Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1347790 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.

Grey Ghost

Partlow, VA

#1125366 Apr 24, 2014
shinningelectr0n wrote:
<quoted text>
Bite something hard tonight and you'll dull your teeth to match your personality and intelligence.
You really need to keep your personal experiences to your self. Midget boy.
Aphelion

Melbourne, FL

#1125367 Apr 24, 2014
In the frame of physics, a "greenhouse effect" as such, can only be used to describe a mechanism by which heat accumulates in an isolated pocket of gas that is unable to mix with the main body of gas. The elimination of convection within the troposphere by stratification, and the consequent temperature rise at the surface, presents us with a natural, if not hypothetical, example of a "greenhouse mechanism" in the frame of physics. Pseudoscience, popular misconception and political misuse of the term "greenhouse effect" have given it quite a different and unrelated meaning.
Since its original proposition by Arrhenius, the definition of the "Greenhouse Effect" has been chaotic and, as such, has successfully obfuscated the weakest and most important part of that proposition. Namely, that terrestrial heat radiated into the atmosphere is there absorbed and re-emitted back to earth to raise surface temperatures beyond what is possible from the incident radiation alone. In fact the physics, as we have examined them, only allow compositional changes to redistribute heat within the absorbing mass of the earth if no change in mean incident radiation occurs. This predicts that atmospheric warming due to increased opacity can only result in surface cooling, which effectively does no more than alter the thermal gradient, thereby redistributing the heat without adding or subtracting from it

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#1125368 Apr 24, 2014
dem wrote:
<quoted text>
Denigrating two races just to win topix points with fellow tea bag fkn imbeciles?
PRICELESS!
Haaahaaaaaahahahahhahaahahaaa

paco, why you so mad, mang? you never say nothin' about race,huh, ese?

PRICELESS!!!!
Aphelion

Melbourne, FL

#1125369 Apr 24, 2014

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#1125370 Apr 24, 2014
dem wrote:
So which subject are you idiot tea bag kkklowns pretending to be experts on ?
Rightuptheasshole has dibs on; topix scientist, racism, homosexuality, and all around being a lying tea bag prick. Typical to the elderly right wing male rural retard.
hey,paco, don't be such a sore loser, mang!
dem

Chicago, IL

#1125371 Apr 24, 2014
Aphelion wrote:
<quoted text>
Changing the parameter of the conversation to meet your needs and then claiming victory as predicted.
At least your consistently stupid.
Careful, lady! You're thisclose to being thrown in that room with the other out of control women.

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#1125372 Apr 24, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
Hannity: Bundy's Remarks Are "Beyond Repugnant," Reinforce "Ignorant View" That Conservatives Are Racist
http://mediamatters.org/video/2014/04/24/hann...
EPIC SMACK DOWN of Sean Hannity by Jon Stewart. " SEAN HANNITY (2/5/2014): I love Washington because he gave up power. Amazing to me, when he could have held on to it.

Washington. Now there's a Founding Father who could found the shit out of everyone. How do you think he would handle an armed group of federal government rejectionists who wouldn't pay their taxes? Well, we don't really need to speculate, because it was called the Whiskey Rebellion. And Washington, with his federal army, crushed it in 1794. I guess you would say, disproportionately.(audience laughter)

And the reason he was legally allowed to do that was because a man named Daniel Shays pulled the same shit in 1786 and 1787."

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#1125373 Apr 24, 2014
forks_make_us_fat wrote:
<quoted text>
'why do you think your whackjob posts are even worthy of a response? i have proven so many of them false, as i have clearly and verifiably pointed out earlier today..
why should anyone even listen to you ever again, seeing what bullshit you have posted in the past? seriously...why?'
i love it when you copy my posts word for word.

parroting me shows you are exactly the parrot i said you are and shows how much you respect me...

you re welcome...
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#1125374 Apr 24, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
I do believe you almost touched the planet with one of your feet.
It definitely reduces the probability of getting shot, that's for sure.
Who are you most likely to rob, someone with a gun, or someone that has been disarmed?
Why would you rather rob someone that has been disarmed? Because the other person is likely to blow you to hell, right? If he blows you to hell, he most likely doesn't get shot, right? The only thing that happened is you got blown to hell when you tried to rob him.
So, what's the reason the Democrats want to disarm patriotic law-abiding Americans? It's obvious they don't want to disarm Democrats. Just look at Chicago, dupe.
Who is Carl Rowan?
Still being an idiot I see.

So now, instead of proving your point that if armed you would live, you simply ask questions.

Makes on wonder how you make it daily through life without someone holding your hand.

Reich wing logic.... when confronted with truth, dump and run!

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#1125375 Apr 24, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
I watched the video. I never saw any automatic weapon fire.
And, you never answered the question about how I can prevent being one of the civillians shot in that incident. Do I have to just stand there and get killed just because the government can't/won't protect me?
The case you referenced proves civillians are at risk. How many civillians were shot?
Let's go over this again.
Law enforce agencies exist for the sole purpose of protecting me. If the government determines they need a machine gun to protect me, then a machine gun is needed for my protection. Therefore, the government has determined that I need a machine gun.
Or, what am I supposed to do if the government isn't around to protect me?
What am I supposed to do if the government can't afford to protect me?
What am I supposed to do if the government refuses to protect me?
The government determined a machine gun is necessary for my protection.
Is a machine gun necessary for my protection? Or, is there some other reason the government needs a machine gun?
No, let us NOT go over it again. Let's just agree that you are too slow and dim-witted to get it the first time . Leave it at that . A man just has to know his limitations

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#1125376 Apr 24, 2014
frontporchreactionary wrote:
<quoted text> Why should woodtick produce a 'link to empirical proof' when your own teenage kid can explain to you the greenhouse effect in human induced global warming ;if he had been paying attention in his Earth Science classes.
i produced page after page of proof of my statements as i always can...

aphelion has proven he will lie openly and then from backing up his words...
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#1125377 Apr 24, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
What is a "San Jose professor"?
Not soon enough. What was it replaced with?
So this is the best you can do with CRA now?

wow. how underwhelming.....

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#1125378 Apr 24, 2014
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>hey,paco, don't be such a sore loser, mang!
How MANY cases of model airplane glue did you pick up at the hobby shoppe today?!? LOL
dem

Chicago, IL

#1125379 Apr 24, 2014
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>Haaahaaaaaahahahahhaha ahahaaa
paco, why you so mad, mang? you never say nothin' about race,huh, ese?
PRICELESS!!!!
Geez, ma'am! what ya gonna call me next, a JEW!
Careful we have some sensitive ones here.
If you're trying to prove your racism or retardism I can only say it isn't necessary.
Perhaps you should "trick" me into finding your misspellings again?
The ones you "meant to do"...hee hee
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#1125380 Apr 24, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Prove it, dupe.
Then, explain how honoring an oath to the Constitution is a threat to a nation defined by the Constitution.
Are you done with CRA son?

I'm asking so I can put another notch in the 'win' column.
Aphelion

Melbourne, FL

#1125381 Apr 24, 2014
frontporchreactionary wrote:
<quoted text> Why should woodtick produce a 'link to empirical proof' when your own teenage kid can explain to you the greenhouse effect in human induced global warming ;if he had been paying attention in his Earth Science classes.
I'm sure that you believe everything you learned in public school was accurate.

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#1125382 Apr 24, 2014
Aphelion wrote:
In the frame of physics, a "greenhouse effect" as such, can only be used to describe a mechanism by which heat accumulates in an isolated pocket of gas that is unable to mix with the main body of gas. The elimination of convection within the troposphere by stratification, and the consequent temperature rise at the surface, presents us with a natural, if not hypothetical, example of a "greenhouse mechanism" in the frame of physics. Pseudoscience, popular misconception and political misuse of the term "greenhouse effect" have given it quite a different and unrelated meaning.
Since its original proposition by Arrhenius, the definition of the "Greenhouse Effect" has been chaotic and, as such, has successfully obfuscated the weakest and most important part of that proposition. Namely, that terrestrial heat radiated into the atmosphere is there absorbed and re-emitted back to earth to raise surface temperatures beyond what is possible from the incident radiation alone. In fact the physics, as we have examined them, only allow compositional changes to redistribute heat within the absorbing mass of the earth if no change in mean incident radiation occurs. This predicts that atmospheric warming due to increased opacity can only result in surface cooling, which effectively does no more than alter the thermal gradient, thereby redistributing the heat without adding or subtracting from it
what does opacity have to do with CO2 levels/

why can't you stay on topic?
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#1125383 Apr 24, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
I read the first sentence and busted out laughing. I couldn't read further.
Probably because you couldn't read past the first sentence.

Personally, I would have been sad but hey! You reich wingers play by a different set of rules!
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#1125384 Apr 24, 2014
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>i would say he clearly does not understand the thoughts he parrots...
just a mindless puppet.
lol! Like this is the first time Russia has buzzed any country.
Aphelion

Melbourne, FL

#1125385 Apr 24, 2014
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>i produced page after page of proof of my statements as i always can...
aphelion has proven he will lie openly and then from backing up his words...
And yet you cannot prove your lie.

But keep trying to deflect. I will continue to call you out. Either supply a source for your position or admit you are the lair and fraud that I believe you to be.

I await your next deflection. As I know you will offer no substance.

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
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 1 hr Red_Forman 1,845
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 1 hr Red_Forman 7,321
last post wins! (Apr '13) 1 hr Red_Forman 621
Word (Dec '08) 1 hr Red_Forman 5,649
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 2 hr Earthling-1 57,316
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 5 hr Dr Guru 207,626
abby2-11-16 10 hr Kuuipo 7
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages