Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1534355 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.

TSM

United States

#1003172 Oct 14, 2013
Republicans you can’t negotiate with Liberals in good Faith so don’t!! Democrats are now refusing to pass a "clean" continuing resolution to end the government shutdown, as well as a straightforward debt ceiling increase Mr. President that’s our Final Offer the Ball is in your court!!
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#1003173 Oct 14, 2013
From the Start, Signs of Trouble at Health Portal

Interviews with two dozen contractors, current and former government officials, insurance executives and consumer advocates, as well as an examination of confidential administration documents, point to a series of missteps — financial, technical and managerial — that led to the troubles.

Politics made things worse. To avoid giving ammunition to Republicans opposed to the project, the administration put off issuing several major rules until after last November’s elections. The Republican-controlled House blocked funds. More than 30 states refused to set up their own exchanges, requiring the federal government to vastly expand its project in unexpected ways.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/13/us/politics...

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#1003174 Oct 14, 2013
So here we had King George III placing taxes on the colonists without representation in Parliament.

Obama places tax burdens on us and doesn't even acknowledge our representatives in Congress.

Parliament passed the Intolerable Acts which closed the Port of Boston.

Obama is just plain intolerant and closes war memorials and open-aired national parks.

And doesn't fund soldiers' burials.

When you look back, it didn't take much to start a revolution and history does tend to repeat itself.

Just sayin'.

Since: May 11

Newville, PA

#1003175 Oct 14, 2013
Whatever wrote:
<quoted text>
Your last sources appear partisan.
Synopsis of the latter quote.
"Since the costs are expected to grow faster than revenues, the difference is called "unfunded liability"."
There is a lack of money to fund it beyond a certain date.
"But this is not debt. The money has not been sent."
Yeah, Einstein if the money is not spent yet it cannot be debt, but what does this have to do with shortfalls in future liability.
"In the past, changes had to be made to these programs to adjust cost costs & revenues & changes in the population."
It isn't an unfunded liability as golly gee we have found a way to dodge the bullet in the past?
This quote did nothing to change the fact that it is still an unfunded liability.
It says the "unfunded liability"is meaningless. It is just a guide. It is not debt.

There s nothing to say that Congress could jus eliminate the whole program or double the tax rate.

If you were 20 years old, 180 pounds, fit, eating 3000 calories a day but burning off enough so that you only gained two pounds a year.

If you kept this up for 75 years taking into account no changes were made you would be 150 pounds heavier than you are now.

Are you fat now because in 75 years if you make no changes you will weight 330 pounds?

Since: Nov 11

Naperville, IL

#1003176 Oct 14, 2013
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>What BS, Saddam was more advantage to the US than being taken out. Sure he was ruthless but a lot less ppl died under his regime than the democratic one that is in power now. Why because they are tribal and religious differences run deep. So they blow each other every other day. In Saddam's time, if anything like that happened the so called suicide bomber or those responsible would lose their whole family tree. So no one dared sneeze while he was around, plus he made Iran nervous and that would have been to the US advantage.
Now 100's die every week, but at least they are free to die while shopping at the markets or just going to pray! Being set free is a wonderful thing, just ask them.

The correct way to go after these bad guys is exactly what Obama's doing now, with specialised operations and drone programs. Yes you may not like it because it is a huge success over Bush BS mass invasion and a lot more effective. He has taken out all the hierarchy of Al Queda and less experience ppl to follow. As for protection from Muslims, I think i need more protection from the religious right they are the real war mongers.
See? You are scared death of Christian veterans in lawn chairs than of Muslim radicals, that is why you and the Liberal idiots like you get blown up into pieces by Muslims as they were in the Boston marathon.

When a Liberal in America gets blown up into pieces by a Muslim it puts a smile on my face.

When will your turn be? Only Allah's will will tell!

In the mean time, keep thinking Conservative Christians are the problem! While you were looking at the Tea Party, a Muslim will soon show you who the real threat is.
Grampy

South Windsor, CT

#1003177 Oct 14, 2013
All the Libtards are criticizing the Washington Redskins claiming their name is offensive. How can a team named after a potato be offensive?

If anything is offensive it's the Democrats using a jackass as their political symbol. It's demeaning to all jackasses everywhere! They should change their symbol to a rat! A disease spreading filthy RAT!

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#1003178 Oct 14, 2013
TSM wrote:
Republicans you can’t negotiate with Liberals in good Faith so don’t!! Democrats are now refusing to pass a "clean" continuing resolution to end the government shutdown, as well as a straightforward debt ceiling increase Mr. President that’s our Final Offer the Ball is in your court!!
Not sure if Obama would even know the Republicans had given him everything he wanted because Reid wouldn't even look at this bill either - much less vote on it for the president to sign.

You know how petulant children get when they're so stubborn they say no to everything and don't even know when they're being offered something they want. That's Harry Reid.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1003179 Oct 14, 2013
Emeem wrote:
<quoted text>
While I was typing a response to your "anyone can find a job" post you posted this "no jobs in California, New York and Massachussetts".
Damn it DB, hold still!
Now you're telling me veterans can't live in these states? Last time I checked they were still part of America. And why would you make vets live in a hell hole like Texas?
Again, you demonstrate your very poor skills with reading and comprehending the written English language.

I said, avoid states with failing economies like California, etc. If a person chooses to live in a state with a failing economy, that is their choice. They should feel proud of themselves for choosing such a place to starve.

I wouldn't make anyone live anywhere they don't want to live. And, I'm not going to pay someone to live where they want to live if they can't support themselves there.

If you don't like Texas, don't go. There's lots of work here for other people. It's so good here, there's probably 10 million illegal aliens in just the state of Texas doing the work Obama's base won't do.

Here's something else for you to consider. There's no shortage of technical jobs. There is a shortage of people qualified to do those jobs.
What's the Democrat plan to fix that?
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#1003180 Oct 14, 2013
Whatever wrote:
<quoted text>
I thought it was common knowledge that most people knew Medicare and Medicaid agencies involvement in sitting up the Obamacare website. Especially anyone who routinely reads the news.
I have included a link to an article stating this.
The ball is in your court to prove Medicare and Medicaid agencies were not in charge of linking the agencies.
Go!
i am not nutjob crazy.

i seem to remember being berated for posting a poll number, on purpose btw, that someone took exception to. sometimes to make a point you have to concede a point.

so i occasionally wander around trying to be an honorable soul, so....no Go! i have not made it my purpose in life to know everything there is to know about everything. but as you can see, i went straight for your source.

thanks again.

“fairtax.org”

Since: Dec 08

Gauley Bridge WV

#1003181 Oct 14, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
God, you are ignorant.
Unfunded liabilities are NOT debt.
CBO: "The term "unfunded liability" has been used to refer to a gap between the government's projected financial commitment under a particular program and the revenues that are expected to be available to fund that commitment. But no government obligation can be truly considered "unfunded" because of the U.S. government's sovereign power to tax--which is the ultimate resource to meet its obligations.[Congressional Budget Office, September 2004]"
Another
Q: What's wrong with the "unfunded liabilities" stories that conservatives tell about Social Security and Medicare? This is where they make the case that over some very long time horizon, these programs are supposed to pay out tens of trillions more than they're scheduled to take in.
A: These are mostly scare tactics, designed to mislead. That said, there's a useful point embedded in there: both programs need to undergo changes to meet their obligations. But at least some of the folks who make the "trillions in unfunded liabilities" argument do so to make it seem like we can't afford social insurance, which is nonsense.[The Christian Science Monitor, 7/7/11]
The "unfunded liabilities" refer to projecting SS & Medicare out 75 years. It estimates the cost & it estimates the revenues. Since the costs are expected to grow faster than revenues, the difference is called "unfunded liability".
But this is not debt. The money has not been sent. In the past, changes had to be made to these programs to adjust cost costs & revenues & changes in the population.
As laws are passed & efforts made to reduce costs & tweak revenues, then that gap changes.
"The term "unfunded liability" has been used to refer to a gap between the government's projected financial commitment under a particular program and the revenues that are expected to be available to fund that commitment. But no government obligation can be truly considered "unfunded" because of the U.S. government's sovereign power to tax--which is the ultimate resource to meet its obligations.[Congressional Budget Office, September 2004]" Learn to friggin' read. It's government speak for DEBT!!! Only by raising taxes to an unsustainable level will it ever be paid and then it won't. same as Obamacare.
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#1003182 Oct 14, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
... idiots.
The recession the Democrats' CRA program caused when it collapsed the economy after two years oversight by Democrats Dodd and Frank, from whom we heard a constant stream of lies right up to the collapse....
Congress adds to the debt by borrowing money. Appropriations add to the deficit, which is covered by Congress borrowing money, thus increasing the debt.
The money paid to Social Security is put into the general revenue funds, and Social Security is paid out of the general appropriations funds. You'd know this if you knew anything at all about what comes out of your mouth.
I really wish you knew how our government works, dumbass.
But, since you mentioned it, let's fix Social Security right here and now.
IF YOU DIDN'T PAY INTO SOCIAL SECURITY, YOU DON'T GET ANYTHING FROM SOCIAL SECURITY.
That will fix Social Security overnight.
Now that we've fixed Social Security, what other problem do you have?
lol! Your still the idiot on CAR I see!

Poor baby!
Whatever

Scottsbluff, NE

#1003183 Oct 14, 2013
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
not going to take it....
The political agenda put forth by a local organizer in Washington DC was not in alignment with our message. We feel disheartened that some would seek to hijack the narrative for political gain. The core principle is about all Americans honoring Veterans in a peaceful and apolitical manner.
http://1mvetmarch.wordpress.com/
any Democrat politicians show up and act like they had some right to be there?
Yes, anyone is free to support the vets in their protest of the privately funded WW II memorial being barricade. Why weren't they there?

However, that the "political agenda put together by a local organizer" is so ambiguous to leave more questions than answers.

“fairtax.org”

Since: Dec 08

Gauley Bridge WV

#1003184 Oct 14, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
So , what do you do with the 80 year old couple that runs out of money?
What do you do with the disabled
That do you do with the unemployed
You just got rid of taxes, how are you finding the military? infrastructure, law enforcement, etc
And please not the "fairtax. The tax that gives huge tax breaks to corporations & wealthy people.
Spending only what comes in will take recessions & turn them into depressions.
Davey loves the givernment. Davey thinks people are too stupid to survive on their own.

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#1003185 Oct 14, 2013
All I'm saying is the tearing down of those barricades around that war memorial was an act of patriotism reminiscent of the first patriots. An act of defiance that makes me proud to be a modern-day patriot.

Too bad there's no country we can send the modern-day loyalists back to.
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#1003186 Oct 14, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
So, tell us why the Democrats stopped funding the death benefits.
Why didn't the Democrats fund death benefits and stop funding Big Bird? Obviously, Big Bird is more important than the people who volunteered to protect us and died doing that.
This is an excellent example of what the priorities of the Demcorats actually are. There was a choice, Big Bird or the patriots defending us. The Democrats gave the money to Big Bird, and no money to those who died protecting us.
The Democrats wouldn't even consider giving Big Bird less money so the death benefits could be paid. To the Democrats, Big Bird was so important, all death benefits had to be withheld so Big Bird could get all of the... what was it, 440 million dollars?
Tell us how much in death benefits the Demcorats thought was unimportant, and compare that to the amount of money given to PBS. Then, tell us why a small portion of the money given to PBS couldn't have been withheld so the death benefits to those who volunteered to protect us.
The impact would have been something like, PBS gets 438 million instead of 440 million, or something like that.
Every time you turn around, the Democrats are spitting into the faces of veterans. That's who the Democrats are.
because that was the com objective son!

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#1003187 Oct 14, 2013
sonicfilter wrote:
The Crack-Up Continues
Via Sully, that’s a clip of Freedom Watch’s Larry Klayman speaking at the veteran’s rally in Washington yesterday. He called President Obama an Allah-worshiper, and urged the people to wage a “non-violent revolution” to “demand that this president leave town, to get out.”
The elected, lawful president of the United States.
Is this what American conservatism is turning into?
It’s like when left-wing radicals took over the Democratic Party, allowing Richard Nixon reap the political benefits of looking normal and responsible compared to the passionate ideologues who came to dominate Democratic politics.
Did you see Molly Ball’s report from the Values Voter Summit, which is the big annual DC meeting for religious conservative political activists? These guys — and I say this as an unapologetic religious conservative — are living in Cloud-Cuckoo Land. Excerpt:
I asked Tony Perkins, the veteran conservative activist who heads the Family Research Council, what way out of the shutdown he would consider acceptable. He said a delay of the health-care law’s individual mandate—a proposal already rejected by the Senate and president when the House passed it—was the absolute least conservatives would settle for, and that any deal that didn’t substantially affect Obamacare would inspire a revolt.“Ted Cruz has done more to help the Republican Party, I think, than anyone in the last 10 years,” he said, by “reengaging the people Republicans need to win elections.”
Do you care about the polls showing this is hurting the Republican Party? I asked.“No,” he said.“Who are they polling? Just GOP voters? No, the general public.” And what about the schism within the GOP that has resulted?“It’s long overdue,” Perkins said.“Where did that go-along, get-along view get us? Into a mess. It’s time to challenge the status quo.”
Remember Occupy Wall Street? Remember how some people said they weren’t going to get anywhere because they had no strategy? That you couldn’t actually change things with mere outrage? This is the same, but worse. If he stands by this quote, Tony Perkins actually believes that the opinion of non-Republicans doesn’t matter. How does he figure this? Republicans are not a majority in this country. To win elections, they have to win the votes of Independents too. Lots of Independents look at this lot and want to run the other way.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher...
<spam>

"...what way out of the shutdown...."

There is no government shut down. It's all a hoax. The government is operating at (a selective) 87 percent. That missing 13 percent is just about what needs to be removed from government spending every year for about 10 years to get back to a balance between revenue and spending.
You can't say "balanced budget" because there hasn't even been a budget since Obama took office.
And that's the problem. If the government can't even budget itself, only an idiot would expect that government to be able to control spending.

How about we take a step forward and just keep that 13 percent of the government inactive and cut spending that way, since it's obviously impossible to cut spending with something like a budget as long as Democrats are involved.
Whatever

Scottsbluff, NE

#1003188 Oct 14, 2013
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
i am not nutjob crazy.
i seem to remember being berated for posting a poll number, on purpose btw, that someone took exception to. sometimes to make a point you have to concede a point.
so i occasionally wander around trying to be an honorable soul, so....no Go! i have not made it my purpose in life to know everything there is to know about everything. but as you can see, i went straight for your source.
thanks again.
People here spent yesterday airing their hurt feelings and getting even with each other. It was embarrassing to all involved.

Now on to the issues today.

Are you saying you agree that Medicare and Medicaid agency was in charge of linking the various agencies together?
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#1003189 Oct 14, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Didn't you die of brain cancer?... twice?
a fine example of con thinking!!!

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#1003190 Oct 14, 2013
flack wrote:
<quoted text> "The term "unfunded liability" has been used to refer to a gap between the government's projected financial commitment under a particular program and the revenues that are expected to be available to fund that commitment. But no government obligation can be truly considered "unfunded" because of the U.S. government's sovereign power to tax--which is the ultimate resource to meet its obligations.[Congressional Budget Office, September 2004]" Learn to friggin' read. It's government speak for DEBT!!! Only by raising taxes to an unsustainable level will it ever be paid and then it won't. same as Obamacare.
Pretty sure no amount of increased taxes would make a dent in this deficit. Time for government to cut the massive waste and nonessential spending in the budget.

Democrats will just have to live with losing a vote or two.
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#1003191 Oct 14, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
... back to the subject....
There is ample revenue to pay the debt. Failure to use this revenue to pay the debt is an obvious violation of the 14th Amendment to the Cosntitution.
What we have is a president who is telling the entire country he intends to violate the Constitution.
And nobody seems to be concerned.
That is evidence we will not survive.
Then you should leave son. Hurry!

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.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Up To 40 Percent Of Obamacare Website Hasn't Be... (Nov '13) 1 min C Kersey 5
News A look at the judges who will rule on Trump's t... 3 min Frankie Rizzo 165
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 7 min bad bob 2,196
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 8 min Crow 269,713
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 11 min UidiotRaceUMAKEWO... 314,301
News VA cuts ribbon on new clinic in Greenbrier County 14 min Well 3
News James Comey fired as FBI director 21 min Quirky 2,332
News Donald Trump gets warm welcome in Saudi Arabia ... 47 min John McQuan 116
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr LOL 240,800
News White House rebuts Washington Post report of Tr... 1 hr UidiotRaceUMAKEWO... 637
More from around the web