Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1433353 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

Carlisle, PA

#1080224 Feb 15, 2014
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
only dumbf*cks need to be taught personal hygiene.....
So, when did you learn.
Nostrils Waxman

Windsor, CT

#1080225 Feb 15, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
their loss. compare the union negotiated pay scale in Germany against ours, and i'd think most people would want a piece of that.
it's 2 to 3 times more than they pay American workers.
A set back for the Democrat Union Thug man in a state that values freedom and prosperity.

Now they can be assured jobs there instead of Democrats/Commies destroying the jobs because of short-term greed.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#1080226 Feb 15, 2014
Liberals R Defective wrote:
<quoted text>You mean like Obama did in the same election? If you like your doctor, etc.,etc. Romney could live to a hundred years old and never tell as many bald faced lies as your favorite Marxist did in the last seven years. How can you tell when a democrat is lying? If he or she is still breathing.
Every person who talks and writes about politics gets stuff wrong. I’ve gotten my fair share wrong. But what I think I got most wrong in Campaign 2012 was the damage Mitt Romney’s “47%” remark would do to him.

It may seem obvious, but bear with me.

Mitt Romney was talking off the cuff to a supposedly off the record group of donors and muddled several data points together, ultimately telling the tale of the 47% who won’t vote for him for any reason. He was referencing the 47% who don’t pay taxes and interwove it with a 47% of locked in Obama support. The statement was a mess.

I didn’t think Mitt Romney would be as hurt by the statement as he was because I assumed Romney had misspoken in an off the cuff way. I assumed Romney would clarify that he knew many of those who have government assistance did not actually want the assistance, but needed it. I assumed he’d make the case that he’d help those people get off the government dole and back into work.

In other words, I assumed Romney believed what I believe — many of those people are good people who fell on hard times and are not of the same class of people who will vote for Barack Obama for free stuff. I was absolutely wrong. Romney not only believes completely what he said as he said it, he reinforced it with his post election analysis of his defeat blaming gifts to various classes of people. If that was true, as Newt Gingrich pointed out, Romney had plenty to gift to plenty strapped to the back of marching elephants.

Note to Mitt Romney: really, it’s you, not them. Seriously.

http://www.redstate.com/2012/11/20/ronald-rea...

that's why Mitt lost.

Since: May 11

Carlisle, PA

#1080227 Feb 15, 2014
harmonious wrote:
<quoted text>
Where's the jobs, sonny boy?
Brokeback Barry hasn't fixed anything:
This “official unemployment rate” has been manipulated throughout the years. The current version does not include discouraged workers (those who stop looking for work, or no longer can qualify for unemployment benefits) and the underemployed (those who take part-time jobs just to get by).
Rep. Duncan D. Hunter, R-Calif., stated in The Washington Times,“The official unemployment rate treats this subset of Americans, totaling as many as 88 million people, as if they just vanished ... call it what it is, an accounting gimmick.”
So What Is the Real Number That Obama Would Prefer You Don’t See?
The real unemployment rate is an eye-opening 22.3%, according to John Williams with Shadow Government Statistics ... nearly triple the “official unemployment rate.”
But as alarming as this number is, certain experts — like Dick Morris, John Bolton, Lou Dobbs, Newt Gingrich, and Larry Kudlow — believe our economic situation could get much, MUCH worse.
Read more: Jobless rate is inaccurate as Obama Plays a Numbers Game
Thinking those 88 million are people are wanting jobs is a gimmck. The number represents everyone ver 16 not working.

You people are dumber than sh*t.
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1080228 Feb 15, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
If O'Reilly had let Obama bloviate and double speak like he always does when confronted with hard questions, he wouldn't have been able to ask any more questions.
It was the interview with Fox after the other cameras stopped rolling that was the better interview and should have been the live one shown.
However, the question O'Reilly is pounding Republican investigators to look into now is: "Did Leon Panetta tell the president on the night of 9/11/12 that the embassy was under a terrorist attack"?
Because if Panetta is subpoenaed and answers under oath that he did, in fact, tell the president Benghazi was a terrorist attack within minutes after it began (which he testified he knew it was), it's all over but the cryin'.
If it's proven this president covered up a terrorist attack to win a reelection, it's all over.
So finally, finally, finally...someone is honing in on the obvious and getting closer to what should have been done months ago. I was getting worried there for a while, but O'Reilly finally came through.
Leon Panetta is the key to the truth - as O'Reilly kept emphasizing - and if the truth is revealed by Panetta, Obama's presidency is over.
Go ahead Carol just keep talking in circles with the same bullcrap repeated ad nauseam. Once again nitwit no one ever denied that this was a terrorist attack. Here's what the Senate Select Committee said on your alleged cover-up.
"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. Indeed, former CIA Director David Petraeus testified to the Committee on November 16, 2012, "They went through the normal process that talking points-unclassified public talking points-go through." In fact, the purpose of the National Security Council (NSC) is to coordinate the many national security agencies of the government, especially when information about a terrorist attack is flowing in and being analyzed quickly-and the NSC used this role appropriately in the case of the talking points coordination. Furthermore, such coordination processes were also standardized, often at the urging of Congress, following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks with the explicit goal of reducing information "stovepipes" between and among agencies.[Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 11-12, 2012, U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, 1/15/14] "
THERE WAS NO COVER-UP STUPID!
But go ahead and keep up the lies.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#1080229 Feb 15, 2014
Nostrils Waxman wrote:
<quoted text>
A set back for the Democrat Union Thug man in a state that values freedom and prosperity.
Now they can be assured jobs there instead of Democrats/Commies destroying the jobs because of short-term greed.
you really do need to read this.

Job 1 for GOP: Pretending Not to Be Crazy

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2014/02...
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1080230 Feb 15, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
No one wants poor families cut off from food stamps and medical care.
Are you for real?
But some people have made food stamps, free housing, more babies and more welfare and living off the backs of others a permanent lifestyle without even a conscience thought this might be wrong.
As Neil Cavuto said, "Be compassionate. Just don't be stupid."
No one is denied medical care in this country just by going to any ER. The idea was to reform health care. Nothing is going to change but it's just going to be much worse for the middle class now.
Sure Carol just keep repeating the same old ignorant stereotypes about the poor.
Myth:“People on welfare are lazy and sit at home collecting it while the rest of us work to support them.”
Fact: The welfare reform law that was signed by President Clinton in 1996 largely turned control over welfare benefits to the states, but the federal government provides some of the funding for state welfare programs through a program called Temporary Assistance For Needy Families (TANF). TANF grants to states require that all welfare recipients must find work within two years of first receiving benefits. This includes single parents, who are required to work at least 30 hours per week. Two-parent families are required to work 35 to 50 hours per week. Failure to obtain work could result in loss of benefits. It is also worth noting that, thanks to the pay offerings of companies such as Walmart, many who work at low wage jobs qualify for public assistance, even though they work full-time.
Myth:“Welfare recipients keep having more kids so they can get more benefits.”
Fact: According to a 2010 report released by the federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the average family receiving TANF benefits has 1.8 children, which is about the same as the national average. Half of the families receiving TANF benefits only have one child. In fact, the average size of families receiving welfare benefits has declined from 4.0 in 1969 to 2.4 in 2010. Also, some states, such as Delaware and Georgia, make it clear to those who sign up for TANF benefits that their benefits will not increase if they have additional children. Taken from the Delaware Department of Health and Human Services website:
You will get information on family planning. Your check will not increase if you have a baby 10 months or more after you sign up for this program.
A Government Accountability Office report (page 45), shows the amount of TANF benefits paid in each state for one to three children. Even in states where having additional children will result in a benefit increase, that increase is, in most cases,$100 a month or less.

Myth:“Most welfare recipients are drug users.”
Fact: That’s apparently what Florida governor Rick Scott thought, too. The state of Florida began drug testing welfare recipients in 2011. About 2 percent tested positive for drug use. According to the New York Times, federal statistics show that the rate of drug use among welfare recipients is about the same as it is for the public at large.
Stop lying and denigrating the poor Carol, it's not very Christian.
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1080231 Feb 15, 2014
TSM wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to ask Reid why he’s fail to bring up Legislation passed by the House that’s setting there in the Senate for an Up or Down vote!! You don’t think he’s playing Politics do you?
Because moron, the Senate isn't going to waste time and taxpayer money on asinine legislation that does nothing and will go nowhere.
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1080237 Feb 15, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, let's see...he's taken away my freedom of choice about my own health care provider and applauded CVS for taking away others' freedom of choice to smoke even e-cigarettes when he was until very recently a smoker himself. He gave me no choice in how much more he took out of my paycheck last year and my husband's this year and next to pay for his failed policies. And if it were up to him, he'd take away my freedom of choice to have a gun to defend myself.
So the old adage, "the government can give but it can also take away" must be etched on a plaque somewhere in the Oval Office.
Really nitwit? Like you actually had a choice before? Insurance companies always had certain networks that excluded some physicians. Ten years ago I had to switch doctors when the plan I was under changed. You're a diabetic and before the ACA was passed you could be denied coverage under pre existing conditions clauses.
CVS isn't selling cigarettes. BIG WHOOP! Buy them elsewhere. Get a BJ's membership and buy them by the carton and you'll save money.
Nobody gets to say how much they pay in taxes dumbass! Obama hasn't raised your income taxes at all stupid! At any rate it's not the President who decides tax rates, its Congress.
Obama hasn't proposed anything about preventing you from getting a gun liar; he's proposed background checks to keep them out of the hands of criminals. You're not a criminal are you Carol? Probably not but if you think that having a gun makes you safer, you're a fool. A gun in the home is exponentially more likely to injure or kill a family member than repel a criminal.
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1080240 Feb 15, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
What's funny (and sad) is you think this is really over. What's scary is how desperately you want to think it is.
Any reason why Panetta hasn't come out of hiding by now and put this to rest once and for all? All he'd have to say in front of one camera is, "I did not tell the president Benghazi was under a terrorist attack within minutes after it began that night."
But he's nowhere to be found - like he suddenly disappeared.
Could it possibly be he may not want to be found? Because he might have to be truthful and say otherwise? And his simply telling the truth would bring down this presidency?
That's a pretty good reason to remain in hiding if you ask me...considering who your enemies would be at that point.
Sure Carol, just keep chasing your tail with those delusional talking points that have been debunked for a while.
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1080241 Feb 15, 2014
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
there are ample grounds for impeachment of Obama, but not sufficient votes in the US Senate......
Really? What grounds would they be?
You're an idiot Galt!
Nostrils Waxman

Windsor, CT

#1080242 Feb 15, 2014
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure Carol, just keep chasing your tail with those delusional talking points that have been debunked for a while.
Jesus Lugnut! You haven't run out of Carol's posts yet?
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1080243 Feb 15, 2014
Homer wrote:
Note to self: Stay the fck out of Oklahoma
I think if Texas wants to secede we should let them but only if they take Oklahoma with them. It would raise the average IQ of the rest of the country by at least 20 points and we'd get rid of some of the more insane members of Congress.

“Amor patriae.”

Since: Feb 08

Eastern Oregon

#1080244 Feb 15, 2014
dem wrote:
<quoted text>
Fk you tea bag terrorist.
Here you are again, banging on pots and pans.
Nostrils Waxman

Windsor, CT

#1080245 Feb 15, 2014
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
I think if Texas wants to secede we should let them but only if they take Oklahoma with them. It would raise the average IQ of the rest of the country by at least 20 points and we'd get rid of some of the more insane members of Congress.
How about if all the red states that voted against Al Gore secede Libtardulant?

That would leave you commies with 17 states! The we could watch you Democrats destroy yourselves much quicker.

http://www.rothcpa.com/archives/misc/statesfi...
dem

Chicago, IL

#1080246 Feb 15, 2014
mdbuilder wrote:
<quoted text>
Here you are again, banging on pots and pans.
Just telling it like it is, you geriatric racist idiot.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#1080247 Feb 15, 2014
mdbuilder wrote:
<quoted text>
Here you are again, banging on pots and pans.
wow, is that ever the pot calling the kettle black!
your posts take about two seconds to be shown to be crap...
lots of noise, no substance.

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#1080248 Feb 15, 2014
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure Carol, just keep chasing your tail with those delusional talking points that have been debunked for a while.
Nothing has been "debunked". Both Congressional and FBI investigations are still underway.

If Panetta is subpoenaed and testifies under oath that he told the president Benghazi was, in fact, a terrorist attack within minutes after it began, it's all over but the cryin'.

O'Reilly challenged one of the investigators on his show - reminding him and his audience that Panetta is the "key" - emphasizing the importance of focusing only on him.

Panetta and Gen. Ham testified in the original investigation that they knew within minutes after it began it was a terrorist attack. Panetta went directly to brief the president.

Nothing is debunked. Neither is Obama's fantasy that there wasn't "a smidgeon of corruption" with the IRS. The jury is still out and both of you should wait until the verdict is in.

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#1080249 Feb 15, 2014
Nostrils Waxman wrote:
<quoted text>
Jesus Lugnut! You haven't run out of Carol's posts yet?
I'm PDupont's proverbial squeaky wheel.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#1080251 Feb 15, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing has been "debunked". Both Congressional and FBI investigations are still underway.
If Panetta is subpoenaed and testifies under oath that he told the president Benghazi was, in fact, a terrorist attack within minutes after it began, it's all over but the cryin'.
O'Reilly challenged one of the investigators on his show - reminding him and his audience that Panetta is the "key" - emphasizing the importance of focusing only on him.
Panetta and Gen. Ham testified in the original investigation that they knew within minutes after it began it was a terrorist attack. Panetta went directly to brief the president.
Nothing is debunked. Neither is Obama's fantasy that there wasn't "a smidgeon of corruption" with the IRS. The jury is still out and both of you should wait until the verdict is in.
are daft? what would Panetta's opinion of that at that time matter?

we all knew it was a terrorist attack from second one, as the president clearly stated the next day...

i think you were told to parrot something you didn't copy down correctly. go back over your tapes...

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) 2 min Cops 103,644
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 14 min No Saint Boy 61,511
last post wins! (Apr '13) 1 hr honeymylove 1,713
last post wins! (Dec '10) 1 hr honeymylove 2,562
Four letter word game (Dec '11) 1 hr RACE 2,081
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 1 hr RACE 3,200
Word (Dec '08) 1 hr RACE 6,757
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 2 hr Coffee Party 225,423

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages