Barack Obama, our next President

"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 ... Full Story
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#940752 Jul 9, 2013
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
Because, as some like to say on here, even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while.
But even when the liberal media actually gets it right and proves you liberals are wrong, you still don't believe it.
That's just how brainwashed you are.
Son, that's the difference.

You believe the likes of fart news never gets it wrong.

The so called liberal media obviously is much more balanced at reporting.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#940753 Jul 9, 2013
Grey Ghost wrote:
<quoted text>
That's Bull sh1t moron...Hey old clueless twit, you simply make up Sh1t as you go along. We were there in 73 when the first peace treaty was signed. Besides our involvement there was a by product of Eisenhower and allegedly to stop communist aggression.
In case you were sleeping in class this morning:

we finished our history lesson yesterday when the Soviet Union petitioned the UN to create two countries in Vietnam, and the UN accepted. Let's review before we continue:
The Japanese army was in Vietnam after the war ended. The British monitored the removal of the Japanese army in the southern region of Vietnam, while the Chinese army in the northern region. After the Japanese army had been removed, the British army left Vietnam and the Chinese army refused to leave.
Ho Chi Minh goes to Paris and asks the French to return to Vietnam to remove the Chinese Army. The French return to Vietnam and bring elections with them.
(Ho Chi Minh's communist do not win the provincial elections, and Ho Chi Minh cannot be dictator of Vietnam.)
Ho Chi Minh declares the northern region of Vietnam a separate country.(I declared the property I live on a separate country, too, the People's Democratic Republic of Bikeria, where I am the dictator, and we don't have elections or a constitution.)
Vietnam becomes part of the Cold War when Ho Chi Minh asks the Soveit Union to help him in his war against the democratic provinces of Vietnam that didn't elect communists, and the French he asked to return to Vietnam.
The communists defeat the French at Dien Bien Phu with Soviet weapons.
Today, we will learn how the US became involved in Vietnam.
1955
The Soviet Union petitions the UN to divide Vietnam into two separate countries. The UN agrees. Vietnam becomes two separate countries at the request of Ho Chi Minh, a heavily militarized North, and a non-militarized South.
Ho Chi Minh invades Laos and Cambodia and uses the communist-occupied territories there to stage invasions of South Vietnam.
Ho Chi Minh extends his "influence" in South Vietnam by using the tactic of slipping into villages at night and murdering all elected officials.
South Vietnam asks the United States for help.
The United States becomes involved in Vietnam.

So, what is inaccurate here? Please correct the inaccuracies with what you claim is the history of Vietnam.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#940754 Jul 9, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
So, what you're saying is, the Muslim Brotherhood terrorists in the White House every day are really the government-in-exile for Egypt, right?
How about this:
We join the side that is against the goddam terrorists at war with us and want to kill us.
Morsi had a chance. The Muslim Brotherhood's intollerance of any other faction sharing political power with them caused the Egyptian military to toss the terrorists' asses out of the government.
Now, there shouldn't be any reason to have the Muslim Brotherhood in the White House every day, should there?
you guys and your Brotherhood lies.

but i guess it's a damn good thing that the Brotherhood loving Romney didn't get into the WH.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#940755 Jul 9, 2013
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>Hey son. You continually demand others answer your questions as if you're some sort of god.
Apparently your weakness is you're not as god-like as you believe. So.....
"If you have no links or examples to offer then be a good consumer and go watch TV, airhead." - shinningelectr0n
I'll repost the last statement, son:

Or, how about you open your lying yap and say something like "that didn't happen."

Obama gives every Wahhabist terrorist in Saudi Arabia "special traveller" status to enter the United States with no scrutiny.
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#940756 Jul 9, 2013
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you parrots ever stop parroting mediamatters.org ?
Did you look at any other source to confirm, deny or actually tell the whole story?
You didn't, did you?
lol! So now they're wrong?
CommieIdiots

Wilbraham, MA

#940757 Jul 9, 2013
GOPIdiots wrote:
<quoted text>
Then why didn't Bush end it before he left office, instead of leaving that mess along with others for his replacement?
Then why didn't Clinton get Bin Laden when he had the chance & end it before he left office, instead of leaving that mess along with others for his replacement?
LCN Llin

United States

#940758 Jul 9, 2013
WASHINGTON — In a move that could bring to a head six months of smoldering tensions over a Republican blockade of certain presidential nominees, Senate Democrats are preparing to force confirmation votes on a series of President Obama’s most contentious appointments as early as this week.

If Republicans object, Democrats plan to threaten to use the impasse to change the Senate rules that allow the minority party wide latitude to stymie action.

Through the filibuster and other delaying tactics, Republicans have slowed the confirmation process as the president tries to install the team that will carry him through his second term. But Democrats and their majority leader, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, now say they have reached the point where they believe that the only way to break the logjam is to escalate the fight.

Senator Jeff Merkley, Democrat of Oregon, one of the most outspoken members of his party in calling for new limits on the filibuster, said,“They’ve essentially said they are going to disable the executive branch if a minority of the Senate disagrees with or dislikes the president the people elect.” He added,“It’s come into a realm where it’s just unacceptable because if the executive branch can’t function, then the nation can’t respond to the big challenges it faces.”

Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, is so alarmed by the threat of a filibuster rule change that he has gone on the Senate floor nearly every day the chamber is in session for the last month to warn of the consequences.

“Majorities are fleeting, but changes to the rules are not,” Mr. McConnell said recently.“And breaking the rules to change the rules would fundamentally change this Senate.”

Mr. Reid has held off on forcing the issue until now, worried that a fight over the filibuster would disrupt the delicate negotiations over immigration legislation. It is also uncertain whether at least 51 Democrats would go along with a rules revision given how cautiously senators weigh even the slightest change to how their body functions.

But with the Senate now clear of the immigration debate, having passed a comprehensive bill before its July 4 recess, Democratic leaders have said they see no reason to wait any longer.

Their plans represent a shift in strategy. Instead of picking fights over judges nominated by the president, where much of the tension has arisen this year, Democrats are likely to focus only on agency appointees. For example, they would line up a series of votes on nominees to run the Environmental Protection Agency, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Labor Department and a politically important labor oversight board.

The rule change they would seek is intended to be limited. It would allow senators to continue to filibuster legislation and judges, but not appointments to federal agencies or cabinet posts.

Democrats believe that their argument — that a president has the right to assemble his own team of like-minded cabinet officials and other high-level policy makers — is more persuasive in the court of public opinion. They also believe that this fight could have fewer consequences for them should their political fortunes reverse and they find themselves in the minority trying to block judicial nominees from a Republican White House.

“Often imitated”

Since: Jul 07

never duplicated

#940760 Jul 9, 2013
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
caught yachting?
proof?
and no, i am not of the church of the right wing leap of faith.
so pictures would be sufficient. words coming out of the mouth of America's premier nutjob just aren't going to cut it.
If you have to ask these questions it I s obvious you only read left wing rags. The denial the reversal has been reported by several news outlets. Expand your horizons, sonic.
Proud To Be An American

Washington, DC

#940761 Jul 9, 2013
Wake up Americans. While the concept of "separation of church and state" may be implied by the 1st Amendment which states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...." it says NOTHING at all about the actual "separation of church and state." Go ahead and research it! That phrase doesn't exist, but many believe it does because they've been taught by our liberal educational establishment that it does. Trust me ... it DOES NOT! Besides, even if you accept the principle of the separation of church and state being implied by the First Amendment, it's implication is not there to protect Americans from religion. It is there to protect religious Americans FROM THE GOVERNMENT!

We've forgotten our godly heritage, and it will cost us dearly if we don't return to our roots and to God!

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#940762 Jul 9, 2013
John Galt wrote:
A retired U.S. Marine severely injured in Iraq was subjected to extra scrutiny at a California airport and at the state capitol building for wearing "too much metal" -- an inspection that shocked his travel companion as well as bystanders, the MilitaryTimes.com reported.
Cpl. Nathan Kemnitz, who was gravely wounded in 2004 from a roadside bomb in Iraq, has limited use of his right arm and is incapable of lifting it above his head, according to the website.
During a recent trip to the state capitol building in Sacramento, Calif.-- where Kemnitz was being honored as his legislative district’s veteran of the year -- the retired Marine was reportedly asked to remove his dress shirt.
He was also asked by TSA workers at Sacramento International Airport to lift his arms above his head during a full-body scan. Kemnitz could not comply with either request, telling Military Times, "My right arm doesn’t work. It’s a lot of hassle for me to do that."
Kemnitz's travel partner, Patricia Martin, was outraged following the incidents and wrote to Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki to express her anger.
“What does a uniform and heroism represent if our own citizens — in this case employees of the TSA and security personnel — have no regard for them?” Martin reportedly wrote.
"I feel so strongly that you need to know just how shamefully even a Purple Heart recipient/disabled veteran can be treated by some TSA and security employees," she said, according to the website.
Just conjecturing - but since the political correctness of the progressive liberalists' ideology wouldn't allow them to flag a terrorist before he opened fire on our military at Foot Hood and even though red flags were everywhere, a soldier in uniform is now suspect.

That's what happens when political correctness poisons a society. Everyone suffers because common sense is in a coma.
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#940763 Jul 9, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll repost the last statement, son:
Or, how about you open your lying yap and say something like "that didn't happen."
Obama gives every Wahhabist terrorist in Saudi Arabia "special traveller" status to enter the United States with no scrutiny.
Son, I already saw the statement. But....

"If you have no links or examples to offer then be a good consumer and go watch TV, airhead." - shinningelectr0n

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#940764 Jul 9, 2013
lily boca raton fl wrote:
<quoted text>
Your great fear should be that you are agreeing with a person who posts 24/7 saying Magic Negro about the President of the United States
Thought Harry Reid made "negro" an acceptable word after calling Barack Obama one.

But only conservatives can't say it?

How much clearer can your hypocrisy be?

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#940765 Jul 9, 2013
lily boca raton fl wrote:
<quoted text>
Your great fear should be that you are agreeing with a person who posts 24/7 saying Magic Negro about the President of the United States
At least Joe Biden used the term African-American when he said Barack Obama was the first "clean" African-American to run for such high office.

Better look at the man in the mirror.
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#940766 Jul 9, 2013
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
Just conjecturing - but since the political correctness of the progressive liberalists' ideology wouldn't allow them to flag a terrorist before he opened fire on our military at Foot Hood and even though red flags were everywhere, a soldier in uniform is now suspect.
That's what happens when political correctness poisons a society. Everyone suffers because common sense is in a coma.
Ah! 1930's German 'common sense.'
GOP idiots

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#940767 Jul 9, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Hoodieman called his girlfriend and told her he was going to kick some creepy ass cracker's ass, idiot.
Then, there's the location of Zimmerman versus the location of Hoodieman, the busted nose, the grass on the back of the shirt, and the evidence of Zimmerman's head being bashed against the concrete sidewalk.
On the other side, there's a hole blown through Hoodieman's chest cavity... and nothing else.
You have an active imagination.
He said he was being followed.
Patriot

Longmont, CO

#940768 Jul 9, 2013
NY Mayor Michael Bloomberg is being accused of committing thousands of gun-related felonies...

http://intellihub.com/2013/07/09/michael-bloo...
LCN Llin

United States

#940769 Jul 9, 2013
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>lol! So now they're wrong?
When President Bush took office on Jan. 20, 2001, the S&P 500 stock market index stood at 1,342.54.

The day President Bush left office, it was 805.22, a drop of 40 percent.

A grim-faced President Bush acknowledged risks to taxpayers in what would be the most sweeping government intervention to rescue failing financial institutions since the Great Depression. But he declared, "The risk of not acting would be far higher."

The administration is asking Congress for far-reaching new powers to take over troubled mortgages from banks and other companies, including purchasing sour mortgage-backed securities. Administration officials and congressional leaders are to work out details over the weekend.

Republicans try to hide their mess
TheIndependentMa jority

Hazard, KY

#940770 Jul 9, 2013
Grey Ghost wrote:
<quoted text>
AAH, is the wittle baby irritated,sitting in that mudhole farting all day i'll bet is causing a rash...Yea think? LMAO, what a bunch of clueless jerks..That be your culture.
Ugh.
Gag and puke.

Quit adding to the already abunDUNCE of stoopid, would ya plz goober.

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#940771 Jul 9, 2013
lily boca raton fl wrote:
<quoted text>
Delusional
Oh, for cryin' out loud, Lily. MSNBC had to recently apologize for editing and using a clip of Joe Biden out of context to promote their bias on gun control.

NBC had to recently apologize for editing Zimmerman's 911 call to promote a racial bias that didn't exist.

Dan Rather was fired from CBS for reporting a lie about Bush without fact checking first.

And you think I'm delusional? Think again.

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#940772 Jul 9, 2013
No Surprize wrote:
<quoted text>Democrats: We started the KKK before we were against it...
It's the culture....
anybody who would compare the Democratic Party post the civil war/southern DIXIECRATS to todays Democratic Party is an idiot who doesn't understand the meaning of context, and that things change over time. Its like saying, we're enemies of Japan & Germany.....it was true in the 40's but today we're allies

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
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 19 min wojar 182,109
'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 31 min American Lady 165,510
Parties assess variables looking at 2016 map 1 hr barefoot2626 15
Democrats optimistic on 2016 presidential chances 3 hr Hooogle It 4
Ending the Slavery Blame-Game (Apr '10) 7 hr Henu 35
McAuliffe wants to ban gifts and trips for lawm... (Mar '09) 8 hr Rick 20
Who is the worst president since WWII ? 9 hr barefoot2626 1,114
More from around the web