Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1685119 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.

Jane Says

New York, NY

#782115 Oct 24, 2012
Homer wrote:
<quoted text>I'm sure Al Queada claims repsonsibility for a lot of attacks. Why is Fox News trying so hard to embolden the enemy? Who's fcking side are they on the U.S. or Al Queada? Traitors.
embolden the enemy? you're confusing Fox with Carter and let's-roll-back-the-borders-in -Israel-and apologize-to-Islam-Obama.

Bam's BenghaziGate

Team Obama insists it was led astray by the CIA and that the White House was deaf and blind about the coordinated terrorist strike in Libya on Sept. 11, believing intelligence assessments that the attack was merely a protest that got out of hand.

But the claim is looking shakier than ever: Turns out the administration had eyes and ears in Benghazi the entire time.

Their eyes? During the attack, an unarmed Predator drone was flying over the city, watching the events in real time.

Their ears? According to reporter Eli Lake,“The State Department, monitoring the phone calls from the consulate’s operations center, knew virtually from the first minutes ... that the attack on the consulate was no protest gone astray.”

Though administration officials would spend days blaming the strike on an obscure filmmaker, basic facts were already clear to the White House at that early hour.

“When a major CIA outpost nearby came under attack ... there was little doubt about that being an operation by well-trained terrorists,” Lake reported.

Which suggests two possibilities:

One, that Team Obama has been lying like a rug.

Two, that the US intelligence establishment is utterly broken.

Trouble is, both possibilities may be true.

The Wall Street Journal reported yesterday that the CIA’s daily briefing for Obama as late as Sept. 21 said that the attack grew out of a spontaneous protest over a video that mocked the prophet Mohammed.

But the claim was based in large part on a conversation intercepted between al Qaeda members and allied terrorists in Libya.

Here’s a simple rule: When intel comes straight from a terrorist, safe to say he’s not discussing a random act of violence.

So why did the CIA insist that the attack began as a protest in the face of so much contrary information — and why did the White House believe it for a moment?

If Team Obama’s eyes and ears were in working order on Sept. 11, they didn’t have the sense or the honesty to admit what they saw and heard and knew so clearly:

That there was never a protest at all.

That the administration had refused requests for more security in Benghazi in the months before the attack, as al Qaeda and other terrorist groups grew in strength.

That the killers then tore into the consulate with ease, and slipped away as easily.

That Chris Stevens didn’t have to die.

Blaming their mistakes and their dishonesty on the CIA simply drops the White House to a new and shameful low.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editoria...
Lily Boca Raton FL

Boca Raton, FL

#782116 Oct 24, 2012
Homer wrote:
<quoted text>I am being to wonder if they even believe in rape. It's God's plan, she deserved it. Some of these rightwingers are sick in the head.
It is so absolutely despicable! I wonder if they're going to legalize rape now. They whine about fears of Sharia Law, I think that Muslim women are forced to marry their rapists.

As I said, The Christian Taliban
FreedomofKetchup

London, KY

#782117 Oct 24, 2012
Homer wrote:
<quoted text>I just call it as I see it. I hate liars and peddlers of misinformation.
The REAL TRUTHS bothering you Homer? They should.

INCOMPETENCE is bad enough-LLYING to the American public about it is UNacceptable.

ROMNEY/RYAN 2012!
haha

United States

#782118 Oct 24, 2012
carol wrote:
<quoted text>Because embassies are considered extensions of the country they represent. In essence, they attacked the USA on 9/11 - again.

Security was removed a few weeks before the attack and the call for help was repeatedly denied.

The lapse in judgment at the highest level and the mixed messages afterwards is a big deal because we still don't have answers.

It wouldn't look good for this president's campaign if he admitted his administration failed to prevent an attack and protect an ambassador on 9/11.

There's our answer.

I understand the spin, but everything else is semantics. They attacked a building smack dab in the middle of "enemy" territory. The highlight of a few (or one) casualty over the 1000's of young men and women that have died in the last 10 years is IMO despicable and disrespectful to the families ( and this country) of 1000's that have sacrificed on the front line. No life should be considered worth more or less than any other life.
Lily Boca Raton FL

Boca Raton, FL

#782119 Oct 24, 2012
A high-profile Republican activist in Utah who was charged with multiple sex crimes has committed suicide.

Greg Peterson, 37, was found dead from a self-inflicted gunshot wound in his Heber City cabin just days after posting bond and being released from jail, according to the Salt Lake Tribune.

Peterson was arrested in July and charged with 23 felonies and two misdemeanors for the alleged kidnapping and sexual assault of at least four women. He met three of the women at an online dating site and the other he met at a church function.

He was also charged with forcible sex abuse in a separate case.

Peterson, the owner of Peterson Wealth Management and Smartstocks.com , held fundraising events for Republicans.

Peterson’s Facebook page showed a photo him meeting with Romney and indicated that he co-chaired at least one Romney fundraiser on Nov. 17, 2007, according to Talking Points Memo. ABC 4 obtained a photo of Peterson with his arm around a smiling Romney

Raw Story ( http://s.tt/1qQlY )
Jane Says

New York, NY

#782120 Oct 24, 2012
Homer wrote:
<quoted text>Mitt speaks out of both sides of his mouth, Homer has no idea how he will govern. How could anyone vote for someone like that?
maybe Valerie Jarret will stay on and continue to make the decisions.
Realtime

Cape Canaveral, FL

#782121 Oct 24, 2012
carol wrote:
<quoted text>
Because embassies are considered extensions of the country they represent. In essence, they attacked the USA on 9/11 - again.
Security was removed a few weeks before the attack and the call for help was repeatedly denied.
The lapse in judgment at the highest level and the mixed messages afterwards is a big deal because we still don't have answers.
It wouldn't look good for this president's campaign if he admitted his administration failed to prevent an attack and protect an ambassador on 9/11.
There's our answer.
That's "your" answer because it's bs and bs appeals to you.

Blue Mountain Group of Wales was under contract with the State Department to provide security at the US consulate in Benghazi. Let google be your friend.

Since: May 11

Newville, PA

#782122 Oct 24, 2012
FreedomofKetchup wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama either cannot decipher time in "years" or FAILED geopgraphy.
Russia IS the number one in nuclear aquatic armaments-
Delta class ballistic missile submarine (Project 667BDR Kal'mar / 667BDRM Del'fin)
Builder: Soviet Union / Russia
Displacement: 18,000 tons
Operator: Russian Navy: 11 in service, including 5 Delta III and 6 Delta IV
But don't worry DUHAVEY-DUH "cold war ended 20 years ago".and Iran just wants urnium enrichment in case DUH oil runs out.
Mindless, clueless, Bootlickers-make for such (squawk) "optimul" Dmbfks.
Slurp it all up good now DUH A VEY.
ROMNEY/RYAN 2012!
I get it. You are saying since we have a better sub than Israel that Israel should consider us an enemy.

Do you know what the meaning of "foe" is?

Rissia is not our number one enemy.
Jane Says

New York, NY

#782123 Oct 24, 2012
Homer wrote:
<quoted text>I just call it as I see it. I hate liars and peddlers of misinformation.
no wonder you've never been offered a job in the Obama administration. you must pay your taxes too.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#782124 Oct 24, 2012
Criticizing Administration Policy Is Legitimate and Absolutely Necessary, Lying About It Isn’t

John Podhoretz’s criticism of yesterday’s media coverage is typical:

This was an effort — not entirely conscious — to make it illegitimate for Romney to criticize the president’s foreign policy at a moment when foreign policy has suddenly taken center stage.

The overwhelming majority of critics objected to Romney’s original statement and press conference remarks because they included the scurrilous lie that the administration sympathized with attackers in Cairo and Benghazi. Romney went ahead and told this lie on the flimsy basis of an unauthorized embassy statement, which he continued to pretend was a response to the attacks, and persisted in his larger lie that has been one of the main themes of his entire campaign (i.e., that Obama has repeatedly “apologized for” America).

No one said that it was illegitimate for Romney to criticize administration foreign policy. Obviously, Romney has been criticizing administration foreign policy for years, and for the most part journalists and analysts have shrugged. To the extent that Romney’s foreign policy arguments have received much attention, they have mostly been dismissed as campaign posturing or described as enigmatically vague, but no one has questioned that Romney has every right to make those arguments. Indeed, many pundits and journalists with a strong interest in foreign policy have wished that Romney would have more to say in greater detail than he has.

Some people said that it was in poor taste to insert himself into the story of the embassy attacks as quickly as he did, but the real issue wasn’t one of timing or decorum. The main problem with Romney’s intervention Tuesday night and yesterday morning was that his entire criticism of the administration’s response to the attacks was thoroughly dishonest. This wasn’t a matter of having a different, more skeptical interpretation of something that happened. This was a case of accusing the administration of something (i.e., sympathizing with embassy attackers) that it plainly had not done and wasn’t about to do. It would have been perfectly legitimate and even useful for Romney to ask what the administration intended to do next, question what the security arrangements in Benghazi had been, and insist on accountability for any mistakes. Instead of offering anything remotely resembling constructive criticism, Romney immediately launched a false attack intended to link his opponent with people responsible for assaulting U.S. diplomatic missions.

Criticism of administration policy by a presidential challenger and his party is both legitimate and necessary. It’s a shame that Romney chose to abuse that responsibility. He has not only further discredited himself, but he has also made it that much harder to hold the administration accountable for any real mistakes or failures they might have made.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/lariso...
Lily Boca Raton FL

Boca Raton, FL

#782125 Oct 24, 2012
Earlier this week, GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney starred in an ad calling upon Indiana voters to “join me in supporting Richard Mourdock for U.S. Senate.” This is the first time this election that Romney cut such an ad for a fellow Republican candidate. Watch it:

Richard Mourdock:(perhaps someone should rape this fool and see what he has to say then)

I struggled with myself for a long time but I came to realize life is that gift from God, even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape. It is something that God intended to happen.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/10/23/1...
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#782126 Oct 24, 2012
What Happened in Benghazi

Though I am in no way a fan of President Obama’s foreign and security policies, the flailing that the Republican Party is engaging in at the moment to demonstrate some kind of cover-up in the aftermath of the Benghazi attack reveals a complete lack of understanding of how intelligence collection and analysis works. David Ignatius explores the subject in an op-ed,“CIA documents supported Susan Rice’s description of Benghazi attacks.”

Ignatius observes that intelligence is developed when something happens and that evidence is frequently “fragmentary and conflicting.” While there may be such a thing as incontrovertible facts relating to any incident, that solid information is something that frequently cannot be easily discerned. Ignatius notes that Republicans have been beating Obama over the head most recently with the assertion that there was a CIA Station Chief cable the day after the killing of the ambassador that indicated that the attack had been planned and organized by a militant group. But I would bet that there were at least 15 other reports that went out the same day that provided alternative scenarios. If you intercept a cell phone call in which someone is claiming credit for organizing an attack, is he speaking the truth or is he boasting and trying to take credit for some reason or other? If a source in a militia is claiming that he knows who ordered the attack, does he have an agenda that is driving his claim? All of that has to be sorted out, which takes time and cross checking. At the present time, it does appear that the “Innocence of Muslims” video did play a role in the attack and the contention that it was a fully-orchestrated al-Qaeda event seems unlikely.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/intell...
FreedomofKetchup

London, KY

#782127 Oct 24, 2012
Homer wrote:
<quoted text>I'm sure Al Queada claims repsonsibility for a lot of attacks. Who's fcking side are they on the U.S. or Al Queada? Traitors.
That's what REAL (sane and logical) Americans want to know!
Lily Boca Raton FL

Boca Raton, FL

#782128 Oct 24, 2012
Realtime wrote:
<quoted text>That's "your" answer because it's bs and bs appeals to you.
Blue Mountain Group of Wales was under contract with the State Department to provide security at the US consulate in Benghazi. Let google be your friend.
All of a sudden they all think they're experts
Jane Says

New York, NY

#782129 Oct 24, 2012
The ObamaCare law remains extremely unpopular with voters — who oppose it 52-42 in the most recent Rasmussen poll, for example. And Romney labors under the weight of his own Massachusetts health-care plan, so very like ObamaCare. At the least, it makes any Romney discussion of the issue too painfully complex for campaign sound bites.

Still, you can see some clear differences in how the two would approach the issue.

If Obama is re-elected, ObamaCare will be fully implemented. The changes so far have been relatively popular — for instance, letting children stay on their parents’ policies until age 26, or beginning to close the “doughnut hole” for Medicare prescription-drug costs. These reforms have hidden costs, but mostly just that: hidden.

BUT Jan. 1 will bring a host of NEW OBAMACARE TAXES on medical devices, insurance plans and prescription drugs, as well as on investment incomes for higher earners.

In 2014, the individual and employer mandates kick in. The Congressional Budget Office suggests that as many as 6 million Americans will get hit with the mandate’s penalty or tax.

And many businesses may choose to drop coverage for their workers, dumping them into the new government-run insurance exchanges.

Romney’s promise to repeal ObamaCare will be hard to fulfill unless Republicans also win control of the Senate on Nov. 6. If not, expect years of political skirmishing, with Republicans trying to pick off the law’s most unpopular provisions one at a time.

But a President Romney would have a great deal of power over how much — or how little — money is spent to implement the law. For example, he’s highly unlikely to spend $303 million to hire 4,500 new IRS agents to police the mandate.

What would Romney replace ObamaCare with? His centerpiece is likely to be giving people a tax break for buying insurance on their own, rather than through their employer. That simple step for equality would make health insurance personal and portable, controlled by the individual rather than government or an employer.

hmmm....re-elect Obama and have ZERO choice thanks to IPAB, vs elect Romney and repeal and replace with choices we make...
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#782130 Oct 24, 2012
CIA documents supported Susan Rice’s description of Benghazi attacks

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/bengha...

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#782131 Oct 24, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
God f*cking forbid we don't beieve some group for claiming they did somethong.
Gee Whiz. Who wouldn't believe a bunch of extremists who want to make a name for themselves.
You get dumber every freaking day.
How about he run an investigation to find out who really did it, how & why instead of pulling a Romney & lie about it for political points.
The CIA has basically backed what the White House has been saying.
The more you right whiners want to play politics with dead Americans the more pathetic you look.
Very interesting.
... except for the fact that the video proves Obama lied, thus the Democrats running the CIA today are lying, and the government, except of course Obama, watched the attack live, and the 300+ emails sent during the attack describing and discussing the attack in real-time, and Obama didn't attend the security briefing the next morning A-F**K*NG-GAIN, and then Obama spews lies for the next two weeks while the entire world knows what's on the video.

Let me help you idiots with your "investigation"

Ali ani al-Harzi was arrested in Turkey and is now being held by Tunisian authorities in connection with Benghazi attack on September 11th.
So, why haven’t we heard about Obama demanding extradition of this worm?
Ahmed Abu Khattala led the deadly raid on the U.S. mission in Benghazi. Ahmed Abu Khattala is an Islamist and former political prisoner whose fighters were also blamed for assassinating a senior military officer after he defected to the opposition during last year's revolution against Moammar Kadafi.

Obama –“we're going to hunt down those who committed this crime."

So, when does the hunt begin? How about some goddam boots on the ground and getting on the trail while it’s still hot? After all, it’s easy to find Al Qaeda in Libya. Just look for the goddam Al Qaeda flag flying everywhere in Benghazi. How about starting your hunt there?

It seems the whole world knows more about this than Obama's CIA.
FreedomofKetchup

London, KY

#782132 Oct 24, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
I get it. You are saying since we have a better sub than Israel that Israel should consider us an enemy.
Do you know what the meaning of "foe" is?
Rissia is not our number one enemy.
You can't even stay on topic.

Russia is NOT Israel-Israel is a long time DEMOCRATIC ally...Russia is the historical breeder and the manifest destiny PUSHER of CZARduhm commieTICS.

Dmbazz.

SAVE AMERICA!

ROMNEY/RYAN 2012
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#782133 Oct 24, 2012
Roger and us: how Ailes' Fox talk revolutionised the American right

....Ailes creates conflict. Conflict creates good television.

And further: Fox, with its Ailes-curated message, has changed the language of conservative politics. Talking the talk – electric, pugnacious, hyperbolic, self-dramatizing television talk – is talking Fox talk.

Mitt Romney ought to be the guy most depressed about the Ailes' contract renewal. If Romney wins, Ailes will be his biggest political problem.

It's a double-reversal punch line. Ailes is the key figure in promoting a Republican party bench of unelectable gargoyles. That allowed Romney, an obvious centrist, to emerge as the only viable candidate – provided, however, that he helplessly pander to the Ailes party. There may never have been a candidate who has been forced to be so at odds with himself.

Without Ailes, Romney might pedal back to his Massachusetts self. With Ailes, and his subliminal messaging and subtle adjustments to language, Romney is hemmed in. He's stuck with Fox talk. Indeed, any deviation from that language is a deviation from conservative righteousness. Just try it.

If Romney loses, then he's the culprit – not Fox. Romney will be the stand-in, as no doubt he should be, for all the establishment Republican phonies. Obama, remaining in office, stays as the lightening rod – indeed, the anti-Christ against which the Tea Party (or Ailes party) continues to mount its suicidal, but ratings-winning opposition.

Ailes wins on 6 November, no matter what.

But it is important not to see this as a political story. This is a media tale. And it is not so one-dimensional as a media mogul using his power to try to influence the political process. That's merely Murdoch 101. The reason Ailes has become almost all-powerful within News Corporation is because his worldview is vastly more complex than that. He long ago outdid Murdoch at being Murdoch.

He's established Fox News as the pre-eminent political world. When you watch it, you're not just watching people who can influence power people, you're watching the thrilling exercise of power. What you see – the malevolence, the disruption, the veiled subtexts – is the drama of dominance and submission.

Ailes, alone among news professionals, has understood the most important truth about modern news: nobody's interested in politics, not in real politics anyway. It's a buzz kill. Both Romney and Obama: buzz kills. Nonentities. But if you repopulate the political world with extremists, eccentrics, loudmouths and well-scripted voices, you have a show.

That's what we have four more years of with Ailes firmly in place: parallel realities, with Fox having long since overshadowed, or even mostly replaced, actual political reality.

It's Roger's world, and we just live in it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/...

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#782134 Oct 24, 2012
Lily Boca Raton FL wrote:
<quoted text>I don't get it. I've overheard some women say they're voting for Mitt because he's good looking. Oh great.
Wishing I was where it rained occasionally. Hot and humid, and the mosquitoes are heavily armed. Kids stationed in AK have had snow on the ground for weeks; of course, they also have subzero temperatures.

Heading in your direction Monday; business 'forcing' me to New Orleans for a week. Will be a nice change of scenery.

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.

2012 Presidential Election Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 3 hr Mothra 37,864
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 5 hr loose cannon 243,256
News Trump vs. Clinton: The feud continues even afte... 7 hr mr gleeble 35
News Romney declines to say whether he'd run for Uta... 12 hr Chilli J 12
News Voter ID Laws Could Disenfranchise 1 Million Yo... (Sep '12) 16 hr Injudgement 15
News Standing up to the lynch mob 18 hr Biff 47
News Arpaio files appeal to have criminal conviction... Sat BLACK EXTREM... 7
More from around the web