub·si·dy
noun
A sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business.
A subsidy is money given.
A "tax break" is money not taken.
There's a difference.
So, still, to this day, you cannot find any evidence any subsidy to any oil company exists. All you have done is prove that you can't even define the word "subsidy".
Now, let's go over this again. There is no such thing as subsidies to oil companies. Subsidies to oil companies is an urban legend. They don't exist in the United States.
By the way, tell us what other industries get that same type of tax break.
A subsidy is a financial benefit.
Buroc Millhouse Obama

Hamden, CT

#1034746 Dec 4, 2013
NJ Racist 1 wrote:
<quoted text>It was the right thing to do when the shoe was on the other foot, huh? Remember Romney, Ryan jacked up tax plan? You voted to make these ass clowns Don, & underboss of America, the great whore! Memory kind of foggy, huh DB? Nah, you just remember what you want, and fill in the blanks as you go along.
Mornin' Obama votin' racist.
LCNLin

United States

#1034747 Dec 4, 2013
lily boca raton fl wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly! Even Boehner took the $5300 subsidy, saying he has one more year till he's on medicare.
They just don't want poor people to have healthcare.
interesting

Since: May 11

Newville, PA

#1034748 Dec 4, 2013
Buroc Millhouse Obama wrote:
<quoted text>
Here you go again, having one of your dissociative disorder episodes.
The embassy in Benghazi is in Libya, MORON!
You can play your childish semantic games, MORON, but it is technically correct to call the facility in Benghazi and embassy.
Diplomatic mission, Consulate AND Embassy have been frequently used synonymously to refer to the location.
Juvenile MORON!
Benghazi had aConsulate.

Are all you right whiners this f*cking stupid?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1034749 Dec 4, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
A report about the US vulnerability to terrorist attack ignored by Bush & we get attacked by terrorists. I guess to a right whiner that is OK.
I posted a direct statement from the ACA that forbids the board in question from rationing.
Read it & become better educated. Dumbass.
Here's what you ran away from, dumbass:

RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Ray, Dickhead, yes the ACA explicitly bans the board from rationing healthcare.
SEc3403
ii) The proposal shall not include any rec-
ommendation to ration health care, raise revenues or
Medicare beneficiary premiums under section 1818,
1818A, or 1839, increase Medicare beneficiary cost-
sharing (including deductibles, coinsurance, and copay-
ments), or otherwise restrict benefits or modify eligi-
bility criteria.
Now Dumbass Ray, don't you feel like such an ignorant ass?
"The proposal shall not include any recommendation...."

DBWriter wrote:

Please tell us how that sentence forbids rationing. It merely forbids a recommendation in some "proposal" from some element you forgot to mention.
If you read the ObamaKare law, you will read "The Secretary will determine..." everything.
As the ObamaKare law is written, "The Secretary" will determine who gets health care, and who does not.
Any idiot can tell you that there is not an infinite source for health care. As the demand for health care increases, and the supply of health care does not match increased demand, then the statement of the law "The Secretary will determine" is the controlling statement. "The Secretary" will ration health care, you fucking moron.

Now, if you want to be taken seriously here, find the part of the ObamaKare law that defines the specifications "The Secretary" must satisfy to ration health care.
You can't. It doesn't exist. The rationing of health care is solely the subjective discretion of "The Secretary".

Pay particular attention to the last paragraph. It requires you post the text of the ObamaKare law to argue against it.
Post the law, dumbass.

Here's that paragraph again:

Now, if you want to be taken seriously here, find the part of the ObamaKare law that defines the specifications "The Secretary" must satisfy to ration health care.
You can't. It doesn't exist. The rationing of health care is solely the subjective discretion of "The Secretary".
sonicfilter

Fishers, IN

#1034750 Dec 4, 2013
GOP To Recycle Romney's Attacks On Affordable Care Act Medicare Cuts

If the attack sounds familiar, it's because it was used heavily by Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan in last year's presidential campaign. The Affordable Care Act's Medicare cuts actually represent a reduction in reimbursements to hospitals, Medicaid prescription drugs and private insurance plans under Medicare Advantage. The CBO has projected that the reimbursement reduction will extend Medicare's solvency for eight years.

Ironically, Ryan's budget that passed the GOP-controlled House in 2011 and 2012 included the same Medicare savings but also repealed the health care law.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/gop-to-...

hey lily! more desperation!
Grampy

South Windsor, CT

#1034751 Dec 4, 2013
lily boca raton fl wrote:
<quoted text>
That was Grampys schtick and then galt was goaded by him; made them bond.
Finland still teaching goose-stepping in pre-school?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1034752 Dec 4, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
I get it. The Muslim Brotherhood took them with them when they were thrown out of power.
Another example of how f*cking stupid Right whiners are.
Let's practice your reading and comprehension of the written English language.

The jets went to the Muslim Brotherhood. When the Muslim Brotherhood got tossed out of the government, the jets stopped going.
The recession caused by the Democrats' Marxist CRA program that collapsed our economy bottomed out. "Porkulus" just stuffed the pockets of cronies. The only thing that was "shovel ready" was the economy after the Democrats took over.
Why did Obama lie for two weeks covering up the Al Qaeda attack on the United States in Benghazi?
Read the Constitution, dumbass. Then come back and tell us how much the Democrats increased the debt, you fucking moron.
Welfare numbers are up because the Democrats are driving up those numbers. There are 30+ million illegal aliens here while we are increasingly paying Americans to not do the work they are here doing.
You're not only an idiot, you're an indoctrinated ignorant communist dupe.

Now, look at your response and tell us how you have to read what isn't written to justify it.
You're a maroon.
Vodka

Satellite Beach, FL

#1034753 Dec 4, 2013
LCNLin wrote:
<quoted text>
Wax are you on the Canadian health service?
Are you Party Patrick or Acrimonious Angela today? MoFo lily she be drinkin mo than you two today, as usual. Pray to Obammy for a return to Pompano.

Since: May 11

Newville, PA

#1034754 Dec 4, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Lying frauds....
So, if I am talking to Joe over there about ObamaKare, what I say doesn't count if I'm not talking to Jane, right? You're a moron.
Tell us how "We have to pass it to find out what's in it" refers to "...right whiner lies while the bill was being debated & put to a vote..
It seems like Pelosi was saying "we have to pass it to find out what's in it."
I have a suggestion, dumbf*ck. Look at the entire quote & you will know.

Wow, your'e a idiot.

Congress "[has] to pass the bill so you can find out what's in it, away from the fog of controversy."

1) Congress has to pass the bill

2) So the people to who she was speaking can find out what is in it

3) Why will that help? The fog on controversy will fade when its final & in print.

My God you dumbasses have been harping on this for years & you were all too GD stupid to know what she said & to whom she was speaking.

Right whiners - dumber than sh*t.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1034755 Dec 4, 2013
sonicfilter wrote:
GOP To Recycle Romney's Attacks On Affordable Care Act Medicare Cuts
If the attack sounds familiar, it's because it was used heavily by Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan in last year's presidential campaign. The Affordable Care Act's Medicare cuts actually represent a reduction in reimbursements to hospitals, Medicaid prescription drugs and private insurance plans under Medicare Advantage. The CBO has projected that the reimbursement reduction will extend Medicare's solvency for eight years.
Ironically, Ryan's budget that passed the GOP-controlled House in 2011 and 2012 included the same Medicare savings but also repealed the health care law.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/gop-to-...
hey lily! more desperation!
<spam>

You can join the discussion, too.

If you read the ObamaKare law, you will read "The Secretary will determine..." everything.
As the ObamaKare law is written, "The Secretary" will determine who gets health care, and who does not.
Any idiot can tell you that there is not an infinite source for health care. As the demand for health care increases, and the supply of health care does not match increased demand, then the statement of the law "The Secretary will determine" is the controlling statement. "The Secretary" will ration health care, you fucking moron.

Now, if you want to be taken seriously here, find the part of the ObamaKare law that defines the specifications "The Secretary" must satisfy to ration health care.
You can't. It doesn't exist. The rationing of health care is solely the subjective discretion of "The Secretary".

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1034756 Dec 4, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Benghazi had aConsulate.
Are all you right whiners this f*cking stupid?
Why did Obama lie for two weeks covering up the Al Qaeda attack on the United States in Benghazi?

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#1034757 Dec 4, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, the jets went to the government of Egypt.
GM is alive & well
The stimulus took us from losing 750,000 jobs a month & an economy shrinking at a rate over 6% to Job grown & a growing economy within a year.
The Embassy in Libya was not attacked.
The amount added to the national debt during Obama's first term was less than 6 trillion. Most of which was the direct result of the recession.
Welare numbers were driven up by the recession that was in lace when he took office.
So Carol, don't you feel like such an ignorant ass.
Hogwash. During Obama’s first term, when economic conditions bordered on desperate, he was criticized for putting the economy behind other concerns, mainly national health care. The president and Democrats even conceded the criticism when they talked about making a “pivot” to the issue of jobs and the economy from whatever policy pursuit Obama felt was more important at the time.

"Making a pivot" to put jobs and the economy first isn't putting jobs and the economy first.

Obama spiked the deficit higher than during WWII.

"It is a truly jaw-dropping display of fiscal recklessness to rack up enough real (inflation-adjusted) deficit spending in just three years to dwarf our real (inflation-adjusted) deficit spending during all of World War II. Before Obama’s term, few likely would have believed it possible."
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-s-d...

Obama’s claim that ‘90 percent’ of the current deficit is due to Bush policies received 4 Pinocchio's by the Washington Post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-chec...

It's Official: Taxpayers Will Lose Big on the GM Bailout
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/rick-newman/...

You are wrong.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1034758 Dec 4, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
A subsidy is a financial benefit.
sub·si·dy
noun
A sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business.
A subsidy is money given.
A "tax break" is money not taken.
There's a difference.

There is no such thing as a subsidy to oil companies in the United States. Subsidies to oil companies is an urban legend. The government of the United States does not give money to American oil companies. However, Obama gave 2 billion dollars to Petrobras. The only oil company the government of the United States subsidizes is the national oil company of Brasil.

“Bill Clinton could have ”

Since: May 10

Prevented this

#1034759 Dec 4, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Ray, buddy, I have news. We will quit reminding you lying azzwipes about Bush ben you quit blaming Obama for the effects of the Bush recession.
I have further news, I call people racist when they use racial slurs. Evidently, you like the use of racal slurs because here you are defending their use.
The idea you call the ACA a scam ids proof of how uninformed you are about the ACA.
The Republicans have agreed with the ACA except the Republicans say "F*ck those who can't afford insurance" just like they say "F*ck poor & the working poor" every day.
There are five types of liberals aka democrats: lamers, leeches, liars, loafers and looters. It appears this morning, you are at least four out of the five.
NJ Raider 1

Vineland, NJ

#1034760 Dec 4, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Show us that report.
And, you're running away from this... again.
"The proposal shall not include any recommendation...."
Please tell us how that sentence forbids rationing. It merely forbids a recommendation in some "proposal" from some element you forgot to mention.
If you read the ObamaKare law, you will read "The Secretary will determine..." everything.
As the ObamaKare law is written, "The Secretary" will determine who gets health care, and who does not.
Any idiot can tell you that there is not an infinite source for health care. As the demand for health care increases, and the supply of health care does not match increased demand, then the statement of the law "The Secretary will determine" is the controlling statement. "The Secretary" will ration health care, you fucking moron.
Now, if you want to be taken seriously here, find the part of the ObamaKare law that defines the specifications "The Secretary" must satisfy to ration health care.
You can't. It doesn't exist. The rationing of health care is solely the subjective discretion of "The Secretary".
Would you have perferred it said "the commissioner" instead of "the secretary?" In case you did'nt know, someones always in charge of something, regardless of the title! Shit call them the overseer, it's the same damn thing. Everybody has a boss except " THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, that's where the buck stops!

Since: May 11

Newville, PA

#1034761 Dec 4, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's what you ran away from, dumbass:
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Ray, Dickhead, yes the ACA explicitly bans the board from rationing healthcare.
SEc3403
ii) The proposal shall not include any rec-
ommendation to ration health care, raise revenues or
Medicare beneficiary premiums under section 1818,
1818A, or 1839, increase Medicare beneficiary cost-
sharing (including deductibles, coinsurance, and copay-
ments), or otherwise restrict benefits or modify eligi-
bility criteria.
Now Dumbass Ray, don't you feel like such an ignorant ass?
"The proposal shall not include any recommendation...."
DBWriter wrote:
Please tell us how that sentence forbids rationing. It merely forbids a recommendation in some "proposal" from some element you forgot to mention.
If you read the ObamaKare law, you will read "The Secretary will determine..." everything.
As the ObamaKare law is written, "The Secretary" will determine who gets health care, and who does not.
Any idiot can tell you that there is not an infinite source for health care. As the demand for health care increases, and the supply of health care does not match increased demand, then the statement of the law "The Secretary will determine" is the controlling statement. "The Secretary" will ration health care, you fucking moron.
Now, if you want to be taken seriously here, find the part of the ObamaKare law that defines the specifications "The Secretary" must satisfy to ration health care.
You can't. It doesn't exist. The rationing of health care is solely the subjective discretion of "The Secretary".
Pay particular attention to the last paragraph. It requires you post the text of the ObamaKare law to argue against it.
Post the law, dumbass.
Here's that paragraph again:
Now, if you want to be taken seriously here, find the part of the ObamaKare law that defines the specifications "The Secretary" must satisfy to ration health care.
You can't. It doesn't exist. The rationing of health care is solely the subjective discretion of "The Secretary".
If you bothered to keep up (something you idiots can't seem to do), you would know that one of your dumbass buddies claimed the IPAB was a death panel through rationing.

This paragraph from the bill forbids the board from rationing.

The Board can't take direct action but instead makes recommendations that require approval.

Try to keep up, sonny.
sonicfilter

Fishers, IN

#1034762 Dec 4, 2013
Over the last month or so, opponents of the Affordable Care Act have eagerly touted Consumer Reports’“opposition” to healthcare.gov – for the right, if the independent, consumer-friendly outlet disapproves of the administration’s exchange marketplace, it proves … Obamacare is bad.

In reality, Consumer Reports’ position has always been more nuanced than conservative activists and lawmakers would have us believe. The consumer advocates, for example, defended the Obama administration from criticism on canceled plans through the individual market, rejecting Republican talking points altogether. Consumer Reports also played a role in debunking some of the ACA horror stories that the right has been so invested in.

That said, the consumer advocates did warn the public about the problems plaguing healthcare.gov , urging Americans to wait until the site improved before creating accounts and selecting insurance (though Consumer Reports pushed back against far-right efforts to exploit the position). Today, however, it reversed course and changed its verdict.

After advising consumers to steer clear of Healthcare.gov in October, Consumer Reports health care expert Nancy Metcalf told MSNBC’s Chuck Todd Tuesday morning that the federal health care exchange website was improved enough following the Obama administration’s frantic month of repairs that users could confidently use it.[…]

“Now we’re saying,‘it’s time,’” Metcalf said, in particular praising the new window-shopping function, in which users can peruse health plans without registering with the site. The requirement to make an account before viewing options was considered one of the main causes for the site’s initial traffic bottleneck.“It’s terrific, I’ve tried it, it was working yesterday through the busiest times,” Metcalf said.

If recent history is any guide, opponents of the law will argue, indefinitely, that “even Consumer Reports opposes” healthcare.gov , but for those concerned with the facts, the consumer advocates’ position now seems fairly clear.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/consu...

Since: May 11

Newville, PA

#1034763 Dec 4, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's practice your reading and comprehension of the written English language.
The jets went to the Muslim Brotherhood. When the Muslim Brotherhood got tossed out of the government, the jets stopped going.
The recession caused by the Democrats' Marxist CRA program that collapsed our economy bottomed out. "Porkulus" just stuffed the pockets of cronies. The only thing that was "shovel ready" was the economy after the Democrats took over.
Why did Obama lie for two weeks covering up the Al Qaeda attack on the United States in Benghazi?
Read the Constitution, dumbass. Then come back and tell us how much the Democrats increased the debt, you fucking moron.
Welfare numbers are up because the Democrats are driving up those numbers. There are 30+ million illegal aliens here while we are increasingly paying Americans to not do the work they are here doing.
You're not only an idiot, you're an indoctrinated ignorant communist dupe.
Now, look at your response and tell us how you have to read what isn't written to justify it.
You're a maroon.
Sain Dumbwaiter, your ignorance is showing.

By US law, the aid stopped because the military over rode the election.

My God you people are uneducated morons.
Grampy

South Windsor, CT

#1034764 Dec 4, 2013
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
According to a Reuters/Ipsos poll from Tuesday, by 44-22 Americans approve of the deal NATO, Russia, and China cut with Tehran to freeze its nuclear program.
Nice try Dufus! Your cited article is dated Nov. 29th and references a Reuters poll from Tuesday. That would mean the poll was conducted on Nov. 24th. At that time all the American public had was the Liar-in_Chief's administration's fluff version of the agreement.

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
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 1 hr RACE 105,223
Simon McGreedys 3 hr Rattlesnake Pete 1
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 4 hr Just Think 242,122
OVERALL CDST of electric autos. 5 hr Id eat a gun-1st 4
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 6 hr SweLL GirL 11,036
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 7 hr Alyssa76 3,670
last post wins! (Apr '13) 9 hr They cannot kill ... 2,578

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages