Barack Obama, our next President

There are 20 comments on the Nov 5, 2008, Hampton Roads Daily Press story 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.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1098811 Mar 17, 2014
angel wrote:
<quoted text>
Tea Bagging Chicken Little:The Internet is falling!!!! The Internet is falling!!!! LMAO!
You really need to work on your ability to read and comprehend the written English language, moron. Here's the post again. Give it another try.

Friday is the traditional day to make statements the government wants to be old news when everyone comes back from the weekend and starts paying attention again.
This past Friday was no exception for the treasonus Obama administration.
The Obama administration turns the internet over to their allied globalists.
On Friday the U.S. Commerce Department released its grasp on the internet. Oversight of ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, will be passed on to the “global internet community” next year.
... whatever the "global internet ommunity" is.
With this control comes the power to collect taxes from anyone using the internet, especially anyone doing commerce over the internet. You will be taxed by people whom you don't know who they are and have no control over.
Here we are right back at the beginning when we fought a war over taxation without representation.
This is more than putting organizations like the Musliim Brotherhood, for example, in the position of being able to collect a tax from the world, in particular from the people in the United States.
Additionally, this is Obama using a foreign proxy to take away the First Amendment right to free speech from everyone. You will be censored by people whom you don't know who they are and have no control over.
Everything the Democrats do has a history of starting a war with Americans.
http://www.teaparty.org/obama-administration-...

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1098812 Mar 17, 2014
Grey Ghost wrote:
<quoted text>
Really Butt breath, your god sucks just like all the other man made gods do.
... another religious fanatic.

Religion - a belief based on faith.

Show us your proof that God doesn't exist, moron.

You religious nuts really fuckup the world.
Black President

United States

#1098813 Mar 17, 2014
If people wanted a black president, why didn't they elect one? Obama is not black.

Since: May 11

Carlisle, PA

#1098814 Mar 17, 2014
Eman wrote:
<quoted text>
"fully funded by the federal government"...i feel so much better now, knowing its fully funded by my effing tax dollars! The government can fund squat until it takes money from folks like me. And when it can't afford to fund programs that are "fully funded by the federal government" people like me will still be funding it.
Eman hates supporting his country.

I would suggest that Eman pack up his sh*t & move to anther country

Eman would rarther Congress pass laws that are not funded. This is why he supports the right whiners in Congress. The just just pass sh*t & don't pay or it.

This makes Eman happy. He can save a few tax dollars & let future generations pay for it. Just like a good little right whiner POS.
PDUPONT

Belchertown, MA

#1098815 Mar 17, 2014
Incognito4Ever wrote:
<quoted text>
Afghanistan is and historically always has been an "unwinnable war".
We would have won the Iraq War and never have gotten involved in Afghanistan had Obama not insisted his war was the "right" war which was just the opposite. It's become another Vietnam - just like under another narcissistic president, Lyndon B. Johnson.
And a black flag wouldn't be flying over Baghdad as we speak reminding us the terrorists won after all.
HEY STUPID! What president originally invaded Afghanistan? It was George W. Bush! He did it two years before his disastrous adventure into Iraq. Afghanistan was at least somewhat justified by the presence of Al Qaeda; there was no justification at all for Iraq. The only ones who stood to gain from Saddam Hussein's removal were the Iranians and Bush gave them what they wanted on a silver platter.
There is no black flag flying over Bagdad liar!
How the hell did you even graduate from college?
You're an idiot Carol!
PDUPONT

Belchertown, MA

#1098816 Mar 17, 2014
Incognito4Ever wrote:
<quoted text>
They have not been debunked. They have been obstructed. The investigations are ongoing. Of course, taking the Fifth to protect those who could be removed from power is a tell-tale sign of something gone awry.
Or knowing lies were spread in a Senate Intelligence Report by those in power and seeking power to win an election (and a future election) is a nasty little inconvenience debunking the debunked.
Or did you conveniently forget those unfortunate inconveniences?
And what's your evidence for this dumbass? You have none the only thing you have is right wing talking points that have no resemblance to reality.
You're an idiot Carol!

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1098817 Mar 17, 2014
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
HEY STUPID! What president originally invaded Afghanistan? It was George W. Bush! He did it two years before his disastrous adventure into Iraq. Afghanistan was at least somewhat justified by the presence of Al Qaeda; there was no justification at all for Iraq. The only ones who stood to gain from Saddam Hussein's removal were the Iranians and Bush gave them what they wanted on a silver platter.
There is no black flag flying over Bagdad liar!
How the hell did you even graduate from college?
You're an idiot Carol!
As I recall, when Bush left office the Islamist jihad had been crushed in Iraq and Iraq was a funcitoning democracy. The complete existence of Al Qaeda was in the caves in the mountainous tribal region on the Afghan-Pakistan border.
Well, that is a disaster for you. By the way, we're sorry Ronald Reagan kicked the shit out of your side to end the Cold War.

Since Obama was named President, Al Qaeda has taken control of the western half of Iraq, and the Taliban and Al Qaeda are bombing every village and city in Afghanistan.

Now, back to that question you ran away from.

The surge troops for Afghanistan was for the purpose of mopping up the Taliban and Al Qaeda holed up in the caves on the Afghan-Pakistan border. Immediately after taking office, Obama ordered all combat against the Taliban and Al Qaeda cease, and all US forces to retreat from the mountains to the population centers.
So, since the surge was to mop up the caves in the mountains, and Obama ordered all US forces to retreat from the mountains...
Why did Obama send additional forces to Afghanistan?

Since: May 11

Carlisle, PA

#1098818 Mar 17, 2014
Eman wrote:
<quoted text>
the only problem with catastrophic health insurance is that it won't pay for your messiah's signature legislation. It does, however, solve the problem liberals cried about. It prevents people from losing their homes or filing bankruptcy because of a catastrophic health event.
It does not prevent anything o the sort. It only starts paying after you already paid out $20k or more & then what about when that year long policy ends & you are trying to get coverage with a pre-existing condition. That is if you don;t hit the ceiling of that policy first.

However, with the ACA, you no longer have pre-existing conditions as a factor & you could buy a policy in the exchanges.
PDUPONT

Belchertown, MA

#1098819 Mar 17, 2014
Incognito4Ever wrote:
The Intelligence Picture After the Attacks Contributed to the Controversial CIA Talking Points—In intelligence reports after September 11, 2012, intelligence analysts inaccurately referred to the presence of a protest at the U.S. mission facility before the attack based on open source information and limited intelligence, but without sufficient intelligence or eyewitness statements to corroborate that assertion. The IC took too long to correct these erroneous reports, which caused confusion and influenced the public statements of policymakers.
http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/press/reco...
(It confused them on purpose to win an election.)
As discussed below, omissions and wording choices contributed to significant controversy and confusion, as did an erroneous reference to "demonstrations." In addition, the Administration was slow to provide details explaining the drafting and editing process that produced the talking points. Speculation and conspiracy theories about the details could have been mitigated if the factual record of how the talking points were produced was provided sooner to this Committee and to the public..Officials in the Executive Branch and Members of Congress also added to the confusion in the days after September 11, 2012, by inconsistently characterizing the events in Benghazi. Officials provided vague and sometimes conflicting characterizations of the events
in some instances. Members of Congress also lent support to the narrative of a protest gone awry for days following the attack. For example, in a September 22, 2012,, resolution honoring the four Americans who died, the Senate unanimously adopted the narrative that the violence in Benghazi "coincided with an attack on the United States Embassy in Cairo, Egypt, which was also swarmed by an angry mob of protesters on September 11, 2012."
http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/benghazi20...
You can call it whatever you want, but it was a cover up and a subversion of democracy for political reasons to win an election.
No you goddamned liar, there was no cover-up. Here's what the report actually said;
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]
But go ahead keep chasing your tail on this it's fun to watch.
You're an idiot Carol!

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1098820 Mar 17, 2014
From an obscure literary work:

“However, slavery was still legally practiced in states that had been slave-states before the war began, and in Washington, D.C., and the auctions, although less common than previously exhibited for the purchasing part of the population, still drew crowds of the curious as well as the consumers of humanity, still had the expected entertaining performance with such antics as a boy slave, also being available for purchase, mounted on a wooden barrel that held flour or whiskey, or any other product commonly contained in such a configuration, also for sale, beating the cover of the barrel with highly polished black leather shoes in a rapid rhythm in concert with gyrations of the arms and hands while showing white teeth through an open smile adding highlight to the white of his eyes, wide with the ordered motivation to provide the most pleasant appearance possible to the union enlisted soldiers whiling away their time avoiding the boredom of waiting for the inevitable orders to move to the region of battle, and the idle rabble that managed to avoid conscription standing in a group next to the collection of soldiers, also grouped together, added to the cacophony of noise that could be heard all the way to Madam Lee’s whore house. The boy slave ended his performance bowing in a grandiose manner with one forearm folded tightly across his belly and black felt hat held high in the other hand outstretched upward from his folded torso, still smiling with eyes widely open, watching the hard tack tossed onto the barrel top, some of which didn’t reach and fell on the ground near the base, out of the corner of his eyes, and a coin bouncing off his shoe onto the barrel top, and the gathering in front of his stage gave him a half-hearted applause because it was expected and gave a sense of enjoyment to the boy slave.”

… then, one of the audience wanted to ask a question.“Mr. President….”
M Stein

New York, NY

#1098821 Mar 17, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
As I recall, when Bush left office the Islamist jihad had been crushed in Iraq and Iraq was a funcitoning democracy. The complete existence of Al Qaeda was in the caves in the mountainous tribal region on the Afghan-Pakistan border.
Well, that is a disaster for you. By the way, we're sorry Ronald Reagan kicked the shit out of your side to end the Cold War.
Since Obama was named President, Al Qaeda has taken control of the western half of Iraq, and the Taliban and Al Qaeda are bombing every village and city in Afghanistan.
Now, back to that question you ran away from.
The surge troops for Afghanistan was for the purpose of mopping up the Taliban and Al Qaeda holed up in the caves on the Afghan-Pakistan border. Immediately after taking office, Obama ordered all combat against the Taliban and Al Qaeda cease, and all US forces to retreat from the mountains to the population centers.
So, since the surge was to mop up the caves in the mountains, and Obama ordered all US forces to retreat from the mountains...
Why did Obama send additional forces to Afghanistan?
Things are pretty bad for The One if the front page of the New York Times has an article about his failings. Of course, it is worded as a lib paper would write == but the handwriting is on the wall that Obammy is a failure and the world is less safe because he is not a leader.

WASHINGTON — For five years, President Obama has consciously recast how America engages with the world’s toughest customers. But with Russia poised to annex Crimea after Sunday’s referendum, with a mounting threat to the rest of Ukraine and with the carnage in Syria accelerating, Mr. Obama’s strategy is now under greater stress than at any time in his presidency.

In his first term, the White House described its approach as the “light footprint”:“Dumb wars” of occupation — how Mr. Obama once termed Iraq — were out. Drone strikes, cyberattacks and Special Operations raids that made use of America’s technological superiority were the new, quick-and-dirty expression of military and covert power. When he did agree to have American forces join the bombing of Libya in 2011, Mr. Obama insisted that NATO and Arab states “put skin in the game,” a phrase he vastly prefers to “leading from behind.”

As he learned to play the long game, the Treasury Department became Mr. Obama’s favorite noncombatant command. It refined the art of the economic squeeze on Iran, eventually forcing the mullahs to the negotiating table.

But so far those tools — or even the threat of them — HAVE PROVED FRUSTRATINGLY INEFFECTIVE IN THE MOST RECENT CRISES. Sanctions and modest help to the Syrian rebels have failed to halt the slaughter; IF ANYTHING, THE KILLING WORSENED AS NEGOTIATIONS DRAGGED ON.

The White House was taken by surprise by Vladimir V. Putin’s decisions to invade Crimea, but also by China’s increasingly assertive declaration of exclusive rights to airspace and barren islands. Neither the economic pressure nor the cyberattacks that forced Iran to reconsider its approach have prevented North Korea’s stealthy revitalization of its nuclear and missile programs.

In short, America’s adversaries are testing the limits of America’s post-Iraq, post-Afghanistan moment.

“WE’RE SEEING THE ‘LIGHT FOOTPRINT’ RUN OUT OF GAS,” said one of Mr. Obama’s former senior national security aides, who would not speak on the record about his ex-boss.
“No one is arguing for military action, for bringing back George Bush’s chest-thumping,” the former aide said. At the same time, he said, the president’s oft-repeated lines that those who violate international norms will be “isolated” and “pay a heavy price” over the long term have sounded “more like predictions over time, and less like imminent threats.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/17/world/obama...

Of course, Obammy is probably busy with brackets this week. Priorities.
PDUPONT

Belchertown, MA

#1098823 Mar 17, 2014
Incognito4Ever wrote:
Is there no level too low for even Nancy Pelosi to stoop?
So she's up in front of a microphone and camera telling a grim story of some "GOP friend" of hers - some no name anonymous friend mind you - who "told" her that Republicans see the poor and even hungry children as "invisible" and the entire GOP feels "indifferent" towards them. Just for dramatic effect, she emphasizes the words "invisible" and "indifferent" again.
So who is this "GOP friend" of hers who "told" her that? The same "friend" who told Harry Reid to bald-faced lie about Romney's taxes? The same no name anonymous "friend" that doesn't exist in Pelosi's mind too?
Lie...cheat...steal...whatever ...Pelosi is the liberal poster child.
She proves there is no level too low when it comes to power, being power hungry and retaining power by any means necessary.
You on the left should be proud of your party.
That was nothing but a big fat political lie. Just like Reid's was. Just like Obama's are.
But some will still actually fall for it. God help us.
Sure Carol, but your own countless posts denigrating the poor as lazy and shiftless show the she was right on the money. The working poor are invisible to right wing sociopaths like you.
M Stein

New York, NY

#1098824 Mar 17, 2014
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
Monica Lewinsky actively pursued the relationship you clueless twit. No one took advantage of her.
Clinton was just continuing the Kennedy's War on Women. At least he didn't drown her and forget to tell anyone until he put on dry clothes, went to sleep and had breakfast the next day.
PDUPONT

Belchertown, MA

#1098825 Mar 17, 2014
Incognito4Ever wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't wait for Elmo to be speaker then. Pelosi doesn't have both oars in the water. She's a walking talking disaster who will say anything to retain power by any means necessary. Frankly, you should have more on the ball if this is the best you can do judging character.
Coming from a supporter of Mendacious Mitt and Lyin' Ryan, that’s hilarious!
Grey Ghost

Berryville, VA

#1098826 Mar 17, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
... another religious fanatic.
Religion - a belief based on faith.
Show us your proof that God doesn't exist, moron.
You religious nuts really fuckup the world.
Hey dumbo, how can I be a religious fanatic when i'm a non- believer? You mean this Is the best world that idiot could put together, all of the killing and all of the different religions, He wasn't smart enough to know this was all going to happen. Idiots like you, drugs, mayhem babies born dead or deformed, crippled children you believe because you are very weak minded. But thanks for being a Republican though, morons like you are great for us liberals.and the future of this nation.
forks_make_us_fa t

Norman, OK

#1098827 Mar 17, 2014
History...
is a...
Social Science...

and California and Unions...

"The Asiatic Exclusion League was formed as the Japanese and Korean Exclusion League on 14 May 1905 in San Francisco, California, by 67 labor unions. Among those attending the first meeting were labor leaders (and European immigrants) Patrick Henry McCarthy of the Building Trades Council of San Francisco and Andrew Furuseth and Walter McCarthy of the Sailor's Union."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asiatic_Exclusio...

Since: May 11

Carlisle, PA

#1098828 Mar 17, 2014
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
The so called obstructionists were elected representatives doing what they were elected to do, were they not? It's not a majority rule democracy yet.
Republicans & Democrats are standing on the deck of a ship. Uncle Same is over board & in the water. Democrats, the captains, want to throw out a life line & send out a rescue boat. The Republicans say that was too expensive & want to send in swimmers. Since the Captain s in charge, he decides to go with his plan. The Republicans the hide the life line & put holes in the rescue boat.

To the Tea Party, this is governing.

If the Tea Party does not get their way, they would rather our country sink then help it recover.

We need stimulus action like job bills. The assh*le Tea Party only wants to defund, weaken repeal the ACA & cut food stamps any any cost. Like your hero Cruz costing our eonomy 24 billion dollars for a stunt.

This is why you people are dumber than sh*t

Since: May 11

Carlisle, PA

#1098829 Mar 17, 2014
Teaman wrote:
That is what was said when the Cap & Trade was passed under Bush Sr.

Never happened.
TheIndependentMa jority

London, KY

#1098830 Mar 17, 2014
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Republicans & Democrats are standing on the deck of a ship. Uncle Same is over board & in the water. Democrats, the captains, want to throw out a life line & send out a rescue boat. The Republicans say that was too expensive & want to send in swimmers. Since the Captain s in charge, he decides to go with his plan. The Republicans the hide the life line & put holes in the rescue boat.
To the Tea Party, this is governing.
If the Tea Party does not get their way, they would rather our country sink then help it recover.
We need stimulus action like job bills. The assh*le Tea Party only wants to defund, weaken repeal the ACA & cut food stamps any any cost. Like your hero Cruz costing our eonomy 24 billion dollars for a stunt.
This is why you people are dumber than sh*t
Get a clue jackboot licking, tre hugging dhmfk...we just hope the world remembers the innocent, and keeps striving for BETTER (NOT LESS) protection of.

...Though JI originated in Indonesia, it has established networks with groups and sleeper cells in Southeast Asia accused of various terrorist acts. Because of its existing regional networks, JI is said to be behind the “Talibanization of Southeast Asia” and as such “has become an important and even key element of the discourse on terrorism in Southeast Asia.”[4] JI is closely connected with Islamist extremist groups in Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines and Thailand.

JI REGIONAL PARTNERS AND LINKAGES (TERRORISM CELLS IN SOUTHEAST ASIA)
Country

Terrorism Cells
Indonesia

Majilis Mujahidin Indonesia, Laskar Jihad, Laskar Jundulla, GAM, FPI, DI, Jammah NIII, Laskar Mujahidin, Mujahidin KOMPAK, ABB, AMIN, and RP11
Malaysia

Kumpulan Mujahidin Malaysia, Al-Muanah
Myanmar

Arakan Rohingya National Organization
Philippines

Abu Sayyaf Group, Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), Misuari Breakaway Group (MBG), Balik Islam/Rajah Solaiman Islamic Movement (BI/RSIM)
Thailand

Gerakan Mujahidin Pattani Islam

http://declassifiedrommelbanlaoi.blogspot.com...
M Stein

New York, NY

#1098831 Mar 17, 2014
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure Carol, but your own countless posts denigrating the poor as lazy and shiftless show the she was right on the money. The working poor are invisible to right wing sociopaths like you.
The working poor are unhappy with ANOTHER UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE of Obammy's meddling.

Union Diagnosis: Obamacare Irony (Income Inequality Made Worse) Bad For Workers

It’s been said that humor brings insight and tolerance where irony brings a deeper and less friendly understanding. United Here, a union representing 300,000 workers, has discovered unhealthy levels of irony in the Affordable Care Act.

THE UNION TAKES NOTICE THAT THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IS TRYING TO SHIFT THE CONVERSATION AWAY FROM THE HEALTH CARE LAW TO FRIENDLY DEMOCRAT ISSUES SUCH AS INCOME INEQUALITY. THE IRONY, AS THEY CALL IT, IS THAT THE ACA WILL ACTUALLY WORSEN INCOME INEQUALITY.

The Irony of ObamaCare: Making Inequality Worse

The promise of Obamacare was the right one and the hope for extending healthcare coverage to the un-and under-insured a step in the right direction. Yet THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES WILL HIT THE AVERAGE, HARD-WORKING AMERICAN WHERE IT HURTS: IN THE WALLET.

Currently a national dialogue is emerging by all political parties on the issue of income inequality. That is a debate worth having. The White House and Congressional Democrats are “resetting” the domestic agenda following the negative fallout from the rollout of the ACA. They plan to shift focus from health care to bread and butter issues of income inequality that have eroded the American paycheck for decades.

Ironically, the Administration’s own signature healthcare victory poses one of the most immediate challenges to redressing inequality. Yes, the Affordable Care Act will help many more Americans gain some health insurance coverage, a significant step forward for equality.

At the same time, without smart fixes, THE ACA THREATENS THE MIDDLE CLASS WITH HIGHER PREMIUMS, LOSS OF HOURS, AND A SHIFT TO PART-TIME WORK AND LESS COMPREHENSIVE COVERAGE.

The unions have been trying to spare their Cadillac health insurance plans as others have been spared.

UNITE HERE represents 300,000 workers in hotels, food service and gaming nationwide.

Many receive benefits through UNITE HERE Health’s Taft-Hartley funds. If employers follow the incentives in Obamacare, the hospitality industry will face labor strife, UNITE HERE members from around the nation will face PAY CUTS to keep good coverage, and the funds that deliver innovative care to thousands of service workers will be destroyed.

These are toxic levels of irony for the Democrats.

http://tammybruce.com/2014/03/union-diagnosis...

Another oopsie by The One.

FROM: Let's pass it so we can find out what's in it.

TO: Let's keep pushing it off until after the midterm election because voters are finding out what's in it.

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) 50 min Guru 187,312
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr ritedownthemiddle 52,854
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 3 hr Cold Front 69,687
New Rapper Seven Dyce 3 hr UBANK RECORDS 1
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 3 hr texas pete 5,906
Word (Dec '08) 8 hr Red_Forman 5,202
Ask Amy 4-25-15 11 hr Kuuipo 2
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]