Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1685732 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: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#1066462 Jan 22, 2014
Homer wrote:
<quoted text>The system worked once.
Let freedom ring!
US elections actually have a long and storied history of fraud and corruption...

history is fun!
Realtime

Cape Canaveral, FL

#1066463 Jan 22, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
Anyone heard any news about Obamacare recently? Except the recent news - a top computer tech testified before Congress any amateur can still obtain personal information off the website?
Any new numbers reported? Anything about the website's success? Any news about insurers getting accurate information now?
It's much too quiet on the Obamacare front.
One of four computer experts to "speak" before a "congressional committee."

The story has raced through right wing blogs picking up, cough, exclusive details at each stop.

Are you bored today doll?

Level 5

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#1066464 Jan 22, 2014
Homer wrote:
<quoted text>A clear victory for freedom and ensuring that all Americans have the right to vote, our founding fathers would be very proud.
Good job Judge Bernard L. McGinley, screw those bastards that would try and deny Americans the right to vote.
Our Constitution also ensured the federal government would have limited powers. So much for limited powers.

The right to vote is perhaps the most sacred right in a republic. It's not to be abused for political gain.

If the Founders were still living with the population having grown beyond their imaginations, they would have supported protecting this sacred right and avoiding its abuse in a heartbeat.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#1066465 Jan 22, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
Lily, apparently I didn't respond to the wrong post.
Just a little distracted today.
"little distracted"????? "today"?????

"Are you kidding me???????"

Level 1

Since: May 11

New Oxford, PA

#1066466 Jan 22, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
Requiring an ID to vote isn't all that unreasonable. Unless democrats are afraid voter IDs would drastically affect their number of votes.
Why else would they get so angry? Don't democratic voters need an ID if they need food stamps or when picking up government checks?
Or can anyone just claim to be someone else and get both? Not sure how that works really.
But probably why there's so much fraud and abuse.
Here we go again.

I know it is difficult for you Carol but there is a difference between a particular photo ID & ID.
Lily Boca Raton FL

Boca Raton, FL

#1066467 Jan 22, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
Pretty sure Rand Paul. He doesn't need a speech writer yet and had no trouble speaking his mind without a teleprompter during his filibuster.
Unlike Valerie Jarrett who writes all of this president's material which he's even gotten confused reading off of a teleprompter. Think of her as President #1 and Obama as #2.
He obviously flunked history; either that or all of you went to glen beck u!! or went to school in Tx?

Level 5

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#1066468 Jan 22, 2014
Realtime wrote:
<quoted text>Gibberish
Gibberish yourself. Jarrett is the power behind the throne whether you want to believe it or not. She never leaves this president's side until he goes to bed or to the bathroom.
Lily Boca Raton FL

Boca Raton, FL

#1066469 Jan 22, 2014
Homer wrote:
<quoted text>The system worked once.
Let freedom ring!
Yes! Those scoundrels are busy every minute of every day trying to figure out how to steal elections.
Homer

Stroudsburg, PA

#1066470 Jan 22, 2014
Lnc wrote:
It was a big week for voters both nationally and locally with the Voting Rights Act of 2014 bill being introduced in Congress and
a Pennsylvania state judge striking down the Commonwealth’s Voter
ID law as unconstitutional.
The Voter ID Law, or Act 18 in Pennsylvania, one of the strictest in the nation, required all voters to show state-approved identification in order to cast a ballot. On Friday morning, Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Judge Bernard L. McGinley issued an order permanently blocking the controversial law that critics said would disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of voters. Judge McGinley’s ruling can be appealed by the commonwealth, but state lawmakers who opposed the law are pressing Gov. Corbett to abide by the judge’s decision.
Senate Democratic Majority Leader Jay Costa, D-Allegheny, said the law was an attempt by Republican lawmakers to freeze participation in the political process.
“Senate Democrats have said clearly and repeatedly that the Voter ID law was an overreach that would result in the disenfranchisement of hundreds of thousands of voters,” said Costa.“It was a law that should have never been approved and we are very happy that the court turned aside the measure today. There has been too much upheaval and confusion about preserving the right to vote. Plus taxpayers have had to pay too much in trying to defend this ill-conceived law. The measure was unconstitutional and political, and could not stand legal scrutiny. Simply put, it was an effort by Republicans to deny citizens access and a voice in their government that should have been dismissed. Instead of trying to find ways to stop citizens from voting, we should be doing mor
Homer beaming with pride today for the PA state judicial system.

“Bill Clinton could have ”

Level 1

Since: May 10

Prevented this

#1066471 Jan 22, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
Anyone heard any news about Obamacare recently? Except the recent news - a top computer tech testified before Congress any amateur can still obtain personal information off the website?
Any new numbers reported? Anything about the website's success? Any news about insurers getting accurate information now?
It's much too quiet on the Obamacare front.
Nancy Pelosi’s Super PAC Is Calling the ObamaCare Website ‘Disastrous’ In This New Arizona Ad
https://www.nrcc.org/2014/01/16/new-ad-shows-...

Level 1

Since: May 11

New Oxford, PA

#1066472 Jan 22, 2014
Chicagoan by Birth wrote:
<quoted text>You've never heard about the ballot box stuffing in major cities, and in minority neighborhoods, you need to get out more?
The subject is photo ID.

How would a voter photo ID requirement stop that.

You people are dumber than sh*t.
Buroc Millhouse Obama

Hamden, CT

#1066473 Jan 22, 2014
Homer wrote:
"Never and I mean NEVER try and deny Americans the right to vote, that's a big GFY to all you rightwingers for even trying!" - Homer
Then you better take your big GFY over to the Democ-RATS in my Democ-RAT state, libtard.

They have had voter ID for a long time, Moonbat.

Imbeecileeeeeee!
Homer

Stroudsburg, PA

#1066474 Jan 22, 2014
Lily Boca Raton FL wrote:
<quoted text>
Voter disenfranchisement and gerrymandering: this is the only way a Republican can win.
The Democrats know this and will get out and vote in huge numbers. There are more Democrats than Republicans in this country; people have to stop being complacent.
I love it when efforts to suppress the vote are squashed. It's very patriotic. The right to vote is so important in this country and to try and stop people just disgusts me to no end.

“fairtax.org”

Level 8

Since: Dec 08

Gauley Bridge WV

#1066475 Jan 22, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>

thanks Bill.
OOP!!!!
CAPITAL COMMERCE
Bush vs. Clinton: The Economic Verdict
By U.S. News Staff
April 18, 2007 RSS Feed Print
Capital Commerce hosted a compelling, no-holds-barred economics debate last week between financial pros and blogging greats Donald Luskin and Barry Ritholtz, which had the one downside of not letting me address the controversy that flared up over which economy has been superior–the Bush economy or the Clinton economy.
First, some context. When Bill Clinton became president in 1993, he was dealt the greatest hand since Phil Jackson became coach of the Chicago Bulls with probable future hall-of-famers Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen already on the team. The U.S. economy was already expanding, and the disintegration of the Soviet Union seemingly meant that defense spending could come down–which encouraged Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan to cut interest rates. Then Clinton got a Republican Congress in 1995 that was also eager to bring the budget into balance.
By contrast, Bush inherited an expansion that was on its last legs, and then he had to raise defense spending to deal with the biggest attack on America in its history–of course, neither Bush nor Congress has shown a whole lot of interest in controlling nondefense spending. Now, one way to statistically compare the two economic records is by looking at the Bush expansion vs. the Clinton expansion. And 21 quarters into each, the economy has grown 16.6 percent under Bush vs. 19.9 percent under Clinton–advantage No. 42. And the unemployment rate 22 quarters into each expansion–jobs numbers come out more frequently – show that the current unemployment rate is 4.4 percent vs. 4.5 percent under Clinton. Slight edge to No. 43. Now, when you add in–or subtract out–the effects of the stock market (for Clinton) and housing bubbles (for Bush) and where each president began, I think this ends up as a "pick 'em" situation at this point. Here is what White House spokesman Tony Fratto told the Washington Examiner last week:
"This is a much stronger expansion in a lot of ways. It's much deeper and more measured ... If you go back to this point in the Clinton expansion, they would have loved to have seen the numbers that we have right now.... On the unemployment rate, we're a full percentage point below where they were at the same point in the expansion–60 or 61 months in. They would have loved to have been at 4.4 percent. They were still up in the mid-5s, which is huge, when you think about it."
OK, let's use Fratto's methodology. I checked the employment data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and found that 60 months into the Clinton expansion, the unemployment rate was 4.7 percent vs. 4.5 percent for Bush. The last time the jobless rate was as high as 5.3 percent under Clinton was January 1997, 49 months into the Clinton expansion. Fratto and I went back and forth on the numbers and how to best date the expansions, but his bottom line–via E-mail–is this:
"The Clinton administration clearly benefited from an expansion that began well before the election and well before they ever passed a single piece of economic legislation. This administration was clearly hurt by being greeted with a recession and the implosion of the technology bubble – well before we ever passed any part of our economic policy."
But my bottom line is that neither Clinton nor Bush was or has been a game changer.(My friend Larry Kudlow has a great post on this topic here.) FDR was a game changer. Reagan was a game changer. I think to be a game changer today you have to 1) revamp America's social insurance program for the 21st-century challenges of globalization and changing demographics, and 2) reform America's creaky and complex tax system to better allow the nation to innovate and compete. Still waiting on those.
Buroc Millhouse Obama

Hamden, CT

#1066476 Jan 22, 2014
Homer wrote:
New bumper sticker:'I (heart) Judge Bernard L. McGinley'
Thoughts?
Comments?
Sure! Get one for your cars bumper that says "Idiot on board!".
Lily Boca Raton FL

Boca Raton, FL

#1066477 Jan 22, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
Oops...responded to the wrong post before.
In 2009, before an interview with "Pay Czar" Kenneth Feinberg, the White House announced that Fox News would be banned from the press pool. It marked the first time in history that an administration attempted to ban an entire network from the press pool.
To their credit, the other networks objected. They told the White House that if Fox were banned, none of the other networks would participate. The White House relented, but in an apparent act of petulant retaliation, it restricted each network to a two-minute interview instead of the standard five.
So the answer to that one is "yes".
The Senate Intelligence Committee answered the last one. It's a "yes" too.
But your score is still 50%.
Fox is not a news organization. You lose.
Buroc Millhouse Obama

Hamden, CT

#1066478 Jan 22, 2014
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>US elections actually have a long and storied history of fraud and corruption...
history is fun!
lsd was fun for you too!

It shows!

“Bill Clinton could have ”

Level 1

Since: May 10

Prevented this

#1066479 Jan 22, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
maybe you missed this.
Rep. Candice Miller (R-MI) on Tuesday evening called on Michigan Republican National Committeeman Dave Agema to step down after he made numerous anti-gay and anti-Muslim comments, becoming the third member of Congress to do so this week.
"Those who seek to be leaders must strive to be inclusive and respectful of others," she said in a statement obtained by the Detroit News. "Anyone who presents themselves as a leader who takes the path of division or exclusion is not following the examples of Lincoln and Reagan and is not worthy of any position of leadership. Dave Agema has failed this test and should resign."
Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI) on Tuesday said that Agema should resign, calling his comments a "distraction" for a GOP looking to broaden its base.
Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) on Monday condemned Agema's comments and also said he should step down.
Agema last year compared being gay to alcoholism and claimed that gay people desire free health care because they have AIDS.
In January he shared a comment on his Facebook page asking, "Have you ever seen a Muslim do anything that contributes positively to the American way of life?"
Other prominent Michigan Republicans have either condemned Agema's remarks or called on him to resign.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/candice...
they must have taken a look at how many Muslims voted for Bush.
CAIR Poll: More Than 85% of American Muslims Picked Obama

Nov 9, 2012
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) released the results of an informal exit poll on Friday that shows more than 85 percent of American Muslim voters picked President Barack Obama in Tuesday's election.


Really you want to bring Bush into this?
forks_make_us_fa t

Norman, OK

#1066480 Jan 22, 2014
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>no it really isn't unreasonable, but what voter fraud do you think it would stop?
it would seem to be a huge waste of money, this is why real conservatives are against it....
Huge waste of money....

hummmm......

I wonder how far a cricket can travel in a day?

ask the USDA....they did a study!

http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/kids/insects/story...
Buroc Millhouse Obama

Hamden, CT

#1066481 Jan 22, 2014
Lily Boca Raton FL wrote:
<quoted text>
He obviously flunked history; either that or all of you went to glen beck u!! or went to school in Tx?
Nasty, vile old bag, for sure.

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.

Orlando Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Police plan to ramp up security at Jackson Brow... 8 hr Dean 2
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict? (Mar '10) 9 hr ANGHARAD 515,003
last post wins! (Jul '11) 16 hr Princess Hey 6,073
Word Association 2 (Jul '10) Mon Princess Hey 23,138
New Game ***Last Word + 2 (Oct '11) Mon Princess Hey 13,087
thank you st jude for prayers answered (Jul '07) Sun SSM 4
News Leader of Orlando-area motorcycle club assaulte... (Nov '07) Sun Nutz 770

Orlando Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Orlando Mortgages