Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1644227 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.

PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1099361 Mar 18, 2014
Incognito4Ever wrote:
Raising the income tax which affected everyone's take home pay and also raising taxes on more of everything we consume isn't helping the economy or unemployment. In fact, the economy is just barely crawling and unemployment is getting worse among minorities.
So why support these policies?
The only ones whose income taxes have gone up are those making over $600,000 a year. So where do you get this "everyone" STUPID? Consumption taxes are mostly state and local. Obama raised taxes on cigarettes and tanning beds. So what? Less than 20% of Americans smoke so that for most it's a non issue. Like you I'm a smoker but I'm willing to accept a higher price for my habit. Most people don't use tanning beds so that's a non issue also. There are no federal taxes on things like groceries, clothing or other consumer goods; those are either state or local.
There never has been any connection between taxes and the strength of the economy. You've made this claim on numerous occasions before Carol and it's just as asinine as it was the first time. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act which did address unemployment predated the Affordable Care Act by a year and it did produce a short-term recovery. We dropped 8.9 percent of GDP in Q4 2008. We lost 800,000 jobs in January 2009. We passed the stimulus. And then the next quarter we saw the biggest jobs improvement in 30 years.
Contrary to your lies, the ACA isn't doing anything to hobble the economy. If you want to assign any blame then look to the GOP who are intent on blocking any legislation that would create jobs by rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, investing in education and providing working Americans with a living wage.
How did an idiot like you graduate from college?
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1099362 Mar 18, 2014
Okay two of my posts somehow got combined. I don't know how, but my bad.
angel

Boise, ID

#1099363 Mar 18, 2014
Buroc Millhouse Obama wrote:
Good morning good people and a good morning to you nasty, frustrated liberals too!
Frustrated?
You must be confused weve been on the winning side for years now and things just keep looking better.
How are things in the Irrelevant Loser camp this morning?
How about that Benghazi huh?
The Healthcare act is still Law and I noticed the sky hasnt fallen yet,how about that?
And Obama STILL has another two and a half years of being a President who doesnt have to worry about Reelection.
Looking like another great day!

Since: May 11

Blain, PA

#1099364 Mar 18, 2014
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
The states write the contract. Missouri claimed to be the first state to write an interstate highway contract. The states maintain them and police them. The interstate is a state toll road here, Pa., and Delaware. There is federal plans, money, and uniformity involved. The only thing new about them is the nonstop highway and speed about them. We've had Baltimore Pikes and Monmouth Pikes here since colonial times. Post roads in the constitution allowed for them.
The old interstates of the 1920s were roads like Rt-1 along the eastern seaboard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highw...
That may be but when federal money is involved, the federal government can specify certain conditions.

When a bridge was repaired in California, local officials refused federal money in order to sidestep certain requirements like the use of US materials. Thy brought in a Chinese company to do the repairs.

In this manner, the federal government can specify a minimum wage for those working on that project.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1099365 Mar 18, 2014
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean after 9-11, right?( I love how you just out 9-11. You do know Bush was President, right?? Had been President for over 7 months, right? Had time to take how many trips to Crawford, Tx?)
When did Al Qaeda strike within the US after 9-11?
Well, the plane was still in Canadian air space and the bomb fizzled...(we really got lucky there)
The car bomb that just fizzled in Times Square...(we really got lucky there)
Terrorist attack at recruiting office in Little Rock, Arkansas.(didn't get so lucky there)
Fort Hood massacre.(didn't get so lucky there)
Boston Marathon bombing.(didn't get so lucky there)

All Islamist terrorist attacks on US soil since Obama was named President.
There were no Islamist terrorist attacks on US soil after 9/11(2001) while Bush was President.

But, when the Obama administration is so incompetent ... or part of the Islamist terrorist netowrk... Russia can tell us who the two Islamist terrorists are (name, address, passport number, photos, and connections to terrorist organizations) that bombed the Boston Marathon, and they can't identify them for four days after the bombing with a hundred photos of them, you can expect things like Islamist terrorist attacks in the United States to increase.

But, it isn't over yet.

Obama gave "special traveller" status to every Islamist terrorist in Saudi Arabia to enter the United States without any scrutiny.
And, as if that didn't get enough Islamist terrorists into the United States, Obama unconstitutionally rewrote the law to allow Islamist terrorists with "limited" contact (whatever that means) with known terrorist organizations to get a visa to the United States.

So, why is Obama importing hundreds, mayby thousands of Islamist terrorists into the United States? Do you think they're coming here to go to Disneyland?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1099367 Mar 18, 2014
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
So, who manages the interstate highway system & issues contracts for construction work?
Could it be the federal government??
And would that be under the executive branch?
And who runs the executive branch?
Interstate commerce, you moron. Interstate commerce.
angel

Boise, ID

#1099369 Mar 18, 2014
TheIndependentMajority wrote:
<quoted text>
What is this Ghost? Are you insuating the TEA party has no sense?
We need MORE of the ones with some sense in DC these days...no matter the ignorant label duhmlabel,
Moron.
Indonesia faces more significant maritime challenges and opportunities than do other Southeast Asian countries. Indonesia has 108,000 kilometers of coastline and claims around 5.8 million square km of exclusive economic zone (EEZ) with abundant natural resources, including huge reserves of fossil fuels and rich fishing grounds. This vast coastline and resource-rich maritime areas are also a source of numerous challenges including terrorism, piracy, illegal fishing, natural disasters, weapons peddling, drug trafficking, and other non-traditional and trans-national security threats.
Currently the main security concerns for Indonesia emanate from piracy and terrorism.[4] Several insurgent and terrorist groups operate in the country, with Jemaah Islamiah (JI) posing the most significant threat. Another source of tension in the region is presented by unsettled maritime borders and overlapping maritime resource claims. According to an article by Jakarta Post, "Of 10 neighbors, Indonesia has partially settled maritime boundaries with seven nations and has not yet established any maritime boundaries with the Philippines, Palau and Timor Leste." [5]
Of the three key neighbors-Australia, Malaysia, and Singapore-Indonesia's relations with Malaysia are the most sensitive, due to complex and overlapping claims over the maritime borders between the two countries. These claims are located in the Straits of Malacca and the exclusive southern economic zone, Singapore Straits, the Sulawesi Sea and the South China Sea.[6] Therefore, it is no surprise that in 2010 the Deputy Chief of Staff for Navy Vice Admiral Marsetio noted of all the unsettled maritime claims, that the ones with "Malaysia posed the biggest potential threat of conflict, especially over the disputed Ambalat area."
"Submarines are not a mere means of war but also a strategic equipment that could strengthen Indonesia's bargaining position against other countries." [17] The deterrent role of submarines was also noted by First Admiral Iskandar Sitompul in the context of the "Malaysia factor." He stated that Indonesia "must possess submarines with greater deterrent effect. If they [Malaysians] know we have that, they will be scared." [18]
Accordingly, in the last ten years at numerous occasions various senior TNI-AL officials have stressed the requirement for an increased number of submarines to protect national interests and guard resources as well as sea-lanes. In 2003, Jane's reported Admiral Bernard Kent Sondakh as stating that Indonesia needed at least six submarines if the country's key straits (Malacca, Sunda and Lombok) were to be secured.[19] In 2006, Agence France-Presse reported that Jakarta was contemplating procuring around 12 submarines from Russia, South Korea or China...
http://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/indonesi...
Teabaggers=Sense?
I think you have 'sense' confused with full-throttle idiocy.
LMAO!!!!!!!!
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1099370 Mar 18, 2014
Incognito4Ever wrote:
<quoted text>
Guess I'll just have to ask the question directly and start with you.
Raising the income tax which affected everyone's take home pay and also raising taxes on more of everything we consume isn't helping the economy or unemployment. In fact, the economy is just barely crawling and unemployment is getting worse among minorities.
Why do you support these policies?
Okay, once again.
The only ones whose income taxes have gone up are those making over $600,000 a year. So where do you get this "everyone" STUPID? Consumption taxes are mostly state and local. Obama raised taxes on cigarettes and tanning beds. So what? Less than 20% of Americans smoke so that for most it's a non issue. Like you I'm a smoker but I'm willing to accept a higher price for my habit. Most people don't use tanning beds so that's a non issue also. There are no federal taxes on things like groceries, clothing or other consumer goods; those are either state or local.
How did an idiot like you ever graduate from college?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1099371 Mar 18, 2014
More_ron wrote:
I have a feeling if Dave were White, his views would change drastically.
I'm in the mood for some Uncle Bens!
... pouring some of that Aunt Jemima syrup on my Aunt Jemima pancakes this morning.

Since: May 11

Blain, PA

#1099372 Mar 18, 2014
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure there are special interests, but everyone knows who they are. The government is much smaller and therefor more transparent. Take the bridge closing for instance.
The stupid seat belt for dogs law here had the ASPCA behind it and everyone knows it. If there was enough outrage, it could be repealed as any other law.
The minimum wage was raised here by public referendum. Direct control.
If sulfur was reduction was such a success before 2009, why was the lawsuit and judgment necessary in 2009?
The same groups that would influence on the federal level would be involved in State politics. Plus you get local influence. State governments are just smaller federal governments. You might get more control but it is far from "Direct" control.

If you are a Republican living in a Democrat district, your vote for state legislators is worthless. With gerrymandering, that is about all that is left.

Referendums are still majority rules by vote. Just like the minority elects the legislators & governors.

As for the cap & trade, it is still in effect & those that violate it would be subject to the consequences. The same concerns about a carbon cap & trade were argued when the acid rain cap & trade was put in place. Those concerns were proven wrong then like like they would today.
angel

Boise, ID

#1099373 Mar 18, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's say this again.
"...The intelligence we were receiving from France, Germany and Russia was the same intelligence we were receiving when Clinton was President, which is why the UN sanctions against Saddam Hussein remained in place...."
That's how Bill Clinton kept pressure on the UN to keep the 18 UN Resolutions active and the sanctions in place, that existed when Bush took office.
A review.
Saddam Hussein was stealing the money from the UN's oil-for-food scam that had been allowed because of the sanctions applied to Saddam Hussein because of the 18 UN Resolutions against Saddam Hussien, from which he was paying French, German and Russian contractors to rebuild his war machine.
Bush busted that shit up, didn't he?
Mission accomplished.
Keep trying to polish that "Mission Accomplished" turd DB!
To everyone outside the FOX fart bubble that whole episode is a sick joke.
A PUNCHLINE at the expense of thousands of dead and mutilated Young Americans.
And it always will be.
Teabagging Denial really doesnt re-write history.
angel

Boise, ID

#1099374 Mar 18, 2014
Black Maggots wrote:
<quoted text>Obviously a black poster. The stupidity stands out like a light bulb.
Yeah Idaho is a hot-bed of Liberal Blacks.
Never too early in the morning for a Teabagging Klan Boy Wannabe to get his stupid on.

Since: May 11

Blain, PA

#1099375 Mar 18, 2014
EasyEed wrote:
<quoted text>
"real dumb"
You as an expert on all things relating to the economy should have no problem answering the following questions;
- Why are fewer American's working then when the boy president nobama was elected?
- Why are fewer American's paying federal income tax since the boy president, nobama was elected?
- Why are the household incomes of American's down since the boy president nobama was elected?
Peace
KMA
GPUAR
Racist f*ck Eed with his slurs s sofa king stupid he thinks the President takes office the day after the election.

Your attempt to blame Obama for things that happened before he took office shows just how pathetic you people are.

What are more people hurting? Its called the Bush recession.
Tea Party

Boise, ID

#1099376 Mar 18, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
... pouring some of that Aunt Jemima syrup on my Aunt Jemima pancakes this morning.
Hi Black Voting Demographic!
We're the Tea Party and we approve of this message courtesy of DBWriter who would piss himself if he actuallyhad to say something like that to the face of a real Black person.

Since: May 11

Blain, PA

#1099377 Mar 18, 2014
Eman wrote:
<quoted text>
dave's logic. The cost of a 12 pack is the same for a man or woman so what's the point in selling less.
Wow, that was a stupid comparison.

We were talking about covering prostate problems. These only apply to men.

Beer is consumed by both men & women.

The question you can't seem to answer is this: How much cost would an insurance company add to cover a women for prostate exams & treatments?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1099378 Mar 18, 2014
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
The same groups that would influence on the federal level would be involved in State politics. Plus you get local influence. State governments are just smaller federal governments. You might get more control but it is far from "Direct" control.
If you are a Republican living in a Democrat district, your vote for state legislators is worthless. With gerrymandering, that is about all that is left.
Referendums are still majority rules by vote. Just like the minority elects the legislators & governors.
As for the cap & trade, it is still in effect & those that violate it would be subject to the consequences. The same concerns about a carbon cap & trade were argued when the acid rain cap & trade was put in place. Those concerns were proven wrong then like like they would today.
Typical totalitarian government promoting bullshit.
The closer the politicians lives to me, the more control I have over them.

Violate the cap and trade laws? What consequences? I don't see any consequenses applied to anyone in the Obama administration for blatantly violating laws.
Do you think, since it's obvious the federal law enforcement agencies are too incompetent to enforce the law, we should endorse vigilantism so we can get at least some law enforcement in the federal government? Right now it's obvious we don't have any law enforcement there.
If not, just how do you think we can stop the lawlessness in the Obama administration?

By the way, you didn't comment on those Islamist terrorist attacks in the United States since Obama was named President, while there were none... zero... nada... while Bush was President. Do you think that fact is related to Obama making the White House part of the Islamist terrorist network?
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1099379 Mar 18, 2014
Incognito4Ever wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm apparently the thorn in PDupont's side.
Don't flatter yourself Carol, you don't even rise to the level of minor annoyance. Your lies and distortions are way too easy to expose.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1099380 Mar 18, 2014
Tea Party wrote:
<quoted text>Hi Black Voting Demographic!
We're the Tea Party and we approve of this message courtesy of DBWriter who would piss himself if he actuallyhad to say something like that to the face of a real Black person.
I'm betting the computer screen you're talking to right now is really scared.
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1099381 Mar 18, 2014
Incognito4Ever wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't think it's those people you have to worry about. It's the ones who worship at the altar of Progressive Liberalism.
HEY STUPID! The Founding Fathers were progressive liberals! Those that fought against slavery were progressive liberals! Those that fought for a woman's right to vote were progressive liberals! Jesus was a progressive liberal!
Narrow minded, ignorant bigots like you however put the Nazis into power in Germany.
How did an idiot like you ever graduate from college let alone become a teacher?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1099382 Mar 18, 2014
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
That may be but when federal money is involved, the federal government can specify certain conditions.
When a bridge was repaired in California, local officials refused federal money in order to sidestep certain requirements like the use of US materials. Thy brought in a Chinese company to do the repairs.
In this manner, the federal government can specify a minimum wage for those working on that project.
Please tell us the process the federal government must go through to specify a minimum wage.

If you need, refer to the Constitution to answer this question.

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 Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr Into The Night 64,178
Joe Biden and PLAGIARISM. 1 hr Biden-s a DORK 11
HRC loves Alinsky's Rules for Radicals. 1 hr HRCs an EVIL bytch 7
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 7 hr They cannot kill ... 11,543
last post wins! (Apr '13) 9 hr honeymylove 2,658
Hillary did say Trump would grow debt trillions 11 hr William Jefferson... 4
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 12 hr Chicagoan by Birth 243,010

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages