Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1564060 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.

Nostrilis Waxman

Simsbury, CT

#1123760 Apr 22, 2014
More_ron wrote:
Anyone seen Jesus Christ today?
Nope.

Did you pray to your Messiah Obama today at the cult Democrat Church of Liberal Socialism?
Nostrilis Waxman

Simsbury, CT

#1123762 Apr 22, 2014
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>It's like trying to squeeze a balloon.
No shape or form.
Just a quivering, ever changing mass that shifts position at the first sign of pressure.
Like your communist head son!

“Peace on Earth”

Since: Sep 08

Santa Barbara, CA

#1123763 Apr 22, 2014
RoxLo wrote:
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
So, what? All that shows is that the BLM wasn't eager for an armed confrontation. When will you get it through your thick skull that the ENN project had nothing to do with anything. It was 200 miles away!!!

March 18, 1996: "The federal government, which owns 87 percent of the land in Nevada, is still worried about potential violence if they try to remove illegally grazing cattle from protected land. Two more pipebombs had exploded in Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management offices in the past two years. The Justice Department has 12 lawsuits pending against Nevada cattle ranchers. A federal court in the state struck down the Nye County ordinance that caused trouble the year before. Not that ranchers took that as reason to stand down, however. One local resident told USA Today,"A single district court decision in one district doesn't settle it. It's just a single day in the year of a revolutionary war. We're going to continue on with the fight." Bundy is also continuing to graze on federal lands. "I'm still saying the state of Nevada owns that land, and the federal government has been an encroacher. I'm not moving my cattle. We have ... rights."

July 2009: "The federal government is still fighting with local ranchers. They have signs posted all over the public land, stating that it is off-limits for grazing.

Some signs have been chain-sawed down; others have been filled with bullet holes.“There haven't been any confrontations out there, but we have to be careful,” says Gail Marrs-Smith, who manages the area for the BLM.“We travel in pairs.” Cliven Bundy, a local organic melon farmer, is one of those who resent the changes. To protect an endangered tortoise, Clark County has set aside habitat by buying and retiring all of the government grazing leases in Gold Butte. But Bundy still runs his cows through here, even though since 1993 he has been ordered to desist because he has no permit. Bundy says that his family has grazed here since the nineteenth century and that he doesn't recognize the authority of the federal government. HE HAS THREATENED RESISTANCE IF ANYONE ENFORCES THE COURT ORDER TO REMOVE HIS CATTLE FROM THE WILDERNESS.“It's so blatant,” says Rob Mrowka, a conservationist who works for the Center for Biological Diversity, in Las Vegas.“Anyone can go out there anytime of the year and see cattle. BLM employees trying to protect sensitive plants and animals are very frustrated. It's a problem that's been going on and on.”

The BLM did all they could to prevent a violent confrontation but with Bundy's cattle standing in the way of progress, they could wait no longer.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/w...

Since: Jan 11

Hackettstown, NJ

#1123764 Apr 22, 2014
Realtime wrote:
<quoted text>Cite your source for filing for a c (4) is to keep donors anonymous. No excuses__just do it K?
By the way__it's a 501 (c)(4) just so you get it right.
Here's a good starting point__google__what is a 501 (c)(4)?
BTW I don't really expect an answer__you already fkd up in step one
Ah! You got me there. They're not required to disclose their donors publicly. I suppose our honorable IRS could still audit donors.
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#1123765 Apr 22, 2014
Nostrilis Waxman wrote:
<quoted text>
Like your communist head son!
poor little ruskie.

So do you still use your head to to try and crack nuts son?
Nostrilis Waxman

Simsbury, CT

#1123767 Apr 22, 2014
Good decision:

"In a 6-2 ruling on Tuesday, the justices said that a lower federal court was wrong to set aside the change as discriminatory. The Supreme Court ruled that Michigan voters had the right to change their state constitution to bar public colleges and universities from using race as a factor in admissions."

The racist liberal Democrats must hate this.

“Peace on Earth”

Since: Sep 08

Santa Barbara, CA

#1123768 Apr 22, 2014
Nostrilis Waxman wrote:
<quoted text>
He didn't say there was a "plan". He stated what happened. Where do you Moonbats come up with your bizarre tangents? Liberalsism is a mental disorder.
You weren't following the thread were you? "Moonbat", DB said the BLM had a "plan" to kill all of Bundy's cattle. Kvetch jumped in with her post which in no way addressed DB's claim. Since it was DB's "bizarre tangent" by your assessment conservatism is a mental disorder. No surprise.
Nostrilis Waxman

Simsbury, CT

#1123769 Apr 22, 2014
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
So, what? All that shows is that the BLM wasn't eager for an armed confrontation. When will you get it through your thick skull that the ENN project had nothing to do with anything. It was 200 miles away!!!
March 18, 1996: "The federal government, which owns 87 percent of the land in Nevada, is still worried about potential violence if they try to remove illegally grazing cattle from protected land. Two more pipebombs had exploded in Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management offices in the past two years. The Justice Department has 12 lawsuits pending against Nevada cattle ranchers. A federal court in the state struck down the Nye County ordinance that caused trouble the year before. Not that ranchers took that as reason to stand down, however. One local resident told USA Today,"A single district court decision in one district doesn't settle it. It's just a single day in the year of a revolutionary war. We're going to continue on with the fight." Bundy is also continuing to graze on federal lands. "I'm still saying the state of Nevada owns that land, and the federal government has been an encroacher. I'm not moving my cattle. We have ... rights."
July 2009: "The federal government is still fighting with local ranchers. They have signs posted all over the public land, stating that it is off-limits for grazing.
Some signs have been chain-sawed down; others have been filled with bullet holes.“There haven't been any confrontations out there, but we have to be careful,” says Gail Marrs-Smith, who manages the area for the BLM.“We travel in pairs.” Cliven Bundy, a local organic melon farmer, is one of those who resent the changes. To protect an endangered tortoise, Clark County has set aside habitat by buying and retiring all of the government grazing leases in Gold Butte. But Bundy still runs his cows through here, even though since 1993 he has been ordered to desist because he has no permit. Bundy says that his family has grazed here since the nineteenth century and that he doesn't recognize the authority of the federal government. HE HAS THREATENED RESISTANCE IF ANYONE ENFORCES THE COURT ORDER TO REMOVE HIS CATTLE FROM THE WILDERNESS.“It's so blatant,” says Rob Mrowka, a conservationist who works for the Center for Biological Diversity, in Las Vegas.“Anyone can go out there anytime of the year and see cattle. BLM employees trying to protect sensitive plants and animals are very frustrated. It's a problem that's been going on and on.”
The BLM did all they could to prevent a violent confrontation but with Bundy's cattle standing in the way of progress, they could wait no longer.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/w...
Harry Reid:

Grandma & the grandkids are terrorists!

Of course, StupidSinceBorn cites a "blog"!

<shaking head>

Since: Jan 11

Hackettstown, NJ

#1123770 Apr 22, 2014
More_ron wrote:
Anyone seen Jesus Christ today?
He had risen last Sunday.

“Peace on Earth”

Since: Sep 08

Santa Barbara, CA

#1123771 Apr 22, 2014
RoxLo wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, we all know what it is.
Now back to the discussion. You stated the Chinese Solar Project was not connected to Gold Butte. The Searchlight project mitigation study shows that it was.
I think the building of large solar panel farms--that obliterates their habitat-- is placing the desert tortoise in more danger than some cattle.
My claim was that the Chinese Solar Project was 200 miles away from Gold Butte and you said that was "wrong". Admit it. You were "wrong". I'm not going to follow you down another path.
Nostrilis Waxman

Simsbury, CT

#1123772 Apr 22, 2014
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>poor little ruskie.
So do you still use your head to to try and crack nuts son?
No son, I've been using yours for years. That's why you can't figure it out!

“Peace on Earth”

Since: Sep 08

Santa Barbara, CA

#1123773 Apr 22, 2014
Realtime wrote:
<quoted text>Bundy's melon farm (home) is in Bunkerville. Again__Bundy has no ranch to speak of.
Gold Butte can be found to the South of Bunkerville_-maybe 15 miles as the crow flies.
That's important!
The ENN solar project is well away__no need to waste time with these fools on that location.
You are right. They are fools. I'm done discussing the issue. They just keep changing the goal post.

“Peace on Earth”

Since: Sep 08

Santa Barbara, CA

#1123774 Apr 22, 2014
Nostrilis Waxman wrote:
<quoted text>
Really libtarded one. You just challenged Fetch to provide a "plan" yet he never said there was one, confused libtard.
http://www.topix.com/forum/chicago/TI79GCO8VK...
You are a scatterbrain, so how can you even start to say others say false things when you can't even stay on topic?
You are a type "A" confused liberal. There is no reason or way to debate you as you are a spaceshot.
You really should think about shutting up when you jump in the middle of a discussion you know nothing about. It just makes you look stupid(er).
No Surprize

Largo, FL

#1123775 Apr 22, 2014
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
You weren't following the thread were you? "Moonbat", DB said the BLM had a "plan" to kill all of Bundy's cattle. Kvetch jumped in with her post which in no way addressed DB's claim. Since it was DB's "bizarre tangent" by your assessment conservatism is a mental disorder. No surprise.
oh yes, and every neighborhood has a nutjob old woman like you..

It's the culture...
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#1123776 Apr 22, 2014
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah! You got me there. They're not required to disclose their donors publicly. I suppose our honorable IRS could still audit donors.
http://www.publicintegrity.org/2012/06/20/914...

"U.S. Chamber, GOP block election ad transparency bill
Corporate speech trumps disclosure of donors
By Rachael Marcus emailJ ohn Dunbar email
6:00 am, June 20, 2012 Updated: 2:21 am, July 13, 2012

Alexi Giannoulias “can’t be trusted,” the 2010 election ad said. His family’s bank loaned money to mobsters, he accepted an illegal tax break and he even squandered money that families were saving for college.

If the charges were true, the U.S. Senate candidate from Illinois must have been a real creep. But they were bogus. Giannoulias, the Democratic candidate, lost anyway.

His accuser was not his opponent. It was an anonymously funded, pro-Republican nonprofit called Crossroads GPS, a “social welfare” organization that, thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, can accept unlimited donations from corporations, wealthy individuals and unions, and run attack ads.

In short, it functions just like the better-known super PACs but with a major distinction — it is not required to disclose its donors, despite the high court’s consistent support for disclosure rules

In 2010, legislation introduced by Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., would require nonprofits that buy political ads to disclose their donors. The bill — fought by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the nation's most powerful business lobby — failed. A stripped-down version introduced this year has been blocked by Republicans in both the House and Senate.

The Chamber claims disclosure would “silence free speech.” Critics say its opposition is more about shielding the business association’s corporate donors from a potential public backlash...."
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#1123777 Apr 22, 2014
Nostrilis Waxman wrote:
<quoted text>
No son, I've been using yours for years. That's why you can't figure it out!
lol! I don't live in Russia like you son.

Obviously you're dreaming again!

“Peace on Earth”

Since: Sep 08

Santa Barbara, CA

#1123778 Apr 22, 2014
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>It's like trying to squeeze a balloon.
No shape or form.
Just a quivering, ever changing mass that shifts position at the first sign of pressure.
LOL. Yes. She shifts positions and then tries to claim that it was the environment around her that shifted, not her. Illogical and clueless.

“Peace on Earth”

Since: Sep 08

Santa Barbara, CA

#1123779 Apr 22, 2014
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah! You got me there. They're not required to disclose their donors publicly. I suppose our honorable IRS could still audit donors.
Wow. How refreshing. An apology from a conservative. Too bad you added the last sentence.

Since: Jan 11

Hackettstown, NJ

#1123780 Apr 22, 2014
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.publicintegrity.org/2012/06/20/914...
"U.S. Chamber, GOP block election ad transparency bill
Corporate speech trumps disclosure of donors
By Rachael Marcus emailJ ohn Dunbar email
6:00 am, June 20, 2012 Updated: 2:21 am, July 13, 2012
Alexi Giannoulias “can’t be trusted,” the 2010 election ad said. His family’s bank loaned money to mobsters, he accepted an illegal tax break and he even squandered money that families were saving for college.
If the charges were true, the U.S. Senate candidate from Illinois must have been a real creep. But they were bogus. Giannoulias, the Democratic candidate, lost anyway.
His accuser was not his opponent. It was an anonymously funded, pro-Republican nonprofit called Crossroads GPS, a “social welfare” organization that, thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, can accept unlimited donations from corporations, wealthy individuals and unions, and run attack ads.
In short, it functions just like the better-known super PACs but with a major distinction — it is not required to disclose its donors, despite the high court’s consistent support for disclosure rules
In 2010, legislation introduced by Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., would require nonprofits that buy political ads to disclose their donors. The bill — fought by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the nation's most powerful business lobby — failed. A stripped-down version introduced this year has been blocked by Republicans in both the House and Senate.
The Chamber claims disclosure would “silence free speech.” Critics say its opposition is more about shielding the business association’s corporate donors from a potential public backlash...."
You left out Karl Rove.:-)

“Peace on Earth”

Since: Sep 08

Santa Barbara, CA

#1123781 Apr 22, 2014
Nostrilis Waxman wrote:
Good decision:
"In a 6-2 ruling on Tuesday, the justices said that a lower federal court was wrong to set aside the change as discriminatory. The Supreme Court ruled that Michigan voters had the right to change their state constitution to bar public colleges and universities from using race as a factor in admissions."
The racist liberal Democrats must hate this.
Just for the record, democrats in California passed a ban on race-conscious admissions back in 1996.

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) 47 min Eagle 12 - 258,470
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 2 hr Electric Blues 315,205
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 15 hr Patriot AKA Bozo 11,288
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) Thu 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
More from around the web