Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1565662 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

New Oxford, PA

#1064265 Jan 17, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Al Qaeda was holed up in caves with the Taliban in the mountainous tribal region along the Afghan-Pakistan border when Bush left office. Al Qaeda had no visibility anywhere else in the world. Every time some Al Qaeda or Taliban went outside, they got their head blown off. Throughout Afghanistan there were no Al Qaeda and Taliban thugs bombing villages and cities.
How relevant is that?
Mission accomplished.
Now, let's put Obama, or whatever his name is, in as president.
Today, Al Qaeda has grown to be bigger and stronger than it has ever been in its history. Obama ordered all combat in the mountains where Bush had Al Qaeda and the Taliban holed up in caves cease, and all US forces to retreat to the population centers. Then, Obama gave "safe passage" to the Taliban (thus, to Al Qaeda, also, because you can't tell the difference between them) throughout Afghanistan. Now, Al Qaeda and the Taliban are bombing every city and village in Afghanistan.
Obama made Al Qaeda relevant again. Al Qaeda has grown so big and strong since Obama was made president and began helping them, they are able to invade Syria and fight a full-scale war with the Syrian army.
Obama is arming and funding the Al Qaeda invasion of Syria, you fucking moron. Today, as we speak, right now, the Armed Forces of the United States is training Al Qaeda terrorists on a US military base in Jordan, then sending them into Syria to support the Al Qaeda invasion.
I don't mean to disturb your morning with facts.
By the way, since it seems most likely the lie Obama spewed for two weeks after the Al Qaeda attack on the US in Benghazi was given to CNN before the Al Qaeda attack began:
If a person in the White House and/or the State Department had any part in the premeditated murder of a US ambassador, should that person be hung?
Bush declared Bin Laden irrelevant in late 2002. Al Qaeda was very irrelevant was it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_al-Q...

Since: May 11

New Oxford, PA

#1064266 Jan 17, 2014
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
if the Waltons gave the company to the minimum wage employees, Walmart would be bankrupt within one year....
Walmart's business plan to depend on a certain portion of their work force be at minimum wage as they depend on high volume at low margins.
dem

United States

#1064267 Jan 17, 2014
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>is that Sambo's interpretation of the law???...
Morning you racist pussscccee

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1064268 Jan 17, 2014
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Welfare is unconstitutional?
The SC already told you that the ACA was Constitutional.
Call it ObamaKare, like what Obama said he wants it to be called.

You are an idiot.

The case involved ONLY the part of the bill that the people who wrote the bill called a "penalty", and even wrote the word "penalty" into the bill. Roberts was the deciding vote, and he decided the people who wrote the bill couldn't define the word "penalty" and don't know what a tax is.

There are so many parts of ObamaKare that are unconstitutional. The first that comes to mind is the fact that any law that is vague and ambiguous is unconstitutional.
"[T]he terms of a penal statute [...] must be sufficiently explicit to inform those who are subject to it what conduct on their part will render them liable to its penalties… and a statute which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application violates the first essential of due process of law."

Let's see. The people who wrote the law publicly said over and over it was not a tax, and they actually used the word "penalty" written into the law. The Supreme Court reads the law they wrote and concludes it isn't a penalty, but a tax.
So, if the people who wrote the goddam law can't understand the law, how can it possibly be "be sufficiently explicit to inform those who are subject to it...."
Roberts ruling, and the other 4 justices who supported that ruling, obviously were ruling in accordance with something other than the Constitution, and obviously ignoring previous Supreme Court rulings.

Let's go through the Constitution and see what we find.
The very first thing that comes to mind is the 5th Amendment, where it states no person can be deprived of property (money) without due process of law. ObamaKare authorizes the IRS to use its subjective whim to take money directly out of your bank account.

There are so many unconstitutional aspects of ObamaKare, this board isn't sufficient to even list them all, let alone discuss all of them.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#1064269 Jan 17, 2014
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
The economy is better than Bush left it.
prove it....

Obama turned a short-term recession into a permanent economic malaise...

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#1064270 Jan 17, 2014
'Duck Dynasty' Ratings Are Down Dramatically From Last Season

""Fans no longer give a quack about "Duck Dynasty."

TV Line reports that 8.5 million people tuned in for the fifth season premiere of "Duck Dynasty" on Wednesday (Jan. 15), down from 12 million viewers who watched the fourth season premiere.

In the highly sought after age demographic of 18-49, only 4.2 million tuned in.

When Phil Robertson insulted black people and gay people back in December, creating a huge uproar in the media, fans passionately defended the patriarch, but the ratings haven't held up.

Could this be the beginning of the end for "Duck Dynasty?"""

----------

So much for you 'free speech' morons!!

Since: May 11

New Oxford, PA

#1064271 Jan 17, 2014
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
the death of bin Laden (if he is really dead) had absolutely no effect on radical Islamic terrorism...
Bin Laden's death basically ended the central command struct & left Al Qaeda to be just independent groups acting without coordination.

It also hurt their fund raising.

I understand that low life scumbags like you had no urge to to take justice on one that murdered 3000 Americans. You wanted these groups to know they could kill Americans without worry about the consequences.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1064272 Jan 17, 2014
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Bush declared Bin Laden irrelevant in late 2002. Al Qaeda was very irrelevant was it?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_al-Q...
You're running away again, daveyboy. How about you address the response to your post. Here it is again for your convenient reference. There's a question at the end I'm particularly interested in seeing what you think about hanging people who commit treason.

Al Qaeda was holed up in caves with the Taliban in the mountainous tribal region along the Afghan-Pakistan border when Bush left office. Al Qaeda had no visibility anywhere else in the world. Every time some Al Qaeda or Taliban went outside, they got their head blown off. Throughout Afghanistan there were no Al Qaeda and Taliban thugs bombing villages and cities.
How relevant is that?
Mission accomplished.
Now, let's put Obama, or whatever his name is, in as president.
Today, Al Qaeda has grown to be bigger and stronger than it has ever been in its history. Obama ordered all combat in the mountains where Bush had Al Qaeda and the Taliban holed up in caves cease, and all US forces to retreat to the population centers. Then, Obama gave "safe passage" to the Taliban (thus, to Al Qaeda, also, because you can't tell the difference between them) throughout Afghanistan. Now, Al Qaeda and the Taliban are bombing every city and village in Afghanistan.
Obama made Al Qaeda relevant again. Al Qaeda has grown so big and strong since Obama was made president and began helping them, they are able to invade Syria and fight a full-scale war with the Syrian army.
Obama is arming and funding the Al Qaeda invasion of Syria, you fucking moron. Today, as we speak, right now, the Armed Forces of the United States is training Al Qaeda terrorists on a US military base in Jordan, then sending them into Syria to support the Al Qaeda invasion.
I don't mean to disturb your morning with facts.
By the way, since it seems most likely the lie Obama spewed for two weeks after the Al Qaeda attack on the US in Benghazi was given to CNN before the Al Qaeda attack began:

If a person in the White House and/or the State Department had any part in the premeditated murder of a US ambassador, should that person be hung?

“Amor patriae.”

Since: Feb 08

Eastern Oregon

#1064273 Jan 17, 2014
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
The economy is better than Bush left it.
Fools like you conveniently can't remember sh*t that happened prior to Jan 21st, 2009.
Once the labor force is whittled down another 50 million, we'll be back to 5% unemployed. This economy sucks, but since you're a sucker, it's all good.

Since: May 11

New Oxford, PA

#1064274 Jan 17, 2014
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
prove it....
Obama turned a short-term recession into a permanent economic malaise...
The economy has been growing, it was shrinking when Obama took office.

Even a dumbass like you should know that.
Lnc

United States

#1064275 Jan 17, 2014
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
the death of bin Laden (if he is really dead) had absolutely no effect on radical Islamic terrorism...
Alas it did have an effect on bin Laden

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#1064276 Jan 17, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Al Qaeda was holed up in caves with the Taliban in the mountainous tribal region along the Afghan-Pakistan border when Bush left office. Al Qaeda had no visibility anywhere else in the world. Every time some Al Qaeda or Taliban went outside, they got their head blown off. Throughout Afghanistan there were no Al Qaeda and Taliban thugs bombing villages and cities.
How relevant is that?
Mission accomplished.
You're such an idiot. And it's so easy to prove you're wrong.

Battle of Wanat

""The Battle of Wanat occurred on July 13, 2008, when about 200 Taliban guerrillas attacked NATO troops near the Quam,(large clan village), of Wanat in the Waygal district in Afghanistan's far eastern province of Nuristan. The position was defended primarily by United States Army soldiers of the 2nd Platoon, Chosen Company, 2nd Battalion, 503rd Infantry Regiment (Airborne), 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team.
The Taliban surrounded the remote base and its observation post and attacked it from the Quam and the surrounding farmland. They destroyed much of the Americans' heavy munitions, broke through U.S. lines, and entered the main base before being repelled by artillery and aircraft. American casualties included nine killed and 27 wounded, while four Afghan National Army (ANA) soldiers were wounded. The U.S. combat deaths represent the most in a single battle since the start of U.S. operations in 2001.
The Battle of Wanat has been described as the "Black Hawk Down" of the War in Afghanistan, as one of the bloodiest attacks of the war and one of several attacks on remote outposts. In contrast to previous roadside bombs and haphazard attacks and ambushes, this attack was well coordinated with fighters from many insurgent and terrorist groups with an effort that was disciplined and sustained which was able to target key assets such as the TOW launcher with precision.

----------

Appears Bush didn't have any control over the Taliban, they attacked an American Base in July 2008.

Who was President in 2008??

Mission Accomplished.

Dweeb shot down in flames!!

Since: May 11

New Oxford, PA

#1064277 Jan 17, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
You're running away again, daveyboy. How about you address the response to your post. Here it is again for your convenient reference. There's a question at the end I'm particularly interested in seeing what you think about hanging people who commit treason.
Al Qaeda was holed up in caves with the Taliban in the mountainous tribal region along the Afghan-Pakistan border when Bush left office. Al Qaeda had no visibility anywhere else in the world. Every time some Al Qaeda or Taliban went outside, they got their head blown off. Throughout Afghanistan there were no Al Qaeda and Taliban thugs bombing villages and cities.
How relevant is that?
Mission accomplished.
Now, let's put Obama, or whatever his name is, in as president.
Today, Al Qaeda has grown to be bigger and stronger than it has ever been in its history. Obama ordered all combat in the mountains where Bush had Al Qaeda and the Taliban holed up in caves cease, and all US forces to retreat to the population centers. Then, Obama gave "safe passage" to the Taliban (thus, to Al Qaeda, also, because you can't tell the difference between them) throughout Afghanistan. Now, Al Qaeda and the Taliban are bombing every city and village in Afghanistan.
Obama made Al Qaeda relevant again. Al Qaeda has grown so big and strong since Obama was made president and began helping them, they are able to invade Syria and fight a full-scale war with the Syrian army.
Obama is arming and funding the Al Qaeda invasion of Syria, you fucking moron. Today, as we speak, right now, the Armed Forces of the United States is training Al Qaeda terrorists on a US military base in Jordan, then sending them into Syria to support the Al Qaeda invasion.
I don't mean to disturb your morning with facts.
By the way, since it seems most likely the lie Obama spewed for two weeks after the Al Qaeda attack on the US in Benghazi was given to CNN before the Al Qaeda attack began:
If a person in the White House and/or the State Department had any part in the premeditated murder of a US ambassador, should that person be hung?
Look, dipstick, you claimed Al Qaeda had no visibility when he was declared irrelevant. They seemed to have made numerous attacks.
This makes you a GD idiot.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1064278 Jan 17, 2014
RealDave wrote:
Maybe Flack can explain how a HS student with HS transcripts under the name BarackObama go to college as Barry Soetero?
Does Flack know that Hawaii is actually a state?
So, why did Obama use the name "Barry Soetoro" at Occidental?
Why did his mother use the name "Barry Soetoro" when she wrote a letter to her employer, the Ford Foundation, requesting use of trevel benefits for dependent children still in school in 1981?

Which brings us to another question.

What country issued Obama the passport he used in 1981 to travel to Pakistan when it was on the State Department's "No Travel" list?(Most likely Indonesia, which means Obama's supposed US citizenship would have had to have been renounced, if he ever had it.)

Now, what name do you think was in that foreign passport, you moron?

Therefore, according to the propaganda lie that Obama transferred from Occidental (where his name was obviously Barry Soetoro), he would have been Barry Soetoro when he supposedly attended classes at Columbia, where still to this day nobody has been able to find anyone who ever met him on the campus of Columbia.
sonicfilter

Fishers, IN

#1064279 Jan 17, 2014
America is becoming more liberal

Not too long ago, everyone was declaring American politics a lost cause for progressives. The religious right supposedly had a stranglehold on elections. Then it was the tea party that had the political establishment — initially Democrats and Republicans — quaking. The media and the general public took hold of a narrative parroted by conservative candidates and opinion leaders: The United States was a “center-right” nation.

But after two consecutive elections in which the Democratic candidate for president garnered more than 50 percent of the vote — a one-two punch last achieved by Franklin Roosevelt — it is worth questioning that assumption. The country is getting more diverse, and as the proportion of white voters shrinks, so, too, does the conservative base. As demographics shift, so do political preferences — in this case, toward the left. A close examination of U.S. attitudes in the past decade-plus reveals that the United States is steadily becoming more progressive.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/americ...
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#1064280 Jan 17, 2014
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Walmart's business plan to depend on a certain portion of their work force be at minimum wage as they depend on high volume at low margins.
minimum wage is only a small portion of the Walmart business plan....

the biggest factor in maintaining low prices is managing their suppliers...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#1064283 Jan 17, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
You're running away again, daveyboy. How about you address the response to your post. Here it is again for your convenient reference. There's a question at the end I'm particularly interested in seeing what you think about hanging people who commit treason.
Al Qaeda was holed up in caves with the Taliban in the mountainous tribal region along the Afghan-Pakistan border when Bush left office. Al Qaeda had no visibility anywhere else in the world. Every time some Al Qaeda or Taliban went outside, they got their head blown off. Throughout Afghanistan there were no Al Qaeda and Taliban thugs bombing villages and cities.
How relevant is that?
Mission accomplished.
Now, let's put Obama, or whatever his name is, in as president.
Today, Al Qaeda has grown to be bigger and stronger than it has ever been in its history. Obama ordered all combat in the mountains where Bush had Al Qaeda and the Taliban holed up in caves cease, and all US forces to retreat to the population centers. Then, Obama gave "safe passage" to the Taliban (thus, to Al Qaeda, also, because you can't tell the difference between them) throughout Afghanistan. Now, Al Qaeda and the Taliban are bombing every city and village in Afghanistan.
Obama made Al Qaeda relevant again. Al Qaeda has grown so big and strong since Obama was made president and began helping them, they are able to invade Syria and fight a full-scale war with the Syrian army.
Obama is arming and funding the Al Qaeda invasion of Syria, you fucking moron. Today, as we speak, right now, the Armed Forces of the United States is training Al Qaeda terrorists on a US military base in Jordan, then sending them into Syria to support the Al Qaeda invasion.
I don't mean to disturb your morning with facts.
By the way, since it seems most likely the lie Obama spewed for two weeks after the Al Qaeda attack on the US in Benghazi was given to CNN before the Al Qaeda attack began:
If a person in the White House and/or the State Department had any part in the premeditated murder of a US ambassador, should that person be hung?
pure bullshit.

when bush left office, Aq was active in Iraq. in Yemen. Across North Africa.they didn't have many high profile attacks, but (except in Iraq) yet they were certainly active there.

try to get your facts straight.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#1064284 Jan 17, 2014
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Bin Laden's death basically ended the central command struct & left Al Qaeda to be just independent groups acting without coordination.
It also hurt their fund raising.
I understand that low life scumbags like you had no urge to to take justice on one that murdered 3000 Americans. You wanted these groups to know they could kill Americans without worry about the consequences.
the revenge on radical Islam for the events of 9-11-01 has only begun...

the terrorist faux-religion of Islam is the problem, not just one man...

and Obama is fighting on the terrorist side in Syria and elsewhere...
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#1064285 Jan 17, 2014
there is no proof that bin Laden is dead...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#1064287 Jan 17, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
You're running away again, daveyboy. How about you address the response to your post. Here it is again for your convenient reference. There's a question at the end I'm particularly interested in seeing what you think about hanging people who commit treason.
Al Qaeda was holed up in caves with the Taliban in the mountainous tribal region along the Afghan-Pakistan border when Bush left office. Al Qaeda had no visibility anywhere else in the world. Every time some Al Qaeda or Taliban went outside, they got their head blown off. Throughout Afghanistan there were no Al Qaeda and Taliban thugs bombing villages and cities.
How relevant is that?
Mission accomplished.
Now, let's put Obama, or whatever his name is, in as president.
Today, Al Qaeda has grown to be bigger and stronger than it has ever been in its history. Obama ordered all combat in the mountains where Bush had Al Qaeda and the Taliban holed up in caves cease, and all US forces to retreat to the population centers. Then, Obama gave "safe passage" to the Taliban (thus, to Al Qaeda, also, because you can't tell the difference between them) throughout Afghanistan. Now, Al Qaeda and the Taliban are bombing every city and village in Afghanistan.
Obama made Al Qaeda relevant again. Al Qaeda has grown so big and strong since Obama was made president and began helping them, they are able to invade Syria and fight a full-scale war with the Syrian army.
Obama is arming and funding the Al Qaeda invasion of Syria, you fucking moron. Today, as we speak, right now, the Armed Forces of the United States is training Al Qaeda terrorists on a US military base in Jordan, then sending them into Syria to support the Al Qaeda invasion.
I don't mean to disturb your morning with facts.
By the way, since it seems most likely the lie Obama spewed for two weeks after the Al Qaeda attack on the US in Benghazi was given to CNN before the Al Qaeda attack began:
If a person in the White House and/or the State Department had any part in the premeditated murder of a US ambassador, should that person be hung?
here's a little help for you since you seem too inept to actually research before you post pure bullshit...

http://lmgtfy.com/...

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) 4 min tyler 242,274
Letter to NFL Commissioners. 1 hr The Military 1
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 2 hr Alyssa76 11,019
How Adam got Eve. 10 hr The Serpent 1
Trump Sounds like a fool 10 hr Don Screwball 3
OVERALL CDST of electric autos. 11 hr Another Big Lie 1
Trump will lose Votes after today's speech 13 hr Tr ps No Deal 1

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages