Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1564685 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.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

#1034785 Dec 4, 2013
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
Trying to resurrect the old Black Panther story Frank? The fact is that they didn't block the polling place or prevent anyone from voting you goddamned liar. The Bush DOJ dropped criminal charges against them because there was no evidence of voter intimidation.
You're an idiot Frank!
Lying douchebag, everyone saw the video, the filthy 'groids should have been charged with voter intimidation, except for our racist, cowardly dirtbag AG.
Realtime

Cape Canaveral, FL

#1034786 Dec 4, 2013
Grampy wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not poor people, it's lazy Obama/Democrat voting slackers that should not get FREE health insurance! 10 million people have dropped out of the work force since Obama took office. That's 6.5% of the civilian work force. ObamaKare is just another incentive for slackers to not work.
Baby boomers account for a large chunk of the drop outs old timer. Amazing that you right wing clowns can't grasp that fact.

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#1034787 Dec 4, 2013
Washington Post

Obama pushed for spending increases and tax cuts that also have contributed in important ways to the nation’s fiscal deterioration. He certainly could argue that these were necessary and important steps to take, but he can’t blithely suggest that 90 percent of the current deficit “is as a consequence” of his predecessor’s policies — and not his own.

Four Pinocchios: Obama's claim that 90% of deficit is Bush's fault.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-chec...

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

#1034788 Dec 4, 2013
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course you have some kind of reliable source or evidence to back this up don't you? No, you just pulled that right out of your ass you goddamned liar.
Imbecile, too stupid and unsophisticated to recognize sarcasm and satire when its put in front of your stupid looking face.

What a dullard.
NJ Raider 1

Vineland, NJ

#1034789 Dec 4, 2013
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hogwash. During Obama’s first term, when economic conditions bordered on desperate, he was criticized for putting the economy behind other concerns, mainly national health care. The president and Democrats even conceded the criticism when they talked about making a “pivot” to the issue of jobs and the economy from whatever policy pursuit Obama felt was more important at the time.
"Making a pivot" to put jobs and the economy first isn't putting jobs and the economy first.
Obama spiked the deficit higher than during WWII.
"It is a truly jaw-dropping display of fiscal recklessness to rack up enough real (inflation-adjusted) deficit spending in just three years to dwarf our real (inflation-adjusted) deficit spending during all of World War II. Before Obama’s term, few likely would have believed it possible."
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-s-d...
Obama’s claim that ‘90 percent’ of the current deficit is due to Bush policies received 4 Pinocchio's by the Washington Post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-chec...
It's Official: Taxpayers Will Lose Big on the GM Bailout
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/rick-newman/...
You are wrong.
I'm beginning to believe that you're in love with lying! Obama accepted the debt Bush just happened to forget to add to his bill, rightfully so! some things are'nt even worth lying about, but it seems that, you insist. You won't accept that fact that, trusting the polls, lead you republicans to swift ass whoopping, but you'll use polls to bolster your pathetic false truth of an argument. You're too old to be lying like that, Carol!

“Bill Clinton could have ”

Since: May 10

Prevented this

#1034790 Dec 4, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
If you bothered to keep up (something you idiots can't seem to do), you would know that one of your dumbass buddies claimed the IPAB was a death panel through rationing.
This paragraph from the bill forbids the board from rationing.
The Board can't take direct action but instead makes recommendations that require approval.
Try to keep up, sonny.
So the government board make recommendations that require approval--if a Traygone attacks you and cuts off your fingers, you will have to wait for a government board??? May as well throw your fingers out huh Real dumb Dave? You libs are too stupid to make decisions for yourself-that is how the card carrying communists, maxists and socialists aka democrats look at you! Yes yes the democrats know what is good for you...OMG OMG how did you get so stupid?

Since: May 11

Newville, PA

#1034791 Dec 4, 2013
fetch almighty wrote:
<quoted text>Make Senate Democrats and O'bama stand up in public for what they really stand for today, the total destruction of the American Constitutional Republic. Make them defend the treasonous acts of their party and their chosen messiah.
Horse puckey. What treasonous at are you talking about now?

“Bill Clinton could have ”

Since: May 10

Prevented this

#1034792 Dec 4, 2013
dont snow me wrote:
<quoted text>
the filthy, violent, racist ghetto dirtbag Traygone B. Hoodie got what he deserved for his violent, illegal assault on the peaceful Zimmerman, deal with it. More ghetto hoodies deserve the same fate until they learn how to live with civilized people who pay for them to exist.
who was paying for Hooodieman's cell phone?
It always amuses me to see a 20 something Red Hoodie get into a new Mercedes in Chicago--yeah normally one would think is was a father's car--but hey we know they don't have a father.

“no one told me”

Since: Dec 07

Denver

#1034793 Dec 4, 2013
Injudgement wrote:
<quoted text>Ever seen a 65 year old Repub refuse Medicare because it's a government socialistic universal healthcare plan? Repubs hate socialism until there's something in it for them.
why the lies? Clearly you know nothing of medicare, likely having been unemployed your entire life. The gainfully employed have seen the medicare deductions from their every paycheck.
Have you ever actually seen a paycheck with your name on it?

Since: May 11

Newville, PA

#1034794 Dec 4, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
"[has] to pass the bill so you can find out what's in it, away from the fog of controversy."
How about getting away from "the fog of controversy" while the bill is being discussed, moron.
You still have the Democrat party line being "[has] to pass the bill so you can find out what's in it."
Perhaps if Obama knew what was in the bill, he wouldn't have lied over and over about it. Well, we all know that's not true. Obama's only function is to mindlessly repeat what's written on the teleprompter in front of him. The Democrats knew they could never get that bill passed if anyone knew what was in it. And, leave it to Pelosi to say something incredibly stupid like "you have to pass the bill so you can find out what's in it."
Can you believe someone that obviously ignorant was actually Speaker of the House?
Wow, you still don't get it.

You really are dumber than sh*t.

The bill was debated for nearly a year. If a member on Congress did not know what was in it, it is their own fault.

Besides, Republicans decided to vote no in December of 2008 before the bill was even written.

Hell, you dumbf*cks still don't know what is in it. You thought the IPAB could ration healthcare & was a death panel. That is how uninformed you are.

Since: Jul 08

We will not go gentle

#1034795 Dec 4, 2013
lily boca raton fl wrote:
<quoted text>
Good morning dummy republican idiot with the same post 48 times a day for 5 years.
Well, yeah, Lily, but the must be some credit (in his warped little mind) for changing his stupid name (forgetting the location)at least of third of those 48x365x5...

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#1034796 Dec 4, 2013
Even progressive legal experts say Obama’s modus operandi has begun to undercut the basic balance of power in Washington.

His moves “fit a disturbing pattern of expansion of executive power,” said constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley, who usually sides with progressive ideals.“This is a President who is now functioning as a super legislator” who is “effectively negating parts of the criminal code because he disagrees with them. That does go beyond the pale.”

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-803699

“Bill Clinton could have ”

Since: May 10

Prevented this

#1034797 Dec 4, 2013
sonicfilter wrote:
Over the last month or so, opponents of the Affordable Care Act have eagerly touted Consumer Reports’“opposition” to healthcare.gov – for the right, if the independent, consumer-friendly outlet disapproves of the administration’s exchange marketplace, it proves … Obamacare is bad.
In reality, Consumer Reports’ position has always been more nuanced than conservative activists and lawmakers would have us believe. The consumer advocates, for example, defended the Obama administration from criticism on canceled plans through the individual market, rejecting Republican talking points altogether. Consumer Reports also played a role in debunking some of the ACA horror stories that the right has been so invested in.
That said, the consumer advocates did warn the public about the problems plaguing healthcare.gov , urging Americans to wait until the site improved before creating accounts and selecting insurance (though Consumer Reports pushed back against far-right efforts to exploit the position). Today, however, it reversed course and changed its verdict.
After advising consumers to steer clear of Healthcare.gov in October, Consumer Reports health care expert Nancy Metcalf told MSNBC’s Chuck Todd Tuesday morning that the federal health care exchange website was improved enough following the Obama administration’s frantic month of repairs that users could confidently use it.[…]
“Now we’re saying,‘it’s time,’” Metcalf said, in particular praising the new window-shopping function, in which users can peruse health plans without registering with the site. The requirement to make an account before viewing options was considered one of the main causes for the site’s initial traffic bottleneck.“It’s terrific, I’ve tried it, it was working yesterday through the busiest times,” Metcalf said.
If recent history is any guide, opponents of the law will argue, indefinitely, that “even Consumer Reports opposes” healthcare.gov , but for those concerned with the facts, the consumer advocates’ position now seems fairly clear.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/consu...
Keep focusing on the web site Sonic--it is the O'bamacare law that is heinous.
Buroc Millhouse Obama

Hamden, CT

#1034798 Dec 4, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Benghazi had aConsulate.
Are all you right whiners this f*cking stupid?
Benghazi had an "Embassy" Consulate.

Are all you left whiners this f*cking petty & stupid?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1034799 Dec 4, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
If you bothered to keep up (something you idiots can't seem to do), you would know that one of your dumbass buddies claimed the IPAB was a death panel through rationing.
This paragraph from the bill forbids the board from rationing.
The Board can't take direct action but instead makes recommendations that require approval.
Try to keep up, sonny.
Dumbass, I'll use your post to show you're an idiot. You stated the law forbids some "proposal" generated by some element you can't define and delivered to some other element you can't define from mentioning rationing.
I posted the actual language stating "The Secretary will determine..." everything. "Everything" includes rationing. There is no need for rationing to be mentioned in a proposal for rationing to be implemented because... you may need to write this down... "the Secretary will determine..." everything.

To refresh your memory, here's that post you can't answer again. Read the last paragraph over and over, if you need to. It says for you to post text from the ObamaKare law that defines the standards "the Secretary" must satisfy to implement the very obviously necessary rationing:

Please tell us how that sentence forbids rationing. It merely forbids a recommendation in some "proposal" from some element you forgot to mention.
If you read the ObamaKare law, you will read "The Secretary will determine..." everything.
As the ObamaKare law is written, "The Secretary" will determine who gets health care, and who does not.
Any idiot can tell you that there is not an infinite source for health care. As the demand for health care increases, and the supply of health care does not match increased demand, then the statement of the law "The Secretary will determine" is the controlling statement. "The Secretary" will ration health care, you fucking moron.
Now, if you want to be taken seriously here, find the part of the ObamaKare law that defines the specifications "The Secretary" must satisfy to ration health care.
You can't. It doesn't exist. The rationing of health care is solely the subjective discretion of "The Secretary".
Pay particular attention to the last paragraph. It requires you post the text of the ObamaKare law to argue against it.
Post the law, dumbass.
Here's that paragraph again:
Now, if you want to be taken seriously here, find the part of the ObamaKare law that defines the specifications "The Secretary" must satisfy to ration health care.
You can't. It doesn't exist. The rationing of health care is solely the subjective discretion of "The Secretary".

“Bill Clinton could have ”

Since: May 10

Prevented this

#1034800 Dec 4, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text> Horse puckey. What treasonous at are you talking about now?
Focusing on O'bamaCare alone, it is the single largest theft of 1/7th of the U.S. economy, placing the Federal Government in direct control of health and the life and death of citizens and seizing enormous resources from the private sector.
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#1034801 Dec 4, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Ray, Dickhead, yes the ACA explicitly bans the board from rationing healthcare.
SEc3403
ii) The proposal shall not include any rec-
ommendation to ration health care, raise revenues or
Medicare beneficiary premiums under section 1818,
1818A, or 1839, increase Medicare beneficiary cost-
sharing (including deductibles, coinsurance, and copay-
ments), or otherwise restrict benefits or modify eligi-
bility criteria.
Now Dumbass Ray, don't you feel like such an ignorant ass?
lol! You can't reason with them... even when you point out the facts.

Because that's not what they want to hear!

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1034802 Dec 4, 2013
ObamaKare
dumbdem

Satellite Beach, FL

#1034803 Dec 4, 2013
leosnana wrote:
<quoted text>Well, yeah, Lily, but the must be some credit (in his warped little mind) for changing his stupid name (forgetting the location)at least of third of those 48x365x5...
illegitimatebabymamafaketeache rwelfarescumsuckingobammyworsh ipperfckfaceforsure say what? LOL

“Bill Clinton could have ”

Since: May 10

Prevented this

#1034804 Dec 4, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, you still don't get it.
You really are dumber than sh*t.
The bill was debated for nearly a year. If a member on Congress did not know what was in it, it is their own fault.
Besides, Republicans decided to vote no in December of 2008 before the bill was even written.
Hell, you dumbf*cks still don't know what is in it. You thought the IPAB could ration healthcare & was a death panel. That is how uninformed you are.
So you realize the bill in the house was for veterans' housing and then Hairy Balls Reid stripped out every bit of language and make it the O'bamacare bill? I didn't know you were so smart.

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 Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 32 min John-K 315,227
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 7 hr LeavesPharts 33,407
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 18 hr Fine 11,292
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 18 hr Aerobatty 258,475
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Jul 12 New boy 201,878
News Johnny Brown Added To Coaching Staff (Oct '07) Jul 1 Brown Pharts 3
News Tragedy strikes family members of Leasure (Jul '08) Jun '17 Evidence phart 9
More from around the web