Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1394552 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.

PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1165318 Jul 12, 2014
mdbuilder wrote:
<quoted text>
Bush.... You retarded imbecile. OBAMA's president! Remember???
I think Bush deserves Obama's presidential salary. Obama hasn't done shit while Bush gets credit for everything.
Yeah and he's following the law passed by Congress and signed by Bush. So what's your point dumbass?
You're an idiot; you always have been and always will be!
lily boca raton fl

Boca Raton, FL

#1165319 Jul 12, 2014
Obama Cuts In Line At Franklin Barbecue, Makes Up For It By Paying It Forward

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/11/obam...

“Depends on the Day”

Since: Apr 14

Location hidden

#1165320 Jul 12, 2014
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure you miserable piece of fecal matter, just ship them back to the gangs and death squads that they risked their lives to escape from. Xenophobes like you would have probably sent Eastern European Jews back to the pogroms.
You're an idiot and beneath contempt.
Another day of exaggerated drama from Dupie
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#1165321 Jul 12, 2014
Kansas Is Going Broke Due To The Republican Plan Of Cutting Taxes For the Rich

By now, most Americans have heard the infamous line from Albert Einstein that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. A reasonable person would think that doing the same thing with full knowledge it will not give the same results is just stupid. One cannot fathom the Republican mindset that drives them to believe if they continue their thirty year experiment in trickle down economics, it will create jobs and be an economic bonanza that is both stupid and insane because it is always a monumental failure.

It is puzzling really, that if the so-called supply-side economic theory has been a failure on the national level, why Kansas Republicans thought if they started with a budget surplus, squandered it on huge tax cuts for the rich, the state’s coffers would be flush with money and a job creation explosion would follow. It has not been that many years since George W. Bush squandered a budget surplus on tax cuts for the rich that failed to produce the storied economic benefits of trickle down economics, but apparently Kansas Governor Sam Brownback (R) and the Republican legislature were asleep during Bush’s tenure. Kansas is going broke and predicted to be bankrupt within two years, job creation is lagging the entire nation, and it is all down to giving tax cuts to the rich at the expense of the state’s economic life and the people the Republicans were elected to serve.

http://www.politicususa.com/2014/07/11/kansas...

“Depends on the Day”

Since: Apr 14

Location hidden

#1165322 Jul 12, 2014
PolitiFact says 'false' to Pelosi claim SCOTUS is 'five guys who start determining what contraceptions are legal'

Actually, when contacted by PolitiFact, there was a retreat

We can eliminate any reader suspense by sharing the response Pelosi’s office sent PolitiFact after we inquired:“She misspoke,” spokesman Drew Hammill acknowledged.“Obviously the impact of the court’s decision is not to make these four contraceptive methods illegal – i.e. no longer allowed to be sold.”

“Peace on Earth”

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#1165323 Jul 12, 2014
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>Psst! Jews are not a race son.
You people are so confused about such a simple thing..
Yep. And zionism isn't Judaism either. They are so eager to label people as anti-semitic they end up looking like fools.
lily boca raton fl

Boca Raton, FL

#1165324 Jul 12, 2014
RoxLo wrote:
PolitiFact says 'false' to Pelosi claim SCOTUS is 'five guys who start determining what contraceptions are legal'
Actually, when contacted by PolitiFact, there was a retreat
We can eliminate any reader suspense by sharing the response Pelosi’s office sent PolitiFact after we inquired:“She misspoke,” spokesman Drew Hammill acknowledged.“Obviously the impact of the court’s decision is not to make these four contraceptive methods illegal – i.e. no longer allowed to be sold.”
Oh yawn. The more important issue is that this case was ever even heard by the court; how is it possible that a case is based in misinformation is even considered? Seriously is everyone just dumb?

Hobby Lobby "believes" that these drugs and or devices cause abortion so therefore they do?
Uneffing believable.

“Amor patriae.”

Since: Feb 08

Eastern Oregon

#1165325 Jul 12, 2014
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah and he's following the law passed by Congress and signed by Bush. So what's your point dumbass?
You're an idiot; you always have been and always will be!
Which law are you referring to, a**hole? Obama shows utter contempt for laws he deems inconvenient. To suggest he's somehow restricted by regulation or precedent is absurd. The opposite is true. He goes out of his way to spit in the face of convention and tradition.That being said, get fcked you fckn fck.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#1165326 Jul 12, 2014
The Problem With The Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby Decision

.... the Court claims that corporations exercise religion. But corporations are not people. They’re artificial legal entities. They were not “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,” as Thomas Jefferson put it in the Declaration of Independence. Rather, they’re useful economic structures created and controlled by state law.

This latest Supreme Court ruling is not about freedom, but power. The Supreme Court’s decision allows for-profit business corporations to impose their stockholders’ religious views on employees who may follow entirely different religions.

One of the Court’s problems is a failure of imagination. The justices look at the current landscape of corporate ownership, and the fact that no one ever thought to raise claims for corporate religious exemptions before, and conclude that the issue is narrow. But reduced employee insurance costs will give a slight market edge in a low-margin business. If a small group of evangelical investors, or Saudi princes, can buy a company and then cut costs on health insurance by raising religious objections to rules that their competitors must follow, they will. And if a Saudi billionaire objects to paying any health insurance costs for women who work outside the home, then he can really cut costs.

And it’s not just about insurance. Most religions object to something, and the Court’s ruling provides a new avenue for corporate challenges to any federal law whatsoever. The Fatima Center, a radical Catholic traditionalist group, holds that climate change is a vast Satanic hoax. Corporate investors who follow its teachings might not want their companies to comply with greenhouse gas emissions rules — and based on Monday’s Supreme Court ruling, they might have a claim for a religious exemption.

Those who agree with Hobby Lobby claim that the Court has granted religious exemptions to incorporated congregations before, and the difference between for-profit and nonprofit corporations isn’t important. But that’s silly. The truth is, nonprofit corporations don’t themselves have religious rights either. Rather, a religious organization (like a church, synagogue, or mosque) can come into court to represent the religious rights of its members. And we assume that a congregation or religious nonprofit organization doesn’t have a financial motive for creatively inflating its claims for exemptions, precisely because it’s a nonprofit.

But business corporations aren’t congregations, and now that millions or billions in saved costs are potentially at stake, the number and scope of potential corporate religious claims is limited only by the creativity of business in finding a slight market edge. This doesn’t mean that corporate investors will raise insincere claims (though that will happen too). Rather, entirely sincere religious corporate investors will gain a business advantage, courtesy of the Supreme Court, by claiming religious exemptions that they never thought of before.

All this illustrates the folly of “corporate religion.” Some business corporations will use this ruling to squeeze employees and competitors. Others will use it as license to discriminate. And some will do neither. But one thing is certain: allowing business corporations to claim religious exemptions means less freedom for ordinary Americans.

Since this ruling is based on a law that Congress passed, Congress can fix the problem by closing this corporate loophole. Corporations aren’t people, but real people will suffer until this is fixed.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/09/the-problem...
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1165327 Jul 12, 2014
John Galt wrote:
Obama Kills Due process.....
The Environmental Protection Agency has quietly claimed that it has the authority to unilaterally garnish the wages of individuals who have been accused of violating its rules.
According to The Washington Times, the agency announced the plan to enhance its purview last week in a notice in the Federal Register. The notice claimed that federal law allows the EPA to "garnish non-Federal wages to collect delinquent non-tax debts owed the United States without first obtaining a court order."
The notice went on to say that the EPA had fast-tracked the new rule, enabling it to take effect September 2 unless the agency receives enough adverse public comments by August 1. The EPA said the rule was not subject to review because it was not a "significant regulatory action."
The EPA has claimed this new authority by citing the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, which gives all federal agencies the power to conduct administrative wage garnishment, provided that the agency allows for hearings at which debtors can challenge the amount or the terms of a repayment schedule.
Yes moron as I pointed out to another right winger the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 was passed by overwhelming majorities in both houses of the Republican controlled104th Congress and is applicable not just to the EPA but all federal agencies.
According to the text of the law and Department of the Treasury guidelines, all federal agencies who collect delinquent debts can "collect money from a debtor's disposable pay by means of administrative wage garnishment to satisfy delinquent nontax debt" without going to the courts first. A number of federal agencies did so while President George W. Bush was still in office, including the Securities Exchange Commission in 2001 and the Department of Education in 2003.
Contrary to your ignorant assertion there is due process. The law instructs federal agencies to "provide an opportunity for a hearing" that explains to debtors "the existence or the amount of debt, and ... the terms of the repayment schedule." The Treasury's implementation rules also require agencies to "provide a hearing" at the debtor's request.
You're an idiot Galt; you always have been and always will be!
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#1165328 Jul 12, 2014
What stood out as the worst aspect of Monday’s Supreme Court decision on the lawsuit brought by Hobby Lobby against the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive mandate?

For advocates of reproductive rights, it's that the highest court in the land embraced the idea that “business owners can use their religious beliefs to deny an employee a benefit guaranteed by law,” as the ACLU's Deputy Legal Director Louise Melling put it.

That’s pretty bad. But something else is troublesome about the case, at least to me. And that is the idea that the justices simply accepted without question the claim by the Greens, a Christian family who own the Hobby Lobby chain of craft stores, that the four types of birth control they refuse to cover -- two kinds of IUDs and two morning-after pills -- cause abortion.

They do not.

“Today’s decision is based on the Court accepting as the owners’ sincere religious belief that these drugs and devices can destroy an embryo and end a human life,” said Ovide Lamontagne, general counsel of Americans United for Life, a leading anti-abortion group that supported Hobby Lobby's assertion that the Affordable Care Act's contraception mandate violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

Lamontagne quoted favorably from the court's 5-4 majority opinion, written by Justice Samuel Alito:“The owners of the businesses have religious objections to abortion, and according to their religious beliefs the four contraceptive methods at issue are abortifacients. If the owners comply with the [Obama administration’s contraception] mandate, they believe they will be facilitating abortions..."

The problem here is that their religious belief is not a scientific truth. Just because the Greens believe that emergency contraception and intrauterine devices induce abortion does not make it so.

In fact, medical experts say quite the opposite.

http://www.latimes.com/local/abcarian/la-me-r...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#1165329 Jul 12, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
Kansas Is Going Broke Due To The Republican Plan Of Cutting Taxes For the Rich
By now, most Americans have heard the infamous line from Albert Einstein that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. A reasonable person would think that doing the same thing with full knowledge it will not give the same results is just stupid. One cannot fathom the Republican mindset that drives them to believe if they continue their thirty year experiment in trickle down economics, it will create jobs and be an economic bonanza that is both stupid and insane because it is always a monumental failure.
It is puzzling really, that if the so-called supply-side economic theory has been a failure on the national level, why Kansas Republicans thought if they started with a budget surplus, squandered it on huge tax cuts for the rich, the state’s coffers would be flush with money and a job creation explosion would follow. It has not been that many years since George W. Bush squandered a budget surplus on tax cuts for the rich that failed to produce the storied economic benefits of trickle down economics, but apparently Kansas Governor Sam Brownback (R) and the Republican legislature were asleep during Bush’s tenure. Kansas is going broke and predicted to be bankrupt within two years, job creation is lagging the entire nation, and it is all down to giving tax cuts to the rich at the expense of the state’s economic life and the people the Republicans were elected to serve.
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/07/11/kansas...
just a comment on the Einstein saying...

isn't that what practicing the piano or guitar is, doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results? and don't we actually get different results?

isn't that what Tai Chi is also or any kind of training?

Since: May 14

Location hidden

#1165330 Jul 12, 2014
lily boca raton fl wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh yawn. The more important issue is that this case was ever even heard by the court; how is it possible that a case is based in misinformation is even considered? Seriously is everyone just dumb?
Hobby Lobby "believes" that these drugs and or devices cause abortion so therefore they do?
Uneffing believable.
They believe a fertilized egg is equal to life. Terminating that is an abortion.

Can you prove otherwise?

“Depends on the Day”

Since: Apr 14

Location hidden

#1165331 Jul 12, 2014
lily boca raton fl wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh yawn. The more important issue is that this case was ever even heard by the court; how is it possible that a case is based in misinformation is even considered? Seriously is everyone just dumb?
Hobby Lobby "believes" that these drugs and or devices cause abortion so therefore they do?
Uneffing believable.
The admin agreed to the FDA definitions for these Plan B drugs--notice these drugs are separate from the other classes of birth control. This issue was not contested in the court. It is uninformed to keep insisting it was.

“Depends on the Day”

Since: Apr 14

Location hidden

#1165332 Jul 12, 2014
scirocco wrote:
<quoted text>
They believe a fertilized egg is equal to life. Terminating that is an abortion.
Can you prove otherwise?
The FDA used the term "fertilized egg" in their definitions of what a mechanism did.

However, all this is a red herring.

The SCOTUS issue was not about definitions; but interpreting the law.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#1165333 Jul 12, 2014
mdbuilder wrote:
<quoted text>
Which law are you referring to, a**hole? Obama shows utter contempt for laws he deems inconvenient. To suggest he's somehow restricted by regulation or precedent is absurd. The opposite is true. He goes out of his way to spit in the face of convention and tradition.That being said, get fcked you fckn fck.
so you are saying he n do whatever he wants and enact whatever law he wants? why hasn't he done so yet?

found your draft card yet?
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#1165334 Jul 12, 2014
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>just a comment on the Einstein saying...
isn't that what practicing the piano or guitar is, doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results? and don't we actually get different results?
isn't that what Tai Chi is also or any kind of training?
i think the record will show that the GOP affliction of practicing at failing is consistently bringing the same results.

most musicians learn from what other musicians do. as long as the GOP is stuck in it's incestuous cycle of 'learning', it's just going to keep failing to further it's intellect.

“Depends on the Day”

Since: Apr 14

Location hidden

#1165335 Jul 12, 2014
sonicfilter wrote:
What stood out as the worst aspect of Monday’s Supreme Court decision on the lawsuit brought by Hobby Lobby against the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive mandate?
For advocates of reproductive rights, it's that the highest court in the land embraced the idea that “business owners can use their religious beliefs to deny an employee a benefit guaranteed by law,” as the ACLU's Deputy Legal Director Louise Melling put it.
That’s pretty bad. But something else is troublesome about the case, at least to me. And that is the idea that the justices simply accepted without question the claim by the Greens, a Christian family who own the Hobby Lobby chain of craft stores, that the four types of birth control they refuse to cover -- two kinds of IUDs and two morning-after pills -- cause abortion.
They do not.
“Today’s decision is based on the Court accepting as the owners’ sincere religious belief that these drugs and devices can destroy an embryo and end a human life,” said Ovide Lamontagne, general counsel of Americans United for Life, a leading anti-abortion group that supported Hobby Lobby's assertion that the Affordable Care Act's contraception mandate violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
Lamontagne quoted favorably from the court's 5-4 majority opinion, written by Justice Samuel Alito:“The owners of the businesses have religious objections to abortion, and according to their religious beliefs the four contraceptive methods at issue are abortifacients. If the owners comply with the [Obama administration’s contraception] mandate, they believe they will be facilitating abortions..."
The problem here is that their religious belief is not a scientific truth. Just because the Greens believe that emergency contraception and intrauterine devices induce abortion does not make it so.
In fact, medical experts say quite the opposite.
http://www.latimes.com/local/abcarian/la-me-r...
Good grief, the world hasn't come to end. The covering of 20/20 methods of birth control cannot be found in Obamacare act. It is a regulation.

There is a simple solution to this - FEDs cover emergency contraceptives like they do with non-profit orgs.

Once this is known, the Dems attempts to create a new constitutional amendment that is hostile to the Bill of Rights and religion is NOT going to be winner.

“Peace on Earth”

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#1165336 Jul 12, 2014
lily boca raton fl wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh yawn. The more important issue is that this case was ever even heard by the court; how is it possible that a case is based in misinformation is even considered? Seriously is everyone just dumb?
Hobby Lobby "believes" that these drugs and or devices cause abortion so therefore they do?
Uneffing believable.
Ruth Ginsburg noted in her dissenting opinon that "IUDs are expensive and that removing company support for them could leave some female employees without the "most effective" medical option for their needs." "Illegal" may have been the wrong word but it comes pretty darn close. If you allow companies to forbid their insurance carrier from paying for contraceptives, you pretty much make them "illegal" in the workplace. It was a bad decision and one that the SCOTUS will come to regret just like their decision to stop the recount in Florida which led to an incompetant boob in the White House.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#1165337 Jul 12, 2014
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting the contraceptive mandate. On its website, here is how ACOG replies to a question about whether emergency contraception like Plan B and Ella, the “morning-after” pills to which Hobby Lobby so strenuously objects, can cause an abortion:

"Emergency contraception will not disrupt an established pregnancy. Women often are exposed to exogenous hormones in early pregnancy without adverse outcome. Some women undergoing assisted reproductive technology procedures to achieve pregnancy are routinely prescribed progesterone to support the pregnancy. It is also a common occurrence to interview patients in early pregnancy who were not aware that their missed pills had resulted in contraceptive failure and who thus had continued taking their pills."

As for whether IUDs cause abortion, here is the opening paragraph of a 1989 Population Council publication, IUDs are Contraceptives, not Abortifacients, by Irving Sivin, a senior associate in the council's Center for Biomedical Research:

“Prevalent social myth holds that IUDs are abortifacients. Even U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, in dissent from the majority opinion in Webster v Reproductive Health Services, subscribed to this belief. Scientists, including developers of IUDs, have believed it. The key element underlying this myth is that IUDs act only at the uterine level, either to prevent implantation or to destroy developing embryos in the uterus before implantation. Today, however, the weight of scientific evidence indicates that IUDs act as contraceptives. They prevent fertilization, diminishing the number of sperm that reach the oviduct and incapacitating them.”

So why would the Supreme Court blindly accept the assertion by the Greens and their fellow plaintiffs that these contraceptive methods cause abortion?

Because all that matters, in this religious freedom case, is that the Greens believe it.

“When the court looks at religion claims,” said Melling,“one of the elements raised is the sincerity of the religious belief. And the court is usually quite deferential to what somebody says is their belief. In that respect, it’s less unusual than people might think that the court didn’t look behind that assertion.”

Thousands of women could be denied employer coverage for perfectly legal contraception because of a mistaken belief by their religiously conservative bosses about how birth control actually works. Unbelievable, but true.

http://www.latimes.com/local/abcarian/la-me-r...

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) 4 min superwilly 255,488
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 9 min Too Funny 9,786
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 1 hr Brian_G 311,319
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 2 hr Bruin For Life 32,288
News What they're saying about Bulls draft pick Bobb... (Jun '15) Jun 20 Tretre 6
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Jun 13 Dump Trump 201,862
I got my loan from [email protected] (Jun '13) Jun 6 James Harry 41
More from around the web