Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1292402 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: Sep 10

Location hidden

#998851 Oct 9, 2013
fetch almighty wrote:
<quoted text>QUOTE who="usasince1680" <quoted text>
I agree and am compelled to add that the problem with the poor today is
"handouts" - both public and private.
I grew up poor. My parents were too proud to accept any public assistance.
Sometimes we had nothing to eat but potatoes and oatmeal. We bought
day-old bread and picked left-over vegetables from the fields after
the harvest.
We made cardboard cutouts to fill the holes in our shoes. We brought out the
kettles when it rained through the roof and every year my Christmas gift was a
pair of warm pajamas that would have to last all year. No one gave us anything,
we did not ask for anything and we appreciated everything we had. And this
was the 50's - not during the recession.
I learned very early on that this was not the life for me and, because
my parents
were poor, it was (and is) extremely easy to get scholarships and
grants for college.
I did not marry until after college and waited until we were
financially secure before starting a family. Financial security was
and is very important to me.
Today's poor are provided with free food, new clothes, new shoes and
toys at Christmas. What incentive do they have to escape their
I guess my husband and I are considered "wealthy" and we happily share that
wealth but we never give to an organization that provides handouts to the poor
(other than homeless shelters). To do so, in my opinion, is to
encourage laziness
and dependency. People have got to stop feeling sorry for the poor!
*AND YET USAsincepoorsville starved but she had insurance. ROTFLMAO.
You fit the profile.

A very old person, collecting Social Security and Medicare, your socialism is ok. Cardboard in your shoes in th e1950's??

Did you just finish reading "The Grapes of Wrath"?? Wrong era.

But to hell with the rest of America.

You're a liar and a traitor. Move to your Zionist heaven.

I hear they have socialized medicine there!! LOL

Or is that why you won't move to Israel, because it is a socialist form of Government??

Either way, you're a loser.

El Paso, TX

#998852 Oct 9, 2013
Another Liberal Stunt ‘Eight Democrats arrested at pro-amnesty rally on ‘closed’ National Mall pretty pathetic!!

Gering, NE

#998853 Oct 9, 2013
Nuculur option wrote:
<quoted text>
Loyts of Americans did in 1943.
If you weren't so dumb, you'd know that.
This is as stupid as your statement that there is no such thing as preventative medicine.
Or your Christian Zionist bullshit.
You spew worthless foam from the mouth 24/7.
Including families who failed to provide their kids with adequate food and clothing.


Since: Dec 08

gauley bridge wv

#998855 Oct 9, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text> Actually, the highest handicap for men is 36.4. Or about two strokes per hole.
How many strokes you would get would depend on your handicap & Course rating.
To calculate your handicap you take your last twenty 18 hole scores (noting the maximum stroke per hole rules) & take the top ten. You then average those scores & your handicap is 80% of that average.
Years ago I wrote a program for the local CC to keep tabs of members' handicaps.
The golf pros around here will not do a handicap for a golfer until/unless they can shoot under 54 over par repeatedly. That's 3 strokes over par per hole.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#998856 Oct 9, 2013
Republicans ..."it's not about the people. It's about winning."


Fishers, IN

#998857 Oct 9, 2013
Whatever wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, really?
Then why did you cry cite a source when I posted Obama approval at 37% from the article?
It is time for you to stop trying to justify this. What was petty nonsense on your part now has inflated into total idiocy on your part. A self-inflicted wound.
did i not say 'no matter'?

you're not going to catch me out on this. give it up. i knew full well what i was posting. you're just whining because i took the shine off of 37%.

but let's put that 37% in perspective....

48% approve. 46% disapprove.

and yes, i meant to post that.

“Often imitated”

Since: Jul 07

never duplicated

#998858 Oct 9, 2013
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
but you will admit that that poll shows that republicans are taking most of the blame?
or if not, then why pay attention to any of it?
I just think its funny how you guys pick and choose when polls are important.

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#998859 Oct 9, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
This was predicted by Glen Beck immediately after the 2008 election.
October 8, 2013
A highly troubling “urgent bulletin” issued earlier today by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) states that it has received information from the Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) warning to expect a“radical change” in the government of the United States, possibly within the next fortnight, based on information they have received from “highly placed” sources within the Pentagon.
According to this MoFA bulletin, GRU intelligence assests were notified by their Pentagon counterparts this past week that President Barack Obama is preparing to invoke the powers given to him under 50 USC Chapter 13 to hold that various American States are now in a “state of insurrection” thus allowing him to invoke the National Emergencies Act under 50 USC § 1621 and invoke the highly controversial“continuity of government” plan for the United States allowing him, in essence, to rule with supreme powers.
Specifically, this bulletin says, Obama will invoke 50 USC § 212 that states:“ the President shall have declared by proclamation that the laws of the United States are opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings”
The specific laws being opposed by these “combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings,” that Obama will outline in his reasoning’s for declaring a state of emergency, this bulletin continues, are the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), otherwise known as Obamacare...
Glenn Beck!!

He's as batshyt crazy as are you.

How are the ghosts in your TV doing today?? Still talking to them??

They tell you any more good ghost stories??

Fishers, IN

#998860 Oct 9, 2013
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that 50% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Obama's job performance. Forty-nine percent (49%) disapprove.

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#998861 Oct 9, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
http://truthchannel.wordpress. com/2013/10/08/urgent-warning- pentagon-warns-to-expect-radic al-change-in-us-government-soo n/
"The NDAA is opposed by many US States, this bulletin says, with California joining Alaska and Virginia this past week in passing a law making it illegal to be enforced in their territory, and with many other States, also, preparing to do the same.
"The specific portions of the NDAA law being opposed by these US States allows for the indefinite detention without charges or trial of all American citizens and allows for their assassination should Obama order it.
"The PPACA (Obamacare) law is, likewise, opposed by over half of the US States and has led to an American “shutdown” this past week that has closed 15% of their government, but has left fully 85% of it still open."
Here's the bottom line:
The Democrats demand government control of everything. For this, they need to eliminate any controls (the Constitution) on their government. This requires unlimited spending, which Congress is an obstacle to that.
The government is obviously too large.
85 percent of the Obama government isn't enough to satisfy the Democrats. It's all or nothing.
The Democrats intend to destroy this country if they can't get what they want... which is actually the elimination of the constitutional republic.
In short, the Democrats are about to declare war on the American people, and slaughter them wholesale.
This has always been the plan. The massive arms buildup in the DHS whould have made that obvious. Putting the Muslim Brotherhood in top level positions in the DHS whould have made this doubly obvious.
"Wordpress" Home of the right wingnut lunatics.

You folks are all batshyt crazy.

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#998862 Oct 9, 2013
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
President Bush will leave office as one of the most unpopular departing presidents in history, according to a new CBS News/New York Times poll showing Mr. Bush's final approval rating at 22 percent.
Seventy-three percent say they disapprove of the way Mr. Bush has handled his job as president over the last eight years.
Mr. Bush's final approval rating is the lowest final rating for an outgoing president since Gallup began asking about presidential approval more than 70 years ago.
Yes, Bush was unpopular because the Democrats and their precious liberal media darlings made sure the easily fooled believed he had lied about Iraq when, in fact, it was THEY who lied for political gain.

You and the easily fooled just bought it.

Bush was also unfairly blamed for the housing market crisis when Democrats had more to do with it than Republicans.

But just wait. Obama's approval is where Bush was at during the same time in his presidency in the 30s.

He still has 3 more years to go.

Pittsboro, NC

#998863 Oct 9, 2013
Whatever wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, really?
Then why did you cry cite a source when I posted Obama approval at 37% from the article?
It is time for you to stop trying to justify this. What was petty nonsense on your part now has inflated into total idiocy on your part. A self-inflicted wound.
Hey off topic spammer, nuts and valueless!

Welcome to the republican liars club on topix!

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#998864 Oct 9, 2013
NJ raider 1 wrote:
<quoted text>You're arrogance to think you know anything about the African America culture is appalling! That's like the child of a slave telling a slave they're lazy! I don't want to hear about your upbringing or, any of that. Your shitty existence of a life came with more privileges than 90% of black people. You talk about black men abandoning their families. Maybe if more white people left before shit for too bad, the white race would hold such a high percentage of America's suicides in America. Your ideology is " ignore all the biases held against the black race, point the finger of blame as if we're all weighed on the same scales of life." Pop shit all you want. Anyone with a serviceable brain can tell you, your not even scratching the surface.
Don't bother. Dweeb gets his talking points from ghosts in his TV talking to him.

He's batshyt crazy!!

Fishers, IN

#998865 Oct 9, 2013
The Shutdown Is Boosting Barack Obama's Poll Numbers, and Republicans Don't Care

In the RealClearPolitics average, Barack Obama's approval has actually stabilized or edged up since the nadir of September, and the backlash to the Syria imbroglio. The Fox News poll has him bouncing from -14 to -4; the Gallup and Rasmussen trackers have him basically even; YouGov has him bouncing from -12 to even. Even the Reuters/Ipsos poll that puts Obama at -10 represents a move up from -16.

The average gives Obama a 45 percent approval rating, and that's even baking in the newsy AP/GFK poll that puts him at 37 percent. And the AP/GFK is 1) conducted online and 2) making the most news for giving Congress a 5 percent approval rating. The average gives Congress an 11 percent approval rating. Since the start of the shutdown, Congress is down from -57 to -74 in Gallup, from -58 to -68 in Fox,-58 to -77 in CNN, and stable at -66 in YouGov.

I'd expect conservatives to focus on the AP/GFK poll, as the news always gravitates to the polls with the most dramatic results. And on Twitter I've already seen conservatives asking the biased media (hello!) to imagine if George W. Bush posted these numbers. Well, OK: At this point in his second term, Bush's approval fell to 39 percent in Gallup, 7 points lower than Obama's current rating. Throughout the rest of that term, he never cracked 44 percent again.

But as McClintock's answer showed, Republicans are not going to put these numbers through rigorous tests. They believe that the public is moving toward blaming Obama, not them, for the shutdown.

Deltona, FL

#998866 Oct 9, 2013
Eman wrote:
<quoted text>
so "yeah" is really an east bay flunky. That explains why he can't post more than a few words at a time.
His posts are longer and far more informative than yours.

Pittsboro, NC

#998867 Oct 9, 2013
Buroc Millhouse Obama wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey Wilhelm (Grey Ghost)!
As Flack just pointed out, you forgot to use your VPN so instead of posting from Hawaii, it showed you posting from San Jose, CA, lame old libtard Socialist.
What's wrong, kids booted you out of Bumpass because they were tired of you mooching off them?
Here's your post:
Are you going to try and weasel out of this like you did when you were busted as Wilhelm from Germany when you screwed up then too?
It's obvious you libtards use several socks each. Lily does the same thing.
There's likely only three of you retards total and the rest are your socks.
Hey off topic spammer, clueless nuts!

Welcome to the republican liars club on topix!

“Often imitated”

Since: Jul 07

never duplicated

#998868 Oct 9, 2013
Emeem wrote:
<quoted text>
Who cares what Obama's rating is, he isn't ever going to run for anything again.
On the other hand, your teabaggers and their friends are going to be held accountable by the thousands of lives they have affected. Most of America isn't as gullible as you.
The good news is that morons like you are going to help rid America of teabagger vermin.
need a tissue? Your messiah has lost his shine.

Gering, NE

#998869 Oct 9, 2013
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
did i not say 'no matter'?
you're not going to catch me out on this. give it up. i knew full well what i was posting. you're just whining because i took the shine off of 37%.
but let's put that 37% in perspective....
48% approve. 46% disapprove.
and yes, i meant to post that.
Hey skippy, I used the source in your post as my source.

LOL, have some self-pride and let it go.

Doesn't hurt me that you are here acting all self righteous about your petty nonsense.

Pittsboro, NC

#998870 Oct 9, 2013
Michelle wrote:
<quoted text>And that is with many in the media still worshipping Obama. Although, that is changing.
Remarkably, Mediate has reported that, for "the first time in memory," yesterday's presidential press conference contained no questions from a television reporter. Seems press that there's an effort underway to "punish" those who aren't friendly enough toward the White House:
Perhaps coincidentally, the very same Jay Carney has been clashing with some TV reporters recently, and making unsubtle suggestions about their objectivity. A cynical person might think that the decision to skip all of the TV reporters was designed to avoid possible criticism that certain reporters were being snubbed.
Also perhaps coincidentally, the President himself has been outspoken about his displeasure with the media narrative that “both sides” are responsible for the current government shutdown and default crises.
Pretty amazing that this White House throws a snit fit about having to endure the kind of media skepticism that the GOP confronts on a routine basis, isn't it?
In the end, the hand-picked lapdog questions resulted in a media performance that was -- as Brit Hume described it to Hugh Hewitt -- "one of the saddest things I’ve ever seen. It was just pathetic."
It's worth asking: Why is the President so afraid of the tough questions?
Hey clueless nut! Off topic spammer!

Welcome to the republican liars club on topix!

Oklahoma City, OK

#998871 Oct 9, 2013
Nuculur option wrote:
<quoted text>
You said it right, you weren't thinking at all.
You just come here to drop ridiculous charges and run off when they are challenged
Health Insurance in America grew dramatically during WWII, due to wage and price controls.
I believe 1943 was in that period. But you and the Cruzer are clueless about that, as you are about most American History. LOL
As soon as you learn how to do a basic internet search, you can educate yourself. Or did you come here to be educated??
""Employer-sponsored health insurance plans dramatically expanded as a direct result of wage controls imposed by the federal government during World War II. The labor market was tight because of the increased demand for goods and decreased supply of workers during the war. Federally imposed wage and price controls prohibited manufacturers and other employers from raising wages enough to attract workers. When the War Labor Board declared that fringe benefits, such as sick leave and health insurance, did not count as wages for the purpose of wage controls, employers responded with significantly increased offers of fringe benefits, especially health care coverage, to attract workers.""
""President Harry S. Truman proposed a system of public health insurance in his November 19, 1945, address. He envisioned a national system that would be open to all Americans, but would remain optional. Participants would pay monthly fees into the plan, which would cover the cost of any and all medical expenses that arose in a time of need. The government would pay for the cost of services rendered by any doctor who chose to join the program. In addition, the insurance plan would give a cash balance to the policy holder to replace wages lost due to illness or injury. The proposal was quite popular with the public, but it was fiercely opposed by the Chamber of Commerce, the American Hospital Association, and the AMA, which denounced it as “socialism.""
No, instead you will deny facts and ask others to 'prove' it to you, mostly because you know you're wrong.
Your claims of being a Democrat are just a lie, obvious to the most casual of observers. And a masters program for the destitute??
Shirley you jest.
Back to your 'I think Obama's a communist', that you ran away from like a frightened lemming. Please explain. Let's see just how ignorant you really are.
Obama is commie...and you are an idiot.

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.

NCAA Basketball Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 32 min New Age Spiritual... 249,410
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 37 min SpaceBlues 7,189
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 7 hr tom wingo 30,256
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) Mon YTubeGlobalNews 310,385
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Oct 4 RiccardoFire 201,872
Conn's Appliances (Nov '07) Sep 30 celisas79 283
News HS GametimeBOYS BASKETBALL: Centennial's Griffi... Sep 30 Fart news 2
More from around the web