Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1382088 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.

“fairtax.org”

Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

#1066404 Jan 22, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
or Bush.
13 Benghazis Happened Under President Bush and Fox News Said Nothing
http://www.policymic.com/articles/40811/13-be...
When are you nutjobs going to realize he didn't lie about or try to cover up any of them. Libtards are SO stupid!!!

“fairtax.org”

Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

#1066405 Jan 22, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
free will.
unlike you, i don't like to try to impose my views upon others. you want your kids to end up with some kind of traumatic injury, have at it.
Even soccer players are starting to wear helmets.
Lnc

United States

#1066406 Jan 22, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
Why are you so angry defending this president?
Seems to me if you were right and the rest of us were wrong, your anger wouldn't be necessary. You'd have solid arguments to stand behind instead.
Requiring an ID to vote isn't all that unreasonable to incite this kind of reaction. Unless you're afraid voter IDs would drastically affect the number of votes for your party.
Why else would it make you so angry?
We only have one president at a time. Your attacks tend to weaken American in dealing with nations abroad?

What you advocate does help the Democratic Party
so we thank you for your continued counterproductive post :-)

Peace

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#1066407 Jan 22, 2014
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>no it really isn't unreasonable, but what voter fraud do you think it would stop?
it would seem to be a huge waste of money, this is why real conservatives are against it....
Of course it's unreasonable. Where there's a will, there's a way. Photo IDs are required for much less important things.

It really does sound like all the hysteria about this is out of fear of losing an election. Funny that Republicans have absolutely no concerns or fears - just Democrats.
TSM

United States

#1066408 Jan 22, 2014
This is Pathetic but not surprising it’s in their DNA, it’s called the (Obama Syndrome!)

Wendy Davis is having a bad week. In a few days she has gone from quietly admitting she needs to tighten up her language to blaming the entire episode on her opponent!!

Wendy’s Star like Obama’s Halo will continue to Dim; she will be aborted by her Party!!
Lnc

United States

#1066409 Jan 22, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
What's even funnier is you liberals have no problem with ignoring the Constitution when it comes to Americans being forced to buy something against their will or be penalized by the federal government and the IRS.
But have a hissy fit when something as important and crucial as voting requires one to present a photo ID first.
If someone wants to vote badly enough, they will find a way to get an ID. Presenting a photo IDs is required for much less important things.
Another post which illustrates your lack of knowledge regarding constitutional law.

Voter ID laws need to include many forms of ID, not only those chosen by the right wing,:-) and Federal Judges rule on thesw as provided by constitutional law.

Christie in 2016 ..he is unharmed by the traffic jam.
Does drive Galt up the wall :-)

Has be several hours since your reposted:
Benghazi
Naked women photos
Birth certificates
"His real father"
How Blacks are running to the GOP ;-)
Youtube proof of one of your yarns ....

Peace
NuculurVodkaOpti on

Satellite Beach, FL

#1066410 Jan 22, 2014
Lily Boca Raton FL wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, well most people can see how fragile he is. Wonder if he's coming out of the closet?
All of the "fragile people" would do well to sue him for causing them severe psychological damage; like the goons on here. Glen, Rush, Levin and the rest of the merry band of hatemongers should all be sued; that's the only way to get to these guys, take their money.
Everyone has witnessed how fragile Obama is when he attempts to throw a baseball or when he skips up to a podium to read from his teleprompter.

“Bill Clinton could have ”

Since: May 10

Prevented this

#1066411 Jan 22, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
or Bush.
13 Benghazis Happened Under President Bush and Fox News Said Nothing
http://www.policymic.com/articles/40811/13-be...
Really ? how many Ambassadors were killed and how many times did the administration lie about it being a video?
Lnc

United States

#1066412 Jan 22, 2014
Lily Boca Raton FL wrote:
<quoted text>
yes, yes, no, no
Rand Paul? hilarious. Perhaps he and Cruz could run together and have a true whining contest.
Who writes Rand Paul's material.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#1066413 Jan 22, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course it's unreasonable. Where there's a will, there's a way. Photo IDs are required for much less important things.
It really does sound like all the hysteria about this is out of fear of losing an election. Funny that Republicans have absolutely no concerns or fears - just Democrats.
yet what voter fraud would you think this would deter? the only real voter fraud going on is from illegal citizens voting and the id we all have doesn't show our citizenship status...

logic is fun!

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#1066414 Jan 22, 2014
yes wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry there cutie but I believe you are under some sort of an illusion that isn't very practical. You lump all democrats as food stamp users & relying on the government to help them. Soooooooooo, no republicans do? Hmm, that's just odd, downright rude & incorrect. Besides, y'all bitch & moan about our government helping those in need but when YOU need some type of assistance, it's all good. Right? Can't play both sides there bucky.
So no right wingers need help? Good, then pay more in taxes.
I believe the question SHOULD be - If, IF the voter ID will be required, that would mean that the republican votes would lower by millions for there would no longer be duplicate people voting. Republicans do that, ya know.
Oh, for heaven's sakes. No one lumped anyone into anything. You're just becoming hysterical. That's all.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#1066415 Jan 22, 2014
flack wrote:
<quoted text> When are you nutjobs going to realize he didn't lie about or try to cover up any of them. Libtards are SO stupid!!!
What's the difference?
Lnc

United States

#1066416 Jan 22, 2014
It was a big week for voters both nationally and locally with the Voting Rights Act of 2014 bill being introduced in Congress and

a Pennsylvania state judge striking down the Commonwealth’s Voter

ID law as unconstitutional.

The Voter ID Law, or Act 18 in Pennsylvania, one of the strictest in the nation, required all voters to show state-approved identification in order to cast a ballot. On Friday morning, Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Judge Bernard L. McGinley issued an order permanently blocking the controversial law that critics said would disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of voters. Judge McGinley’s ruling can be appealed by the commonwealth, but state lawmakers who opposed the law are pressing Gov. Corbett to abide by the judge’s decision.

Senate Democratic Majority Leader Jay Costa, D-Allegheny, said the law was an attempt by Republican lawmakers to freeze participation in the political process.

“Senate Democrats have said clearly and repeatedly that the Voter ID law was an overreach that would result in the disenfranchisement of hundreds of thousands of voters,” said Costa.“It was a law that should have never been approved and we are very happy that the court turned aside the measure today. There has been too much upheaval and confusion about preserving the right to vote. Plus taxpayers have had to pay too much in trying to defend this ill-conceived law. The measure was unconstitutional and political, and could not stand legal scrutiny. Simply put, it was an effort by Republicans to deny citizens access and a voice in their government that should have been dismissed. Instead of trying to find ways to stop citizens from voting, we should be doing mor

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#1066417 Jan 22, 2014
The real problem with the American right: Aging, white radicals

""The Republican Party’s total failure to make even cosmetic changes to its image and policy agenda last year has at this point become the kind of cliché-cum-running joke that often attaches itself to accepted truisms in American politics. Like chucking about Bill Clinton’s inability to contain himself in the company of women, or noting that Dick Cheney actually ran the show during George W. Bush’s first term, observing that Republicans have failed to moderate or reinvent themselves after losing badly in 2012 is the kind of thing even sympathetic political wise men can say to signal that they get it. That in what was a tough year for President Obama, Republicans screwed up too.

But the observation of these symptoms is less crucial than the diagnosis. Why are Republicans so stuck?

When it became clear about a year ago that Republican leaders would have a much harder time advancing immigration reform than they realized — that GOP activists and conservatives were livid about the idea that Republicans were going to help illegal immigrants gain citizenship — it started to look like the party had an insoluble problem on its hands. Watching Republicans attempt to broaden their appeal to growing, traditionally Democratic constituencies has been like watching someone try to cover a bedroom floor with a poorly cut carpet, fastening it into one corner but pulling it out of the others in the process.

They can’t connect with traditionally Democratic constituencies without breaking connection with their reliable supporters. They can tug in every possible direction, but at some point they need to acknowledge that the carpet’s too small.""

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#1066418 Jan 22, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
free will.
unlike you, i don't like to try to impose my views upon others. you want your kids to end up with some kind of traumatic injury, have at it.
you know, with some people, i'm not sure brain injury would be that big of a deal...probably the best they can contribute to this world is as a gladiator....
Lnc

United States

#1066419 Jan 22, 2014
shinningelectr0n wrote:
<quoted text>
Th .......he?!!
Judge Bernard McGinley of the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania ruled against the state’s strict voter ID law last week following a lengthy trial last summer. The law had been temporarily blocked since last October pending a full trial. The ruling is a big win for voting rights and a clear setback for voter ID supporters.

Judge McGinley found that the law violated the state constitution because hundreds of thousands of registered voters lacked the restrictive forms of ID required by the state, few had obtained the requisite ID since the law’s passage in March 2012, the state had not made it easy to get an ID and there was no evidence of in-person voter fraud to justify the burdens of the law.

“Bill Clinton could have ”

Since: May 10

Prevented this

#1066420 Jan 22, 2014
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>like that would ever happen....
you do realize they don't deal directly with the security of specific consulates and missions, don't you? probably not, that is why progeny of your gene pool won't have to worry about that scenario...
Really? I live in the United States of America, where all things are possible. Children can grow up to do great things, no matter what their gene pool is--at least that is the America I grew up in. The American dream has changed since O'bama was elected?...according to your statement, it is because he is black? seems so. Liberals like you always think they are the intelligentsia-striving to be average. Striving to be average is not in my DNA-striving to be the best, that is our family!

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#1066421 Jan 22, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course it's unreasonable. Where there's a will, there's a way. Photo IDs are required for much less important things.
It really does sound like all the hysteria about this is out of fear of losing an election. Funny that Republicans have absolutely no concerns or fears - just Democrats.
Your stupidity is amusing!!

If the Repugs weren't scared shirtless, they would never have fought for Voter ID.

You want voter id because your side is losing elections.

If the founding fathers thought Voted ID was needed, it would be in the Constitution.

Ask your buddy Dweeb about the Constitution. LOL

It's not, so you can't impose it on people. Esp. when there is no evidence of voter fraud.

It is simply a means to disenfranchise the poor, the students, the minorities.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#1066422 Jan 22, 2014
flack wrote:
<quoted text> When are you nutjobs going to realize he didn't lie about or try to cover up any of them. Libtards are SO stupid!!!
The Majority concludes that the interagency coordination process on the talking points followed normal, but rushed coordination procedures and that there were no efforts by the White House or any other Executive Branch entities to "cover-up" facts or make alterations for political purposes.

http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/benghazi20...

so let's talk preventable....

The State Department had warned of a potential strike against the Saudi days before gunmen infiltrated the Al Hamra Oasis Village and two others killing 36 people and wounding 160. This was the most devastating attack on a State Department employees to occur under Bush.

U.S. Diplomat David Foy was specifically targeted in the third attack in as many years on the Karachi consulate compound. He was one of four people killed.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/40811/13-be...

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#1066423 Jan 22, 2014
Lily Boca Raton FL wrote:
<quoted text>
yes, yes, no, no
Rand Paul? hilarious. Perhaps he and Cruz could run together and have a true whining contest.
In 2009, before an interview with "Pay Czar" Kenneth Feinberg, the White House announced that Fox News would be banned from the press pool. It marked the first time in history that an administration attempted to ban an entire network from the press pool.

To their credit, the other networks objected. They told the White House that if Fox were banned, none of the other networks would participate. The White House relented, but in an apparent act of petulant retaliation, it restricted each network to a two-minute interview instead of the standard five.

So the answer to that one is "yes".

The Senate Intelligence Committee answered the last one. It's a "yes" too.

So your score is 50%.

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) 2 hr Dr Guru 214,265
Word (Dec '08) 3 hr Raydot 6,132
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 5 hr GEORGIA 8,362
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 5 hr GEORGIA 2,396
last post wins! (Dec '10) 6 hr They cannot kill ... 2,024
last post wins! (Apr '13) 7 hr They cannot kill ... 974
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 7 hr freelancehobo 59,437
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages