Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1263862 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.

Olive Magadino

Buffalo, NY

#1095544 Mar 11, 2014
Lissen, shyte on a shingle, you've been abusing everybody with your sick, vile, perverted insults ... And now you ask for compassion???

Answer to your 1st question: Because you get what you give.

Even one of your fellow Conservatives called you out on your vile language.

You're psychotic.

Hey, this "truth serum" works pretty good.
Wonder if the good doc would give me a script! LOL!

shinningelectr0n wrote:
<quoted text>
If, as you admit, I can't help it then why bother trashing me?
You should feel compassion toward me. individuals who are compassionate toward their fellow humans(except toward the wealthy ones, of course)?
HAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#1095547 Mar 11, 2014
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not if he switches it to a ROTH IRA...besides, do you ever ask yourself how an individual retirement account that was limited by law to annual contributions of at most $30,000 grew into a fund with more than $100 million in it? The Romneyites of the world are the very reason you are seeing tighter restrictions being placed on IRAs. You have no one to blame but yourself.
what is your documentation for the $100 million figure?......

perhaps he invested in a startup....like Facebook.....
forks_make_us_fa t

Norman, OK

#1095548 Mar 11, 2014
Olive Magadino wrote:
Now you're sounding like those liberals you so despise.
It's nobody's business what one wants to do with their money - Whether to enjoy it while they're alive, or leave it to their children when they're dead.
It's nobody's "call" ... Especially when it's not your money. Geesh ...
PS I just know you wouldn't want to be counted with hypocrites.
Yea, I see ALOT of "things" bugging ALOT of people on here.
Whole lotta bugging goin' on. ;-)
<quoted text>
I don't despise Liberals...I despise "Liberalism"!

you wrote...
"It's nobody's business what one wants to do with their money..."
I agree...but...
Politicians make it their business what we do with our money everyday because of ENVIOUS voters....

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1095549 Mar 11, 2014
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
No lie.
NICE COUNTRY HOME ON 10 ACRES - NORTHERN MINNESOTA. 2 bed/2 bath home in awesome condition, move in ready - finance it any way! 10 acres. Huge 4-season sunroom off the back, large living room, main floor laundry, attached garage and additional heated garage(man cave). Very private setting. Lots of wildlife.$189,900.00
http://www.countryhomesofminnesota.com/minnes...
That's over $300,000 here in Texas. The land, alone, with nothing on it, is about $15,000 an acre here in most places. The closer you get to San Antonio or Houston or Dallas or in the Hill Country, the higher it will be. Why are prices so depressed up there?

Since: Jan 11

Bordentown, NJ

#1095550 Mar 11, 2014
Vladimir Putinheem wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh sure, it was bound to come down to some racial element...
Only in your mind, apparently.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1095551 Mar 11, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
The Uses and Abuses of Reagan
Michael Gerson makes a silly claim:
Over the past few years, Reagan’s internationalism, moralism and strategic aggressiveness have been out of favor in much of the GOP.
The first thing we must understand is that Gerson is abusing Reagan’s reputation to vindicate the shabby and discredited record of George W. Bush. Reagan’s “internationalism, moralism and strategic aggressiveness” have not been out of favor. Bush’s disastrous abuse of American power, his ignorance about the rest of the world, his contempt for allies that refused to participate in his foolish and ruinous plans, and his reckless and self-destructive behavior are out of favor. The two really have nothing in common, but it is useful for Bush’s flunkeys to claim that they are one and the same. Wrapping their errors in Reagan’s mantle makes them seem a little less egregious and harmful, but it can’t erase their huge and costly errors.
One of Bush’s flaws is that he governed as more of a hard-line ideologue than Reagan ever pretended to be, and another is that he claimed to be an internationalist while making a mockery of America’s reputation in the world. Republicans should not be deluded into thinking that they are obliged to follow Bush’s example in order to honor Reagan, but neither should they feel compelled to respond to contemporary events as if nothing had changed in the last thirty years. It would also serve them well to remember that Reagan did not govern as the combative ideologue that sometimes came across in his speeches. It is far from certain that Reagan would sympathize with the knee-jerk hawkish views that Gerson is trumpeting, but the world is so different from the Cold War era that it isn’t all that relevant. In the end, that is what hawks have to offer right now: a distorted, reductionist idea of “what Reagan would do” and a dangerous, confrontational approach to relations with other major powers that Reagan didn’t always follow when he was in office.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/lariso...
We'rre sorry Ronald Reagan kicked the shit out of your side to end the Cold War.

By the way, "the 80s called and they want their foreign policy back." Who said that?
Vladimir Putinheem

Phoenix, AZ

#1095552 Mar 11, 2014
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm picking on Woodtick. Does that count?
Yes it does. Your superior mental ability to pick on a wooden dick and want me to reward you for it makes you an ideal whack job. Can I come over?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#1095554 Mar 11, 2014
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
Let it go. You are truly clueless.
sounds like you are giving up. and admitting you lied...why did you have to lie about such a simple thing?

i have nothing to let go, dear. i just stated facts and verifiable figures.

are you asking me to let your lies go? just ask and i will...just say uncle if you don't want to actually admit you were openly lying and distorting the facts for no known reason...
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#1095555 Mar 11, 2014
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>the limit is just one million for my state. several other states have similar limits for the "having the losers grab onto the wealth you worked your ass off to pass to your kids tax"...
some call it the death tax.
those unwilling to admit to their grave robbing call it by the euphemism of the "estate tax"...
some states have even lower limits, even taxing charitable contributions......

the moochers have no right to this money....
Vladimir Putinheem

Phoenix, AZ

#1095556 Mar 11, 2014
Realtime wrote:
<quoted text>Brilliant-Interesting- Helpful
Thanks!
Now roll over Rover!

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1095558 Mar 11, 2014
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>ummm who was investigating the whitewater case and kept it going long after nothing was found but they kept digging as he taxpayers were funding this partisan political witch hun t and htey ended up finding a stained blue dress?
oh yes...kenneth starr
why do you not know these things about your own nation's history? you really are stupid, aren't you?
I recall we were discussing the reason Bill Clinton was impeached.
Kenneth Starr had nothing to do with Bill Clinton using the office of President to obstruct justice in the sexual harassment case filed against him.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#1095560 Mar 11, 2014
Vladimir Putinheem wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, I'm pretty sure you're a bad speller, I know that... and... um.. make me, moran.
oh...its you.

still can't spell moron, properly...

not much else to say about you, is there?
Vladimir Putinheem

Phoenix, AZ

#1095561 Mar 11, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
The Uses and Abuses of Reagan
Michael Gerson makes a silly claim:
Over the past few years, Reagan’s internationalism, moralism and strategic aggressiveness have been out of favor in much of the GOP.
The first thing we must understand is that Gerson is abusing Reagan’s reputation to vindicate the shabby and discredited record of George W. Bush. Reagan’s “internationalism, moralism and strategic aggressiveness” have not been out of favor. Bush’s disastrous abuse of American power, his ignorance about the rest of the world, his contempt for allies that refused to participate in his foolish and ruinous plans, and his reckless and self-destructive behavior are out of favor. The two really have nothing in common, but it is useful for Bush’s flunkeys to claim that they are one and the same. Wrapping their errors in Reagan’s mantle makes them seem a little less egregious and harmful, but it can’t erase their huge and costly errors.
One of Bush’s flaws is that he governed as more of a hard-line ideologue than Reagan ever pretended to be, and another is that he claimed to be an internationalist while making a mockery of America’s reputation in the world. Republicans should not be deluded into thinking that they are obliged to follow Bush’s example in order to honor Reagan, but neither should they feel compelled to respond to contemporary events as if nothing had changed in the last thirty years. It would also serve them well to remember that Reagan did not govern as the combative ideologue that sometimes came across in his speeches. It is far from certain that Reagan would sympathize with the knee-jerk hawkish views that Gerson is trumpeting, but the world is so different from the Cold War era that it isn’t all that relevant. In the end, that is what hawks have to offer right now: a distorted, reductionist idea of “what Reagan would do” and a dangerous, confrontational approach to relations with other major powers that Reagan didn’t always follow when he was in office.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/lariso...
Do you always post useless nonsense?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1095562 Mar 11, 2014
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Bush signed the ending of operations in Iraq.
why do you have to lie about these things?
And it was over. Bush crushed the Islamist jihad.
Bush crushed the Islamist jihad in Iraq so completely, Iraq turned into a funcitoning democracy where people walked around in public with blue dye on their finger after the Islamist jihad threatened to kill every one who voted. Iraq was a victory for the Armed Forces of the United States. That didn't change until Obama was named President. Today, the entire western half of Iraq belongs to Al Qaeda, from where they send suicide bombers into Syria to kill the real Syrian rebels.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#1095564 Mar 11, 2014
Ok. Change of subject... If I have this correct, authorities are saying that the transponder on the missing Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 was "turned off to make the aircraft inert to secondary radar." I'm left with the question, "Why in the world would they create a transponder that can be turned off in mid-air?"

My other question is...If they knew military radar had detected the plane off course at 2.40 a.m. near the island of Pulau Perak at the northern end of the Strait of Malacca and it was flying about 1,000 meters lower than its previous altitude, why did searchers focus on the shallow waters of the Gulf of Thailand off Malaysia's east coast until Sunday?

Things just do not add up.(conspiracy theory: Did the military shoot the plane down?)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/11/us-...
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#1095565 Mar 11, 2014
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't believe you seriously don't think the affordability of housing isn't a major contributor to the best places to live choices. That's just plain ignorance.
Santa Barbara is one of the most beautiful and desirable places in the United States to live and a favorite retirement destination of the wealthy. It will never make the list of the best places to live.
CNN Money:
Criteria for Our Best Cities Picks
Start with all U.S. cities with a population of 50,000 to 300,000.
Exclude places where the median family income is more than 200% or less than 85% of the state median and those more than 95% white.
Screen out retirement communities, towns with significant job loss, and those with poor education and crime scores. Rank remaining places based on housing affordability, school quality, arts and leisure, safety, health care, diversity, and several ease-of-living criteria.
Factor in additional data on the economy (including fiscal strength of the government), jobs, housing, and schools. Weight economic factors most heavily.
Visit towns and interview residents, assessing traffic, parks, and gathering places and considering intangibles like community spirit.
Housing
Median home sale price is compiled from actual sales transactions collected by Onboard Informatics from county and municipal assessor's offices.
Quality of Life
Air quality index are county numbers. Source: EPA, Onboard Informatics projection/aggregation.
Personal crime incidents are per 1,000 from FBI incidence reports and Onboard Informatics aggregations.
Property crime incidents are per 1,000 from FBI incidence reports and Onboard Informatics aggregations.
Percent of workers with long commute times from U.S. Census and Onboard Informatics projections.
Percent of population that walks or bikes to work from U.S. Census and Onboard Informatics aggregations.
Leisure and culture
Number of arts and leisure activities (including museums, restaurants, bars, golf courses and ski resorts) within proximity of each city is calculated by Onboard Informatics.
just look at who sets the criteria and judge for yourself whether they mean anything.....

being homeless and living on the beach in Santa Barbara beats having a job and owning a home in Detroit....

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#1095566 Mar 11, 2014
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
some states have even lower limits, even taxing charitable contributions......
the moochers have no right to this money....
i think if we have these laws, we should take the 50% out of every single estate..you know, paying the "fair share"...

what the poor, panhandeling moochers don't realize is that this is payable immediately...it doesn't come out of when you can sell the property of your relative or when it would be best to sell it or the stocks or investments...the gov't takes it right then...if you can't pay, they take the property...

i think this should be standard for every single person...fair share...and all that rot...
Realtime

Deltona, FL

#1095568 Mar 11, 2014
Lily Boca Raton FL wrote:
<quoted text>
I hope your kids like you; otherwise, yer screwed
Have you never heard of Roy Smalley III?

He was a decent shortstop for various teams including the Twins, 12 years ML experience means that he's collecting the MLB pension which is a good chunk of change. He works at Morgan Stanley in Minneapolis__probably not a true genius but smarter than the average Morgan Stanley mutt. His dad also played__dad was probably better, but neither could make a MLB team these days. Kinda like Frank Gifford couldn't make an NFL team now.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#1095569 Mar 11, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
And it was over. Bush crushed the Islamist jihad.
Bush crushed the Islamist jihad in Iraq so completely, Iraq turned into a funcitoning democracy where people walked around in public with blue dye on their finger after the Islamist jihad threatened to kill every one who voted. Iraq was a victory for the Armed Forces of the United States. That didn't change until Obama was named President. Today, the entire western half of Iraq belongs to Al Qaeda, from where they send suicide bombers into Syria to kill the real Syrian rebels.
ummmm there was no islamist jihad until Bush created one there...

are you really this stupid DB?

why do you insist on embarrassing yourself like this so?
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#1095570 Mar 11, 2014
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
A child molester can't help molesting kids. According to you we should just STFU & let them have at it.
stop defending Realslime....

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
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 28 min Earthling-1 6,474
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 5 hr thetruth 244,893
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 6 hr Brian_G 310,343
I got my loan from [email protected] (Jun '13) 14 hr bernarlyn 33
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 17 hr tom wingo 29,852
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Jul 29 RiccardoFire 201,846
News San Diego State basketball: Four-star prospect ... Jul 25 Fart news 2
More from around the web