Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1402731 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

#1096846 Mar 13, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
enforce?
Obama has been deporting immigrants at a record pace.
It has been proven otherwise. I myself posted the numbers. You are being dishonest.

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson acknowledged Tuesday that his department’s deportation numbers are now mostly made up of illegal immigrants caught at the border, not just those from the interior, which means they can’t be compared one-to-one with deportations under President Bush or other prior administrations.
The administration has argued it is tougher on illegal immigration than previous presidents, and immigrant-rights groups have excoriated President Obama, calling him the “deporter-in-chief” for having kicked out nearly 2 million immigrants during his five-year tenure.
PHOTOS: Celebrity deaths in 2014
But Republican critics have argued those deportation numbers are artificially inflated because more than half of those being deported were new arrivals, caught at the border by the U.S. Border Patrol. Previous administrations primarily counted only those caught in the interior of the U.S. by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
“Under the Obama administration, more than half of those removals that were attributed to ICE are actually a result of Border Patrol arrests that wouldn’t have been counted in prior administrations,” said Rep. John Culberson, Texas Republican.
“Correct,” Mr. Johnson confirmed.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/...
Follow us:@washtimes on Twitter
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#1096847 Mar 13, 2014
flack wrote:
Obama to Latinos: Dump Your Cell Phone and Cable to Pay for Health Insurance
March 12, 2014 by Daniel Greenfield
Hey America, would you like budgeting tips from the millionaire who made your health insurance obscenely expensive?
President Barack Obama held a Spanish language town hall at the Newseum last week and was asked a question from a man who wanted to buy Obamacare for a family of three but couldn’t afford it.
“Is the Affordable Care Act really affordable?” the moderator then asked Obama. Obama couldn’t settle on a single answer to the question, so he instead suggested that the man should just sign up for Medicaid, blamed Texas for affordable insurance not being available, and concluded by saying the man should cancel his telephone service if he can’t afford to pay for any of Obamacare’s health insurance options.
The president said the man should “prioritize health care” and cut spending on things like cable, cell phone, and other things to afford insurance.
I guess what I would say, if you looked at that person’s budget, and you looked at their cable bill, their cell phone bill, other things that they’re spending on, it may turn out that it’s just they haven’t prioritized health care because right now everybody is healthy.
Obama clearly has no idea what budgeting $36,000 for a family of three looks like. He’s never had to do it and he’s been living on taxpayer money, his every need waited on by a huge White House staff. When he travels abroad, so many people accompany him that it looks like an invasion.
Instead of significantly addressing the cost hikes in ObamaCare, Obama predictably tries to shift the blame onto everyone else.
1. He shifts blame onto Republican governors who didn’t expand Medicaid
2. And finally on the individuals who can’t afford his health care plan
The most irresponsible man in the White House in American history accuses ordinary people, whose problems, according to Senator Reid, are lies made up by the Koch brothers, of being irresponsible… even as he refuses to take responsibility for causing their suffering.
This is a Spanish language forum and Obama isn’t doing himself any favors here. Latinos lack a racial solidarity reason to vote for him. His approval is underwater among Hispanics with the key factor being the poor implementation of ObamaCare. Hispanic voters like government health care, but they don’t like the mess that Obama made of it.
And Obama’s response to them is to accuse them of wasting money on cable instead of health insurance.
Isn't that what I was saying before Obamacare? You called me cruel and insensitive!!!! LMAO!!!! Libtards are SO stupid!!!!
love the source.

FrontPageMag.com is a neo-conservative magazine founded by ex-Marxist (Trokskyite) turned neo-conservative activist David Horowitz.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/FrontPag...

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#1096848 Mar 13, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps you were blabbing in class, or just not paying attention when I told you.
You still weren't paying attention when it became a topic of discussion yesterday. And, it's in the post you're responding to this morning.
Do you do drugs every morning before you even get out of bed?
I don't blame you for being a pussee on this one DB. It had to hurt having your last pick for POTUS, Napolitano, kiss Jon Stewart twice and kneel in front of the Black woman and kiss her hand. I guess you're stuck whining about a RINO candidate in 2016 because you don't have the balls to get behind someONE.

“fairtax.org”

Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

#1096849 Mar 13, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
2001....
I hope you will join me in standing firmly on the side of the people. You see, the growing surplus exists because taxes are too high and government is charging more than it needs. The people of America have been overcharged and, on their behalf, I am here asking for a refund.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php...
'surplus'
the Man said it. must be true.
Bush was a progressive. But here from the same speech. Oh Mr. Peabody I'm never ashamed of any post or source it comes from. That is only in your pea sized brain. If the source isn't posted it's because it wasn't there in the first place. Now!!

Another priority in my budget is to keep the vital promises of Medicare and Social Security, and together we will do so. To meet the health care needs of all America's seniors, we double the Medicare budget over the next 10 years. My budget dedicates $238 billion to Medicare next year alone, enough to fund all current programs and to begin a new prescription drug benefit for low-income seniors. No senior in America should have to choose between buying food and buying prescriptions.

To make sure the retirement savings of America's seniors are not diverted into any other program, my budget protects all $2.6 trillion of the Social Security surplus for Social Security and for Social Security alone.

My budget puts a priority on access to health care, without telling Americans what doctor they have to see or what coverage they must choose. Many working Americans do not have health care coverage, so we will help them buy their own insurance with refundable tax credits. And to provide quality care in low-income neighborhoods, over the next 5 years we will double the number of people served at community health care centers. And we will address the concerns of those who have health coverage, yet worry their insurance company doesn't care and won't pay.

Together this Congress and this President will find common ground to make sure doctors make medical decisions and patients get the health care they deserve with a Patients' Bill of Rights.

When it comes to their health, people want to get the medical care they need, not be forced to go to court because they didn't get it. We will ensure access to the courts for those with legitimate claims. But first, let's put in place a strong, independent review so we promote quality health care, not frivolous lawsuits.

My budget also increases funding for medical research, which gives hope to many who struggle with serious disease. Our prayers tonight are with one of your own who is engaged in his own fight against cancer, a fine Representative and a good man, Congressman Joe Moakley. I can think of no more appropriate tribute to Joe than to have the Congress finish the job of doubling the budget for the National Institutes of Health.

The right way health care should have been fixed.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1096850 Mar 13, 2014
Grey Ghost wrote:
<quoted text>
More psycho babble from the forum idiot.It's idiots like you that will forever insure that we have a Democrat as president. Thanks BOZO.
You're suffering from severe symptoms of cognitive dissonance again. Let's try again to expose you to reality.

Confused you with Bush... Bush would rather have less than 5,000 killed and win than more than 30,000 killed and lose, dupe.
Now, where were we... oh, yeah.
You're running away again, just like you did when you arranged to get into the reserves when everyone else was getting drafted. And you even managed to get thrown out of the reserves.
Here's that post again so you can clarify your answer that you'd rather see over 30,000 Americans killed and lose than less than 5,000 killed and win.
So, your answer to the question is C) Do the exact same thing in the exact same place against the exact same enemy as the Soveits, and you're so stupid you expect to not have over 30,000 killed and ending up with the same outcome as the Soviets, right?
Makes sense. You're a treasonous fraud that slandered the Armed Forces with lies your entire life. You'd rather have over 30,000 Americans killed and lose than less than 5,000 killed and win.
You're a homo reservist that got thrown out, and joined those frauds pretending to be Vietnam veterans in the so-called "VVAW" that joined Kerry slandering American veterans with lies.
Is there a lure in my tacklebox you won't hit?

Since: Mar 14

Orlando, FL

#1096851 Mar 13, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
Game Over? Another Anti-Gay 'Religious Freedom' Bill Thwarted
Following in the footsteps of other "religious freedom" bills before it, the Mississippi version of the legislation was effectively neutered Wednesday.
The Jackson Clarion-Ledger reported the state House voted to form a study committee on the issue rather than approve the Senate-passed bill. The bill is now punted back to the Senate, which can either reject it, agree to it or propose negotiations. The committee's findings would be due at the end of the year.
The Mississippi bill might have been the religious freedom movement's best -- and perhaps last -- chance to get a broad bill signed into law, making the vote a significant blow to the effort.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/mississ...
Interestingly enough, only 3 states voted for same-sex marriage by popular vote. Six states by court decisions and 8 by state legislatures. 33 states continue to ban same-sex marriage.

So social issues that radically go against what many believe in these 14 states are being forced upon them anyway through court decisions and state legislators?

What happened to "we, the people" deciding what courts and legislators are now taking upon themselves to decide for us?

We, the people, are the government. We elect representatives to make our laws outside of religious and personal beliefs. The people decide on issues that relate to conscience - gay marriage, abortion and social issues which don't deny one's basic civil rights. Gays have civil rights but want to redefine marriage, and the people have no say in the matter whatsoever. Is this the kind of country you want? The state versus the people?

Why are people getting so worked up about businesses being forced to provide services for gay weddings in states where it isn't even legal? That makes absolutely no sense.

It's the underpinnings of progressive secular liberalism undermining the First Amendment where religious freedoms are concerned. That's all this is. But you should know that already.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1096852 Mar 13, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
so what's it like living on nutjob island?
Coulter is the perfect example of over the top crazy. if she can't even reach your standard of nutjob, then who does?
It's political maneuvering, moron. Coulter is in the camp that promoted Christie after he sabotaged the Republicans in exchange for the Democrats pulling their intended candidate out of the race for governor and substituting a sure loser. That's all. It isn't ideological insanity, which consumes the Democrats to the point of forcing them to ignore reality and facts.
Olive Magadino

Buffalo, NY

#1096853 Mar 13, 2014
I just wanted to say thanks, dem or leo or whoever the hell you are, I've just had my second outbreak of shingles in two months! I hope you're happy with yourselves!

Since: May 11

Blain, PA

#1096854 Mar 13, 2014
Incognito4Ever wrote:
<quoted text>
Interestingly enough, only 3 states voted for same-sex marriage by popular vote. Six states by court decisions and 8 by state legislatures. 33 states continue to ban same-sex marriage.
So social issues that radically go against what many believe in these 14 states are being forced upon them anyway through court decisions and state legislators?
What happened to "we, the people" deciding what courts and legislators are now taking upon themselves to decide for us?
We, the people, are the government. We elect representatives to make our laws outside of religious and personal beliefs. The people decide on issues that relate to conscience - gay marriage, abortion and social issues which don't deny one's basic civil rights. Gays have civil rights but want to redefine marriage, and the people have no say in the matter whatsoever. Is this the kind of country you want? The state versus the people?
Why are people getting so worked up about businesses being forced to provide services for gay weddings in states where it isn't even legal? That makes absolutely no sense.
It's the underpinnings of progressive secular liberalism undermining the First Amendment where religious freedoms are concerned. That's all this is. But you should know that already.
Another right whiner who believes it is OK for States to discriminate if they put it to a vote.

Since: Jan 11

Hackettstown, NJ

#1096855 Mar 13, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
love the source.
FrontPageMag.com is a neo-conservative magazine founded by ex-Marxist (Trokskyite) turned neo-conservative activist David Horowitz.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/FrontPag...
Wow! "Redbaiting and neocon punditry, to pushing pro-Likud Zionist propaganda". Your source has a very objective opinion.

Who would know better what the "New Left" is all about than a former participant like David Horowitz?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1096856 Mar 13, 2014
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Drag out that CRA excuse like a good little Tea Party dupe.
Has Paul Ryan apologized,.?
Its a simple question.
He voted for slashing revenues at a time of war. He voted for massive unfunded spending. If you had ever bothered to learn anything, you would know Paul Ryan is a big government, big spending person.
But here you are, Mr Dumbass Tea Party, supporting him.
t shows just how ihnorat you really are.
You keep referencing the CRA, moron. Have the Democrats appologized for collapsing our economy? No. Have the Democrats fixed their damage? No. Have the Democrats appologized for doubling the debt? No. Do the Democrats have any plan whatsoever to not double the debt again? No. Do the Democrats know the unpayable debt will collapse the government? Yes.

So, since only an idiot doesn't know the unpayable debt the Democrats are building will collapse the constitutional government (assuming the possibility, however remote, that the Democrats aren't idiots... except for Pelosi and Sheila Jackson, of course), what government do you Democrats have in mind to replace the constitutional government with? Would the totalitarian leaning of the departments and agencies be a clue? Would Obama acting like he's some kind of a banana republic dictator of African village chief and writing his own laws to suit the political whim be a clue?

What do you think the Democrats plan to replace the constitutional government with?

“fairtax.org”

Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

#1096857 Mar 13, 2014
Lily Boca Raton FL wrote:
LONDON (Reuters)– Four of the biggest U.S. technology groups collectively hold an estimated $124 billion in U.S. Treasury debt, much of it offshore, earning them tax-free interest, the UK’s Bureau of Investigative Journalism (BIJ) said on Thursday.
The finding means Apple Inc, Microsoft Corp, Google Inc and Cisco Systems Inc hold a large proportion of the $254.9 billion held in their foreign subsidiaries in U.S. Treasuries, according to securities filings reviewed by the London-based BIJ, a not-for-profit news organization.
Bringing the money home would trigger a tax bill, so the companies keep it offshore, partly to fund foreign expansion but also, executives say, to avoid a tax hit.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/03/13/tech-gi...
Nothing wrong or illegal about it so what's your point.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#1096858 Mar 13, 2014
flack wrote:
<quoted text> It has been proven otherwise. I myself posted the numbers. You are being dishonest.
Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson acknowledged Tuesday that his department’s deportation numbers are now mostly made up of illegal immigrants caught at the border, not just those from the interior, which means they can’t be compared one-to-one with deportations under President Bush or other prior administrations.
The administration has argued it is tougher on illegal immigration than previous presidents, and immigrant-rights groups have excoriated President Obama, calling him the “deporter-in-chief” for having kicked out nearly 2 million immigrants during his five-year tenure.
PHOTOS: Celebrity deaths in 2014
But Republican critics have argued those deportation numbers are artificially inflated because more than half of those being deported were new arrivals, caught at the border by the U.S. Border Patrol. Previous administrations primarily counted only those caught in the interior of the U.S. by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
“Under the Obama administration, more than half of those removals that were attributed to ICE are actually a result of Border Patrol arrests that wouldn’t have been counted in prior administrations,” said Rep. John Culberson, Texas Republican.
“Correct,” Mr. Johnson confirmed.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/...
Follow us:@washtimes on Twitter
In one term, the Obama Administration has deported roughly 80 percent the number of immigrants the George W. Bush administration deported in two.

In fiscal year 2012, 419,384 immigrants were deported from the U.S., beating the record of 392,862 in 2009. Based on data provided by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the Obama administration has deported roughly 1.6 million immigrants between 2009 and 2012. The previous administration deported about two million between 2001 and 2008.

Statistics also show a record number of deportations of immigrants with a criminal background and an increase of deportations of immigrants with a non-criminal background from 2011. While data for 2013 is not yet available, part of the increase seen in 2012 could be due to the increase in apprehensions along the U.S.— Mexico border, which increased from 340,000 in 2011 to 365,000 in 2012.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/obama-adm...

deflect all you must, but the numbers speak for themselves.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1096859 Mar 13, 2014
Emeem wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't blame you for being a pussee on this one DB. It had to hurt having your last pick for POTUS, Napolitano, kiss Jon Stewart twice and kneel in front of the Black woman and kiss her hand. I guess you're stuck whining about a RINO candidate in 2016 because you don't have the balls to get behind someONE.
Still babbling, I see.
Let's read that post again.

Perhaps you were blabbing in class, or just not paying attention when I told you.
You still weren't paying attention when it became a topic of discussion yesterday. And, it's in the post you're responding to this morning.
Do you do drugs every morning before you even get out of bed?

“Bill Clinton could have ”

Since: May 10

Prevented this

#1096860 Mar 13, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
Scott Walker Will Push Wisconsin State Legislature To Modify Voter ID Requirements
In a press release sent Tuesday, Wisconsin Democratic Party Chairman Mike Tate called Walker's efforts "an unconstitutional attack" that would disproportionately impact racial minorities, veterans, students and seniors.
"Now, Scott Walker and Republicans in the legislature want to change the rules of the game with a special legislative session," Tate wrote. "That's because, without real support for his failed economic policies or his radical social agenda, Scott Walker knows that the only way he can win is by keeping more people at home on Election Day."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/12/scot...
how did this country ever run when people could only vote on election day? when exactly did early voting start and why?
dem

United States

#1096861 Mar 13, 2014
Incognito4Ever wrote:
<quoted text>Interestingly enough, only 3 states voted for same-sex marriage by popular vote. Six states by court decisions and 8 by state legislatures. 33 states continue to ban same-sex marriage.

So social issues that radically go against what many believe in these 14 states are being forced upon them anyway through court decisions and state legislators?

What happened to "we, the people" deciding what courts and legislators are now taking upon themselves to decide for us?

We, the people, are the government. We elect representatives to make our laws outside of religious and personal beliefs. The people decide on issues that relate to conscience - gay marriage, abortion and social issues which don't deny one's basic civil rights. Gays have civil rights but want to redefine marriage, and the people have no say in the matter whatsoever. Is this the kind of country you want? The state versus the people?

Why are people getting so worked up about businesses being forced to provide services for gay weddings in states where it isn't even legal? That makes absolutely no sense.

It's the underpinnings of progressive secular liberalism undermining the First Amendment where religious freedoms are concerned. That's all this is. But you should know that already.
Your gay brother in law is thankful for your efforts to refuse him the same rights you and your hubby enjoy.
forks_make_us_fa t

Norman, OK

#1096862 Mar 13, 2014
Progressives can't make up their minds!!!!!

Pelsoi say's that R's don't care about hungry children...

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/03/how-a...

then we have this....

'Approximately 17%(or 12.5 million) of children and adolescents aged 2—19 years are obese.'

http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/childhood.htm...

Since: Mar 14

Orlando, FL

#1096863 Mar 13, 2014
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
You really are thick headed aren't you? The Religious Freedom Restoration Act protects the practice of religion unless the government can show a compelling interest related directly with core constitutional issues. It also was ruled unconstitutional as applied to state laws by the Supreme Court in the City of Boerne v. Flores decision in 1997. So the baker in Colorado or the photographer in New Mexico couldn't use the act to defend against lawsuits because the public accommodation laws in both those states prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.
The Arizona law was superfluous in that there is no prohibition against denial of services to gays and lesbians and to this date there haven't been any lawsuits in that state alleging discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation. Also if it wasn't vetoed it would allow a Muslim to refuse to do business with Christians or Jews. You'd really get your panties in a twist about that now wouldn't you?
When you enter the public sphere and offer goods or services then you can't pick and choose who you offer them to. Period. It's not me; it's the law in Colorado, New Mexico and 11 other states.
The people and each state are to decide whether their First Amendment rights should be denied - not undermined by courts and state legislators under the guise of progressive secular liberalism.

No one has been denied their basic civil rights. Redefining marriage and abortion are social issues that go against what many believe for religious reasons and/or personal convictions.

So you, like sonic, would prefer the people becoming subjects of the state? Do you have any understanding of the unintended consequences of this?
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#1096864 Mar 13, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
It's political maneuvering, moron. Coulter is in the camp that promoted Christie after he sabotaged the Republicans in exchange for the Democrats pulling their intended candidate out of the race for governor and substituting a sure loser. That's all. It isn't ideological insanity, which consumes the Democrats to the point of forcing them to ignore reality and facts.
forcing Dems to ignore reality and facts?

there's a very good reason that right wing nutjobs sites can't buy a decent internet rating. even the FOX news site sits below Huffpost. and if we start talking about sites like Breitbart or Daily Caller it's just laughable.

right wing sites that ignore reality and facts by acting like conservatives are feeding them reality and facts don't seem to be overly successful beyond nutjobs like yourself. most people, unlike you, don't like being misinformed.

“fairtax.org”

Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

#1096865 Mar 13, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
love the source.
FrontPageMag.com is a neo-conservative magazine founded by ex-Marxist (Trokskyite) turned neo-conservative activist David Horowitz.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/FrontPag...
It may be but it doesn't refute the fact that he said Mr Wizard!! You taking lessons from Mr. Peabody and Sherman now?

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 Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 14 min Cheffie 70,813
Four letter word game (Dec '11) 32 min GEORGIA 1,783
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 33 min GEORGIA 2,838
Word (Dec '08) 34 min GEORGIA 6,541
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr District 1 219,142
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 2 hr Juan Schanahan 103,110
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 2 hr SweLL GirL 9,189

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages