Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1563630 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.

“Stop child soldiers ”

Since: Apr 14

Location hidden

#1123718 Apr 22, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm no too sure about Bundy being wrong. As I understand it, Clark County paid a fee to the government for grazing. If that is true, then I don't believe the government can collect the same fee for the same thing from a private individual.
The ownership of the property by the federal government is determined by the clause in the Nevada constitution that states all "unappropriated" land belongs to the federal government.
If "approprioated" means being used by people of Nevada for their sustenance, then the federal government can only own that land if they complied with the 5th Amendment and paid the state, or county, or both "just compensation".
A ruling on this issue by some court posted here by some Democrat referenced the 1848 treaty between the US and Mexico, treating Nevada as a territory and not a state, and ignored the subsequent 1864 agreement between the state of Nevada and the US to become a state, and it also ignored the state constitution.
Bundy represented himself because he had some bad experiences with lawyers... go figure. That ruling would be dead on arrival if appealed by anyone who knew how to practice law.
The FEDs were never to maintain permanent control over state lands in the first place

""From the beginning of our nation, states gave up title over their public lands to the federal government only to serve as a trustee for the purpose of creating new states and using the proceeds of any lands it may sell to pay the national debt from the Revolutionary War. The federal government honored this duty until it got to the West. Arid western lands were harder to sell. However, this never meant the federal government should just keep them.

In 1976, Congress enacted a “policy”(Federal Lands Policy Management Act, or FLPMA) declaring that it would simply retain these lands in federal ownership. However, in 2009 a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court declared that Congress does not have the authority to unilaterally change the “uniquely sovereign character” of a statehood contract, or enabling act, particularly “where virtually all of a state’s public lands are at stake.”

http://www.federalisminaction.com/2013/06/nev...
Aphelion

Melbourne, FL

#1123719 Apr 22, 2014
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>You keep forgetting Bundy lost in court. He's stealing from me and putting money in his pocket.
But then, no different than any other reich wing nut right son?
How about asking your democrat buddies in the white house about their theft? Oh wait .... your only concerned with those who you don't agree with their positions.

A new report just out from the Internal Revenue Service reveals that 36 of President Obama's executive office staff owe the country $833,970 in back taxes. These people working for Mr. Fair Share apparently haven't paid any share, let alone their fair share.

Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/politics-andrew-mal...
Follow us:@IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

Since: Jan 11

Hackettstown, NJ

#1123720 Apr 22, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
So, what you're saying is, there is no limit to what the IRS can demand in the way of evidence of compliance with the law, right? Like, the IRS can order you to give them your underwear, or turn over to them a list of everyone you slept with in the past decade, or anything their whim decides, right?
I don't see where a list of donor names is important to this determination, besides violating the 4th Amendment to the Constitution.
I think everyone is being misdirected. As I interpret this administration's actions, it seems most logical that they are trying to prevent any political activity other than that which is government funded.
I don't understand why you are appaled by the Waco (Texas) Tea Party being given its legal exemption. What do you know the IRS doesn't know about them?
You seem to be fixated on names. I notice that about Democrats. Symbolism is paramount, and substance is not important. You've been programmed to have an averse reaction when you read TEA, see people who call themselves "patriots", or come into contact with anyone who thought 9/11 was worth generating political involvement.
Perhaps it didn't take much effort by the programmer to get you to think like this.
Exactly. The entire reason for filing for a c (4) is to keep donors anonymous. The next thing you know, these donors are getting audited. There's no reason for a list of volunteers also.

“Stop child soldiers ”

Since: Apr 14

Location hidden

#1123721 Apr 22, 2014
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>

I don't understand why anyone would question flagging the applications of groups like the Waco Tea Party for rigorous review by specialist. We are talking about organizations who wish to escape taxation.
That is a false statement.

“fairtax.org”

Since: Dec 08

Gauley Bridge WV

#1123722 Apr 22, 2014
Realtime wrote:
<quoted text>You think that's funny dmfk?
One day you should check out the Gauley Bridge topix forum read along on the Hard Scrabble Church thread__that cht will bring you to your knees.
Snake handlers__ROFLMAO
Been there. If your belief in God is pure you have nothing to worry about. It's in the bible.

“Stop child soldiers ”

Since: Apr 14

Location hidden

#1123723 Apr 22, 2014
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>You keep forgetting Bundy lost in court. He's stealing from me and putting money in his pocket.
But then, no different than any other reich wing nut right son?
You are behind in the convo.

We are discussing the Chinese Solar Project now.
No Surprize

Largo, FL

#1123724 Apr 22, 2014
Realtime wrote:
<quoted text>Forever is a long time eh?
Agree on the independent thought though__there was a time when poster Carol would spend hours on topix defending Glenda Beck's nonsense. Really__in abnormal ways. Very abnormal.
Yet she'd be here every day__puking away with the latest Beck line__just like clockwork. And then she dumped him for Bill O'Reilly and that miniscule overnight imbecile. Carol's fickle maybe?
Stupid maybe?
You haven't been here since the beginning__have you? If so why did you change your name?
You can tell more about Realtime by what he says about others Really__in abnormal ways. Very abnormal, than you can by what others say about you pervert....

Meanwhile, Realtime all the time happy down on all 4's rolling around on the floor-like his mutts and farm animals do.. between a rock and a wet spot......that's where dirt bag Realtime ends up...

Post #855881:- Realtime: Sex with farm animals was just banned in Florida last year, sex with household pets is yet to be decided unless the pet is injured during the sex....

It's the culture....
No Surprize

Largo, FL

#1123725 Apr 22, 2014
Realtime Post # 1044454:-Ain't nothing cuter than a baby duck__bunnies come pretty close but bunnies stay cute__ducks grow up, shit all over the place and they're not good eating.

Realtime Post #1122570:- "baa ram ewe" Babe___1995

Realtime Honorable mention to baby goats.

oh yes, and every neighborhood has a nutjob like you Realtime..

It's the culture....
forks_make_us_fa t

Norman, OK

#1123726 Apr 22, 2014
Slash wrote:
<quoted text>
How many quarts of semen can you swallow?
you wear your LACK of intelligence proudly...
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#1123727 Apr 22, 2014
RoxLo wrote:
<quoted text>
The FEDs were never to maintain permanent control over state lands in the first place
""From the beginning of our nation, states gave up title over their public lands to the federal government only to serve as a trustee for the purpose of creating new states and using the proceeds of any lands it may sell to pay the national debt from the Revolutionary War. The federal government honored this duty until it got to the West. Arid western lands were harder to sell. However, this never meant the federal government should just keep them.
In 1976, Congress enacted a “policy”(Federal Lands Policy Management Act, or FLPMA) declaring that it would simply retain these lands in federal ownership. However, in 2009 a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court declared that Congress does not have the authority to unilaterally change the “uniquely sovereign character” of a statehood contract, or enabling act, particularly “where virtually all of a state’s public lands are at stake.”
http://www.federalisminaction.com/2013/06/nev...
I like history.

You should too, son!

"1800s

(1821) Mexico took control of the Nevada area
(1826) Peter Skene Ogden explored the Snake River; Jedediah Smith led expedition to Muddy River
(1828) Ogden discovered Humboldt River
(1830) Santa Fe merchant, Antonio Armijo, led first pack train from Santa Fe to Los Angeles
(1833) Joseph Walker led expedition along Humboldt River
(1841) Earliest immigrants, the Bartleson-Bidwell party, passed through Nevada
(1842) Capt. John Fremont and party were first white men to view Lake Tahoe
(1843) Joseph Walker led first group of wagons across the Sierra
(1846) Donner party became trapped in the Sierras. 47 out of 87 perished.
(1848) The United States gained control of Nevada after the Mexican-American War ended ..."
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#1123729 Apr 22, 2014
RoxLo wrote:
<quoted text>
You are behind in the convo.
We are discussing the Chinese Solar Project now.
lol! What was that you said about being to bring up anything people want son?

Reneging now since it doesn't fit your case?

“Peace on Earth”

Since: Sep 08

Santa Barbara, CA

#1123730 Apr 22, 2014
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
perhaps...
but you can't sell the car or destroy it.....
Granted, I don't have that power but the tow company does if the owner can't pay the fees that accumulate for towing and storage.

“Peace on Earth”

Since: Sep 08

Santa Barbara, CA

#1123731 Apr 22, 2014
fetch almighty wrote:
<quoted text>how's it going big fat liar in your Haute Couture stretchy pants.
BLM released their figures-so are they lying usm--or just YOU.
The official listed the dead livestock cataloged by the BLM explaining,“The Bundy branded bull that was euthanized posed a significant threat to employees during the gather. The Bundy branded cow ran into a fence panel injuring its spine and was euthanized.” The dead animals listed by the official were:
1 Bundy branded bull was euthanized
1 Bundy branded cow was euthanized
1 unbranded bull was euthanized
1 unbranded cow was euthanized
1 unbranded bull died
1 unbranded cow died
So? Where was their "plan" to kill Bundy's herd? What you have here are two bullls that proposed a threat to the wranglers horses and four "unbranded" cattle that were "euthanized"... meaning they were in such poor condition they had to be put out of their misery. Thanks for the post. It proves the wranglers were responsible and caring in their work.

“fairtax.org”

Since: Dec 08

Gauley Bridge WV

#1123732 Apr 22, 2014
flack wrote:
<quoted text>Been there. If your belief in God is pure you have nothing to worry about. It's in the bible.
Mark 16:18
Parallel Verses
New International Version
they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well."
New Living Translation
They will be able to handle snakes with safety, and if they drink anything poisonous, it won't hurt them. They will be able to place their hands on the sick, and they will be healed."
English Standard Version
they will pick up serpents with their hands; and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover.”
New American Standard Bible
they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover."
King James Bible
They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
Holman Christian Standard Bible
they will pick up snakes; if they should drink anything deadly, it will never harm them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will get well."
International Standard Version
and they will pick up snakes with their hands. Even if they drink any deadly poison it will not hurt them; and the'll place their hands on the sick, and they'll recover."
NET Bible
they will pick up snakes with their hands, and whatever poison they drink will not harm them; they will place their hands on the sick and they will be well."
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
“And they will take up snakes, and if they should drink lethal poison, it will not harm them, and they will place their hands on the sick and they will be healed.”
GOD'S WORD® Translation
They will pick up snakes, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them. They will place their hands on the sick and cure them."
Jubilee Bible 2000
they shall take away serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands upon the sick, and they shall be healed.
King James 2000 Bible
They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
American King James Version
They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
American Standard Version
they shall take up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall in no wise hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
Douay-Rheims Bible
They shall take up serpents; and if they shall drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them: they shall lay their hands upon the sick, and they shall recover.
Darby Bible Translation
they shall take up serpents; and if they should drink any deadly thing it shall not injure them; they shall lay hands upon the infirm, and they shall be well.
English Revised Version
they shall take up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall in no wise hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
Webster's Bible Translation
They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
Weymouth New Testament
They shall take up venomous snakes, and if they drink any deadly poison it shall do them no harm whatever. They shall lay their hands on the sick, and the sick shall recover."
World English Bible
they will take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it will in no way hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover."
Young's Literal Translation
serpents they shall take up; and if any deadly thing they may drink, it shall not hurt them; on the ailing they shall lay hands, and they shall be well.'
Jean

Palm Coast, FL

#1123733 Apr 22, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
How about we guess who Obama's father is. It's obviously not Obama "Sr", that's for sure.
My best bet from the grave would be that it's lily boca raton fl with a strap-on.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#1123734 Apr 22, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
A ruling by the Supreme Court states any law where it cannot be determined what is required for compliance by reading the law to be unconstitutional due to vagueness and ambiguity.
Congress cannot delegate it's Constitutional responsibility and authority to write legislation to any other branch of government. For instance, Congress cannot write a law saying "The President can determine what is required by a law". Well, they can write it, but it isn't constitutional.
If Congress chooses to turn a blind eye to unconstitutional actions by an administration, that doesn't make those actions constitutional. It only makes Congress inept and derelict. An inept and derelict Congress doesn't change the text in the Constitution.
For instance, if there is a date specified in a law, ObamaKare for example, the President doesn't have the authority to change that date. Congress has to pass legislation to change anything in any law. Additionally, the President doesn't have the authority to determine who is subjected to the law, and who is exempted from the law. In fact, the Constitution specifically commands the President to ensure the laws are faithfully executed.
The Patriot Act is a prime example of a law that is Unconstitutional and goes against the US Constitution but the SCOTUS upheld it but your right as long as there is a legal challenge to a Law or Executive Order and the SCOTUS agrees and rules a Law or executive order Unconstituional, the law or executive order will be struck down as Unconstitutional and a prime example of a Law by the Liberals & Congress that has been unconstitutional for years since 1965 and considered the law of the land was just last year ruled unconsititional by the SCOTUS and there is more of these laws that needs to challenged before the SCOTUS.

Supreme Court Invalidates Key Part of Voting Rights Act

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/us/supreme-...

Supreme Court upholds controversial part of Patriot Act

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2010/062...

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#1123735 Apr 22, 2014
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't pass over anyone due to their race. That doesn't change.
The U S Supreme Court ruling in the Michigan affirmative action case and last years striking down of certain protections in the 1968 Voting Rights Act make discrimination based on race much more possible.

“Peace on Earth”

Since: Sep 08

Santa Barbara, CA

#1123736 Apr 22, 2014
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
American citizens need to stand together to resist abuses by the federal government.....
Bundy was wrong to refuse to pay grazing fees, but the federal government was even worse in employing paramilitary tactics without cause.....
"WITHOUT CAUSE?" How do you suggest they BLM respond to a rancher that has called upon armed nutcases to provide protection? Obviously the BLM didn't employ enough paramilitary tactics. They won't make that mistake again.

Here are a couple of excerpts from the Oath Keepers webpage that went out last week:

"We are concerned that the domestic enemies of the Constitution that infest the federal government might try to take advantage of folks going home, and attempt to make a move on the Bundy family. We feel certain that they will want to try again at some point, perhaps in a different way, even perhaps by executing a dynamic entry raid to attempt to arrest the Bundys. And we have heard that this is being discussed, though I have not been able to directly confirm it. But it is a real risk.

Therefore, to prevent such a raid, or to at least throw a monkey wrench into any such plans and make it more difficult for them, we're doing the following:

We are calling on all Oath Keepers who can possibly get here to come to the Bundy Ranch to serve as volunteers on an ongoing, rotating watch.

That is not because there is any great emergency, but is a preventative measure - sort of like doing a rotation on the DMZ."

"By all means, bring your rifles, handguns, and whatever other gear you think you will need to stand watch, and yes, that includes any cammo you think will work best."

"We need proactive Oath Keepers to help arrange a steady stream of State and County officials to rotate presence there so that the idiot government will have to admit it's ready to kill sitting elected public servants to assert its authority, or leave the Bundy family - and their cows - alone." Guess they decided putting women and children up front wasn't winning people to their side so switched to politicians.

http://oath-keepers.blogspot.com/

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#1123737 Apr 22, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
So, what you're saying is, there is no limit to what the IRS can demand in the way of evidence of compliance with the law, right? Like, the IRS can order you to give them your underwear, or turn over to them a list of everyone you slept with in the past decade, or anything their whim decides, right?
I don't see where a list of donor names is important to this determination, besides violating the 4th Amendment to the Constitution.
I think everyone is being misdirected. As I interpret this administration's actions, it seems most logical that they are trying to prevent any political activity other than that which is government funded.
I don't understand why you are appaled by the Waco (Texas) Tea Party being given its legal exemption. What do you know the IRS doesn't know about them?
You seem to be fixated on names. I notice that about Democrats. Symbolism is paramount, and substance is not important. You've been programmed to have an averse reaction when you read TEA, see people who call themselves "patriots", or come into contact with anyone who thought 9/11 was worth generating political involvement.
Perhaps it didn't take much effort by the programmer to get you to think like this.
under the 16th amendment if the Federal Government wants to they are entitled to100% of our income and we can thank the Republicans for it to since they were the progressive at the time.

History of the 16th Amendment Overview

By W. Cleon Skousen.

A Former IRS Commissioner’s Statement

T. Coleman Andrews served as commissioner of IRS for nearly 3 years during the early 1950s.

Following his resignation, he made the following statement:

“Congress [in implementing the Sixteenth Amendment] went beyond merely enacting an income tax law and repealed Article IV of the Bill of Rights, by empowering the tax collector to do the very things from which that article says we were to be secure. It opened up our homes, our papers and our effects to the prying eyes of government agents and set the stage for searches of our books and vaults and for inquiries into our private affairs whenever the tax men might decide, even though there might not be any justification beyond mere cynical suspicion.”

“The income tax is bad because it has robbed you and me of the guarantee of privacy and the respect for our property that were given to us in Article IV of the Bill of Rights. This invasion is absolute and complete as far as the amount of tax that can be assessed is concerned. Please remember that under the Sixteenth Amendment, Congress can take 100% of our income anytime it wants to. As a matter of fact, right now it is imposing a tax as high as 91%. This is downright confiscation and cannot be defended on any other grounds.”

“The income tax is bad because it was conceived in class hatred, is an instrument of vengeance and plays right into the hands of the communists. It employs the vicious communist principle of taking from each according to his accumulation of the fruits of his labor and giving to others according to their needs, regardless of whether those needs are the result of indolence or lack of pride, self-respect, personal dignity or other attributes of men.”

“The income tax is fulfilling the Marxist prophecy that the surest way to destroy a capitalist society is by steeply graduated taxes on income and heavy levies upon the estates of people when they die.”

http://articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com/16...

“Stop child soldiers ”

Since: Apr 14

Location hidden

#1123738 Apr 22, 2014
Let's take a look at the court records for Bundy's ranch

From 1999 to 2012 there was no court actions against Bundy

Then as the ENN project begins to solidify In December of 2011
http://www.lvrj.com/business/plans-to-move-fo...

United States District Court for the District of Nevada

Full case name
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. CLIVEN BUNDY, Defendant.

Transcripts
May 2012 -Complaint

June 2012 - Answer by Defendant
Dec 2012 - Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment


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) 1 hr cpeter1313 315,168
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 4 hr Patriot AKA Bozo 11,283
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 19 hr Told Pharts 33,405
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
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) May '17 Into The Night 258,461
More from around the web