Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1395642 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.

Best Buy

Palm Coast, FL

#1151295 Jun 15, 2014
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
Typical rethug. Can't argue with facts so resorts to nonsensical attacks out of desperation.
Typical Obama worshipper. Can't argue with facts so resorts to buying Obama lies and fantasies out of desperation. Happy Shopping!
Best Buy

Palm Coast, FL

#1151296 Jun 15, 2014
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
I suggest you go back and read the Senate Report on Benghazi which made it VERY CLEAR that Stevens refused offers of additional security on more than one occasion. Just because you don't like the truth doesn't make it any less truthful. Stevens was the senior official on the ground. The buck stops with him.
I see you are shopping for Hillary Clinton lies, also. Obama lies... Hillary lies ... You're definitely not a discriminating shopper ...or to you, what DIFFERENCE does it make? LOL
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#1151297 Jun 15, 2014
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
Who is "Fox News"? Fox News Channel promotes conservative political positions and biased reporting. Not news worthy or accurate.
right....and MSNBC is straight down the middle, completely unbiased reporting.....

with a trickle down the leg and a little Tawana Brawley......
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#1151298 Jun 15, 2014
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
I suggest you go back and read the Senate Report on Benghazi which made it VERY CLEAR that Stevens refused offers of additional security on more than one occasion. Just because you don't like the truth doesn't make it any less truthful. Stevens was the senior official on the ground. The buck stops with him.
Harry Reid controls the US Senate, so any report from that body is worthless......

and Marc Rich bagman Eric Holder controls the Reichs Justice Ministry......

nothing more need be said.....

time for an independent prosecutor....or several of them.....
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#1151299 Jun 15, 2014
how sweet it is......

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/gametracker/reca... @SA/spurs-crush-heat-in-game-5 -to-win-nba-championship
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#1151302 Jun 15, 2014
another company moves corporate HQ out of US because of excessive tax rates......

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/06/16/medt...
Zane

United States

#1151303 Jun 15, 2014
Thousands to Be Questioned on Eligibility for Health Insurance Subsidies

By ROBERT PEARJUNE 15, 2014

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is contacting hundreds of thousands of people with subsidized health insurance to resolve questions about their eligibility, as consumer advocates express concern that many will be required to repay some or all of the subsidies.

Of the eight million people who signed up for private health plans through insurance exchanges under the new health care law, two million reported personal information that differed from data in government records, according to federal officials and Serco, the company hired to resolve such inconsistencies.

The government is asking consumers for additional documents to verify their income, citizenship, immigration status and Social Security numbers, as well as any health coverage that they may have from employers. People who do not provide the information risk losing their subsidized coverage and may have to repay subsidies next April.

Federal subsidies for the purchase of private insurance are a cornerstone of the Affordable Care Act. More than eight out of 10 people who selected health plans through the exchanges from October through mid-April were eligible for subsidies, including income tax credits. So far this year the federal government has paid out $4.7 billion in subsidies, and the amount is expected to total $900 billion over 10 years.

Since June 1, the government has notified hundreds of thousands of people that “the information in your application doesn’t match what we found in other records.” Accordingly, the notice says,“you need to follow up as soon as possible and provide more documents to make sure the marketplace has the correct information.”

“If you don’t send the needed documents,” it says,“you risk losing your marketplace coverage or help you may be receiving to pay for such coverage.”

The government has a long list of documents that consumers can use to establish their eligibility. These include copies of birth certificates, Social Security cards, high school diplomas, driver’s licenses, pay stubs and voter registration cards.

“The law requires us to double- and triple-check this data,” said Julie Bataille, a spokeswoman at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, so “we’re reaching out to consumers — via mail, email and phone calls — to encourage them to provide supporting documentation.”

Mara Youdelman, a lawyer at the National Health Law Program, an advocacy group for low-income people, said:“In some cases, consumers say they already sent the documents to the federal marketplace. They don’t understand why they are being asked to send them in again.”

continued:
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#1151304 Jun 15, 2014
rest easy.....

Obama received updates today on the massacre in Iraq while playing golf......
Zane

United States

#1151305 Jun 15, 2014
Even though consumers have sent documents to Serco’s office in London, Ky., the government cannot always link the documents to applications for coverage filed months earlier. In addition, some consumers report persistent problems when they try to upload documents through HealthCare.gov .

For months, Republicans have asserted that the administration was lax in verifying the income and eligibility of people who applied for insurance subsidies.

The government enrolled people “before the systems were in place to accurately confirm eligibility,” said Representative Diane Black, Republican of Tennessee.

In some cases, the government told consumers that they had been found eligible for subsidized insurance and could enroll right away. But to keep the coverage, it said, they had to “send the marketplace more information” to verify their eligibility.

Representative Erik Paulsen, Republican of Minnesota, said “many Americans are going to find out that they owe money to the Internal Revenue Service because their premium tax credits were paid incorrectly.”

Representative Joseph Crowley, Democrat of New York, said such remarks showed the Republicans’“unending zeal to undermine the Affordable Care Act.”

At the same time, supporters of the health care law worry that some of its chief beneficiaries will be upset if they find next spring that their tax liability is greater than they expected.

Ronald F. Pollack, the executive director of Families USA, a liberal-leaning consumer group, said he believed that the government would not find major discrepancies in the amounts most consumers should receive in premium tax credits. But he said,“We share concerns that the longer the process of verifying and resolving inconsistencies takes, the more some consumers will owe when they reconcile their tax returns.”

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that subsidies this year will average $4,400 for each person who receives a subsidy. Federal law generally limits the amount that lower- and moderate-income people may be required to repay. A family of four with an annual income of $80,000 could be required to repay as much as $2,500.

Executives at Serco, the federal contractor, said that technical problems with HealthCare.gov had limited their ability to investigate discrepancies.

Until late May, a Serco executive said, the company had to rely on “manual processes” to resolve conflicts between information provided by consumers and information in government databases.

The government was supposed to develop a system to scan documents and transfer information automatically into electronic files, but the system was not developed, so Serco employees had to type in the information. Serco said it took an hour to perform tasks that were expected to take just five minutes.

Subsidies depend on household income and the number of people in a family seeking assistance. But internal memorandums from the Department of Health and Human Services say that the insurance exchanges had no way to verify family size.

The government has also had difficulty checking information about employer-sponsored insurance. The Obama administration delayed until 2015 a requirement for employers to inform the government of insurance that they provide. Workers are generally ineligible for subsidies if they have access to affordable employer-sponsored coverage that meets basic federal standards.

A version of this article appears in print on June 16, 2014, on page A12 of the New York edition with the headline: Thousands to Be Questioned on Eligibility for Health Insurance Subsidies. Order Reprints|Today's Paper|Subscribe
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#1151306 Jun 15, 2014
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is contacting hundreds of thousands of people with subsidized health insurance to resolve questions about their eligibility, as consumer advocates express concern that many will be required to repay some or all of the subsidies.

Of the eight million people who signed up for private health plans through insurance exchanges under the new health care law, two million reported personal information that differed from data in government records, according to federal officials and Serco, the company hired to resolve such inconsistencies.

The government is asking consumers for additional documents to verify their income, citizenship, immigration status and Social Security numbers, as well as any health coverage that they may have from employers. People who do not provide the information risk losing their subsidized coverage and may have to repay subsidies next April.
zzz

United States

#1151307 Jun 16, 2014
by James Delingpole 15 Jun 2014 375 post a comment


Denying climate change is like saying the moon is made of cheese, President Obama has said in his latest attempt to persuade an unconvinced world that "global warming" is the most urgent crisis of our time.

Obama was speaking to a crowd of around 30,000 at a commencement ceremony at the University of California, Irvine. Justifying the extravagance of his metaphor he said: "I want to tell you this to light a fire under you."

Here are some lines from his speech which explain why those present would be better off ignoring their pyromaniacal president's entreaties.

"I'm not a scientist." Possibly the only factually accurate words in the president's entire speech.

"But we've got some good ones at NASA." "Did have some good ones at NASA" would have been more accurate. Problem is, the organisation that put man on the moon is now in the grip of climate alarmists like Gavin Schmidt, successor to activist James "Death Trains" Hansen. In 2012, 49 former NASA astronauts and scientists wrote to protest against the anti-scientific, alarmist position being adopted by Hansen and Schmidt at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS). They wrote: "We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data."

"I do know the overwhelming majority of scientists who work on climate change, including some who once disputed the data, have put the debate to rest." No, you don't know, Mr President. You're just repeating the multiply discredited "97 per cent" consensus meme. And even that figure were accurate - which it isn't - scientific knowledge is not a numbers game. If it were, we would still be going with the majority view that tectonic plates are a myth, that stomach ulcers are caused by stress, that combustion is caused by phlogiston, that leeches can relieve fever, that malaria comes from the bad air in swamps, etc.

“In some parts of the country, weather-related disasters like droughts, fires, storms and floods are going to get harsher, and they’re going to get costlier.” Technically accurate, utterly meaningless. Given the chaotic nature of weather, records are always being broken somewhere in the future. Increased costliness is a given as populations grow and more expensive houses and offices are built to accommodate their needs.

continued:
zzz

United States

#1151308 Jun 16, 2014
"Today's Congress is full of folks who stubbornly and automatically reject the scientific evidence." Indeed. They're called Democrats and most of them refuse to accept the overwhelming evidence that there has been no global warming since 1997, that the computer models which predicted catastrophic warming have been proved wrong by real world data. If it weren't such an ugly term you might almost call them "deniers."

"They will tell you climate change is a hoax or fad." There is a name for people who say such things. Truth-tellers.

"One member of Congress actually says the world might be cooling." Only one? Only one person in the whole of Congress knows that the Earth has entered a prolonged cooling period, the result of weak solar activity?

“It’s pretty rare that you’ll encounter somebody who says the problem you’re trying to solve simply doesn’t exist. When President Kennedy set us on a course to the moon, there were a number of people who made a serious case that it wouldn’t be worth it. But nobody ignored the science. I don’t remember anybody saying the moon wasn’t there or that it was made of cheese.”

As Anthony Watts says, this is 'grade school level logical fallacy.' No one said the moon wasn't there or that it was made of cheese because neither statement is true. There is, on the other hand, a large - and fast-growing - body of evidence, well understood by many distinguished scientists and economists, that the catastrophic man-made global warming "problem" Obama is so keen to fix is, to all intents and purposes, non-existent.
zzz

United States

#1151309 Jun 16, 2014
by Dr. Sebastian Gorka 15 Jun 2014 158 post a comment

Policy decisions and politically driven censorship of the American national security establishment have helped strengthen Al Qaeda's successor and hastened the collapse of the nation of Iraq.

&#8203;The current administration and the President represented Operation Iraqi Freedom as the "wrong war," as opposed to the "good war" that was Afghanistan. The Vice President even called the end of our involvement in Iraq one of the great achievements of Obama's tenure.

Biden in 2010: Iraq Will Be 'One of the Great Achievements' of this Administration

With the jihadi group ISIS now in control of parts of the country that together equal the size of Syria, taking over former US bases, and moving toward the capital of Baghdad, the "achievement" has vanished.

The chaos and murder unleashed in the last few days are beyond the comprehension of the majority of Americans who have never served or lived in a war zone. According to the vicar of Baghdad Andrew White, Iraq is now witnessing mass violence and atrocities worse than anything seen since the invasion in 2003.

Almost 4,500 American servicemen and women died in OIF, and the US taxpayers have spent $20 billion to equip and train the Iraqi security forces. So how did we arrive at this apocalyptic horror?

The fact is that ISIS – The Islamic State of Iraq and the Sham (or the Levant)– has grown in strength and ferocity in the last three years to a point that it now is more powerful and capable than the original Al Qaeda whence it came. It has become Al Qaeda 2.0. ISIS's growth is in part a result of conscious actions and policy decisions taken by the current US administration.

continued:
zzz

United States

#1151310 Jun 16, 2014
•First, since very early on in his presidential campaign and then after becoming the Commander-in-Chief, it became obvious that the President had little interest in international affairs and national security. In fact, in his first speech to graduating West Point cadets in 2009, he was unequivocal. It was time to “end the war in Iraq" because “we must rebuild our strength here at home.” The White House agenda since 2008 has primarily been driven by domestic projects aimed at expanding the state such as Obamacare. That is why none of the National Security Advisers appointed by the White House since General Jim Jones was ignominiously replaced in 2010 have been recognized names in the world of national security. The issue just does not interest the incumbent, and therefore there was no need for a Kissinger- or Brzezinski-caliber replacement.

•As attested to by a remarkably in-depth 2011 article in The New Yorker, the administration sees all crises as unique and unrelated to one another. So great is this belief that America does not need a strategy to deal with the world and inform our national actions in a consistent fashion that the President, when interviewed on national television, actually stated that having "blanket policies" can get you "into trouble." As a result, the idea that the chaos in Syria, where ISIS built its forces, was connected to the future stability of Iraq did not occur to the administration until Mosul, Fallujah, and Tikrit had fallen to fighters trained and hardened in the war against Assad just next door. Our government cannot connect the dots if the Commander-in-Chief openly believes that doing so is a bad idea.

•This lack of any strategic approach to the global threat of jihadi groups is compounded by politically-driven censorship of the national security and defense establishment. As documented elsewhere, in 2011 putative "representatives" of the Muslim communities in the US demanded that the White House review and censor all counterterrorism training materials and trainers used by the Defense Department and Department of Justice, their claim being that existing materials and trainers were un-Islamic or "Islamaphobic." This event that has come to be known as "the purge" – see this documentary for the full story – and led to the forced removal of any mention of Islam or jihad from all governmental training materials used by our armed forces or the FBI. As a result, as a government, we have blinded ourselves to such an extent that it has become practically impossible for a national security professional to understand what is going on in the Middle East and what drives groups like ISIS or Al Qaeda without getting into trouble for being politically incorrect.

Of course, trying to understand the decapitation of enemy forces or the tactic of suicide attacks without referring to, or being allowed to refer to, jihad is analogous to our trying to understand the Third Reich in 1944 while banning our soldiers and intelligence professionals from talking about and analyzing Nazism.

continued:
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1151312 Jun 16, 2014
TPRTY wrote:
<quoted text>
Right, because we all know our patriotic volunteer military is packed with pacifist leftists. We could also tell by the roaring cheers and standing ovations for OBLAMER at West Point.
Patriots defend our country, not leftists.
Who's this "we all" moron? Ignorant pieces of fecal matter like you?
Sure those on the left are certainly unpatriotic like John Kerry who manned a floating target in the Mekong Delta and Max Cleland who left three limbs on the battlefield. All the while Mitt Romney, a big war supporter was in France, Dick Cheney got five draft deferments because he had "other priorities and George W Bush was busy defending Texas from Oklahoma when he wasn't partying.
Let's not forget Tammy Duckworth who lost both her legs in combat in Iraq.
You're an idiot; you always have been and always will be!
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1151313 Jun 16, 2014
Donny Brook wrote:
<quoted text>
You moron. Keep making excuses for your brotha, but he is toast and come next January 23 the House will impeach and the Senate will convict your lying socialist fake president on several changes. The chances are that 90-bureaucrats that knew would leak long before even the most foul congressman and that includes Rangel and Schumer.
Only in your delusional dreams dumbass.
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1151314 Jun 16, 2014
Incognito4Ever wrote:
<quoted text>
A part of me feels sorry for them but, mostly, I blame them for putting us all in greater danger by continually supporting a president who has failed miserably on every front.
He maneuvered government control of about 31% of the U.S. economy with banking and health care and now wants to control the energy sector - another 10.5% of the economy.
While we are witnessing all of this, we have become unthinkably vulnerable. Jihadists are winning and growing in number nine times greater than 9/11. They have nothing better to do than plan another bigger and better 9/11 now that Obama called it quits and will close Gitmo.
It's not a matter of political debate and drawing lines in the sand anymore. We are at a perilous crossroads domestically and on the world stage.
The left continues to defend a president who is clearly dictating our ruin and downfall whether it's intentionally or incompetently.
No one would have believed it possible even three or four decades ago.
But our vulnerability has never been so exposed under this president's leadership and liberal policies. So I blame them and - God forbid - any worst case scenarios.
I'm very concerned for all of us. For the first time since 9/11, I truly don't feel safe anymore. Hard for me to believe I'm the only one.
Withdrawing from Afghanistan and Iraq doesn't mean that we're giving up fighting Al Qaeda dumbass. Those were both unnecessary distractions and without them we'll be able to concentrate more on eliminating threats to our country.
You really are abysmally stupid.
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1151315 Jun 16, 2014
Incognito4Ever wrote:
<quoted text>
You're simply wrong and shortsighted - as usual - conveniently ignoring the part Democrats played in all of the above.
Do some research first. Then open mouth and insert foot.
Really Carol like the "research" you did on Martin Luther? If you did any actual research you'd realize that when the housing bubble was expanding beyond viability it was the Republicans who had control of both houses of Congress and the White House and it was this same party that flatly refused any regulation or oversight over the financial sector including the market in mortgage backed securities and credit default swaps.
Zane

United States

#1151316 Jun 16, 2014
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
Who's this "we all" moron? Ignorant pieces of fecal matter like you?
Sure those on the left are certainly unpatriotic like John Kerry who manned a floating target in the Mekong Delta and Max Cleland who left three limbs on the battlefield. All the while Mitt Romney, a big war supporter was in France, Dick Cheney got five draft deferments because he had "other priorities and George W Bush was busy defending Texas from Oklahoma when he wasn't partying.
Let's not forget Tammy Duckworth who lost both her legs in combat in Iraq.
You're an idiot; you always have been and always will be!
The subject matter you responded to was concerning 'leftist' I've never seen anyone saying Max Cleland, Tammy Duckworth, Mitt Romney, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney are leftist have you? John Kerry is left leaning and according to those who served directly with him he was more concerned with blowing his own horn than anything else. He even put himself in for medals. Like the Purple Heart for a self inflicted injury which didn't even require a small bandaid. Considering the injuries other combat vets endured to receive a Purple Heart a self inflicted scratch which doesn't require any bandaid even a small one doesn't make the mark for a Purple Heart. Sorry John.
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1151317 Jun 16, 2014
Incognito4Ever wrote:
We have a rogue president who doesn't reach out to anyone in Congress - even his own party - and is now making decisions unilaterally without believing it necessary for the Executive Branch to be checked and balanced.
Democrats in the Senate are just as livid. Barack Hussein Obama will single-handedly destroy liberalism and, unless we survive the next few years, he will take down the country with it.
The golden goose of liberalism in 2008 has been cooked. Obama is just basting it now.
Only in your pathologically delusional mind Carol.

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) 2 hr Earthling-1 9,871
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 2 hr Truth is might 311,343
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Mon Barbi A 201,865
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) Mon Trojan 32,289
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) Mon ChristineM 255,511
News What they're saying about Bulls draft pick Bobb... (Jun '15) Jun 20 Tretre 6
I got my loan from [email protected] (Jun '13) Jun 6 James Harry 41
More from around the web