Barack Obama, our next President

Barack Obama, our next President

There are 1419734 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.

angel

Boise, ID

#1064781 Jan 18, 2014
dont snow me wrote:
<quoted text>
100% of scientists once said the earth was flat and we were the center of the universe, they were as ignorant as you and the other hysterics and dumpkoffs.
How weak!
The only ones who are deniers have either a vested finacial interest in not responding to climate change or Fools uch as your self in thrall to their propaganda. Period.
Of course considering the wide aray of bullshit Koch and crew ladle out for teabggers to lap up without hesitation Climate Change Denial probably isnt the hardest thing youve had to choke down.Lmao!
angel

Boise, ID

#1064782 Jan 18, 2014
shinningelectr0n wrote:
<quoted text>
Magic Negro: "I came. I saw. I lied" (my apologies to Caesar)
Boy Messiah: "If all else fails, lie"
Magic Negro: "The buck doesn't stop here. Never has. Never will"
Mamma's Little Boy: "You *CAN* fool all of the people all of the time - with help from the Fifth Column".
Hillary: "Some people look at the way the world is today and ask 'Why?' but I look at the world the way it is and ask 'What difference does it make?'" (my apologies to Robert Kennedy)
Awwwww....is the little electron Klan-Boy getting bitter?LMAO!
angel

Boise, ID

#1064783 Jan 18, 2014
dont snow me wrote:
<quoted text>4 dead isn't phony missing linc
No what was Phony was the Teabagger's transparent and unseemly attempt to Exploit those Four Dead for their own political gain.
Another reason the Right (like you) have Zero credibility.Lmao
angel

Boise, ID

#1064784 Jan 18, 2014
shinningelectr0n wrote:
<quoted text>
it also explains her fascination with peckers
What a class act you are.
Stupid racist misanthope.
You are a EXACTLY why the Right's time is finished in this Nation.
A dead and worthless branch in the evolution of American Society.
Your a joke.
angel

Boise, ID

#1064785 Jan 18, 2014
EasyEed wrote:
<quoted text>
"real dumb"
And now under the august leadership of the boy president nobama, bin laden is dead and the a; qaeda, the tallyban' is stronger than ever.
Peace
KMA
Happy New Year
Far more AlQueda combatants have been killed and far fewer American Soldiers killed under Obama's watch then Bush's including Bin Laden himself yet.....by your mingle mangled logic the continued exisatnce of the Taliban and AlQueada is a damnation of Obama.......what brilliant reasoning.
You are a Tebagging Idiot.
Besides hasnt it been you Repub buddies HOWLING about Obama killing Alqueada operatives with drones?
Hypocrites.
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1064786 Jan 18, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
Just can't imagine Reagan squealing "What difference, at this point, does it make???" when questioned about the deaths of four Americans who died under his watch.
Does the date April 18, 1983 ring a bell? That's the date that the US Embassy in Beirut was bombed and 63 people were killed including 17 Americans were killed.
Does the date October 23, 1983 ring a bell? That’s the day that 220 Marines were killed when their barracks were truck bombed.
In the six months between those bombings nothing was done to increase the protection of the Marine compound.
These bombings were in retaliation for months of Ronald Reagan using the offshore guns of the U.S. Navy to shell Lebanese villages. Those bombardments killed more than a thousand people, innocent men women and children, slaughtering Druze and Muslims indiscriminately. "Teach them a lesson" from Reagan in the Oval Office had produced unanticipated consequences.
Reagan then pulled US forces out of Lebanon which gave Islamic militants their first victory and led to the perception that when America gets its nose bloodied it cuts and runs.
In a 1998 interview with ABC News, bin Laden said the U.S. response to the Beirut bombing showed "the decline of American power and the weakness of the American soldier, who is ready to wage cold wars but unprepared to fight long wars. This was proven in Beirut in 1983, when the Marines fled."
Hillary Clinton wasn't saying that the deaths of four Americans didn't matter you goddamned liar, she was saying that the motivation behind the killings was irrelevant. Here's what she actually said;
With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d they go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.
You're an idiot Carol!
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1064787 Jan 18, 2014
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
When Bush left office, Al Qaeda was holed up in caves. Today, since Obama was named president, Al Qaeda is attacking the United States thousands of miles away from Afghanistan, and have rebuilt their war machine to be bigger than it had ever existed before Obama was named president. Al Qaeda is so big now, they can invade Syria and fight a full-scale war with the Syrian army.
Only a moron would think there isn't a connection here.
You really are a moron.
Yeah stupid, they're coming in from Iraq where they didn't have any presence until Bush invaded the country.
You're an idiot DB; you always have been and always will be.
1 post removed

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#1064789 Jan 18, 2014
Lnc wrote:
<quoted text>
First lady Michelle Obama turned 50 years old on Friday, Jan. 17, 2014.
Hope she thanks us for the $800,000 gift we gave her. Her husband is so generous with our money - and using our tax paid Air Force One like it's his personal possession.

But what's $800,000 and using Air Force One as a taxi cab? It's only money.

Just glad it wasn't Laura Bush who needed a ride home so she could have some "me" time. Liberals would have gone ballistic. Conservatives wouldn't have been too happy either.

But it wasn't Mrs. George Bush. It was Mrs. Barack Obama. So what's the big deal?

We should all just say, "Happy Birthday, Mrs. President Obama!" She wouldn't feel the need to thank us but we could still say,"You're welcome!" .Just to be polite.
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1064790 Jan 18, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
According to Merriam-Webster, there are two definitions of secularism.
-the belief that religion should not play a role in government, education, or other public parts of society.
-indifference to or rejection or exclusion of religion and religious considerations.
Most traditional conservatives also believe religion should not play a role in government, education or other public parts of society. It never has and never will. However, morality is not a partisan issue. Secularists seem to think it is.
All Americans believe everyone has a right to express their religious beliefs without being persecuted or demonized just as secularists have the right to reject or be indifferent to any religion. But they have taken freedom of religion and twisted into intolerance of religion and any expression thereof to the point of denying it to others and silencing it using government as a tool to define a moral standard that does not represent all Americans.
Therefore, it is secularist progressives who believe freedom FROM religion should not only play a role but an active role in government, education and other public parts of society by rejecting and denying traditional values which, in many cases, is religious in origin as even being valid and passing laws that dismiss them in the guise of anti-freedom of religion and taking action against those who simply exercise the freedom to express their beliefs.
It is un-American at its very core.
Progressive ideas in government and society aren't necessarily a bad thing. But secularism added to progressivism in this present political atmosphere has become a destructive ideology and its goal is to destroy traditional values and demonize religion as the cause.
Is this what you stand for?
Yes Carol I firmly believe that not only freedom of religion but also freedom from religion is the only way to preserve freedom in this country. There should be no laws that reflect a particular religious bias. Period. James Madison the "father of the Constitution" and a secularist stated;
“Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christianity, in exclusion of all other Sects?”
In addition to arguing for religion to be free of government control, Madison argued that government also must be free of religion:“If Religion be not cognizance (sic) of Civil Government, how can its legal establishment be said to be necessary to Civil Government?”
Just because some religious denominations are opposed to marriage equality doesn't mean they get to codify their beliefs into laws that affect the population in general.
No one is being denied the right to believe or worship as they see fit. That's because we have a secular government.

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#1064791 Jan 18, 2014
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
Does the date April 18, 1983 ring a bell? That's the date that the US Embassy in Beirut was bombed and 63 people were killed including 17 Americans were killed.
Does the date October 23, 1983 ring a bell? That’s the day that 220 Marines were killed when their barracks were truck bombed.
In the six months between those bombings nothing was done to increase the protection of the Marine compound.
These bombings were in retaliation for months of Ronald Reagan using the offshore guns of the U.S. Navy to shell Lebanese villages. Those bombardments killed more than a thousand people, innocent men women and children, slaughtering Druze and Muslims indiscriminately. "Teach them a lesson" from Reagan in the Oval Office had produced unanticipated consequences.
Reagan then pulled US forces out of Lebanon which gave Islamic militants their first victory and led to the perception that when America gets its nose bloodied it cuts and runs.
In a 1998 interview with ABC News, bin Laden said the U.S. response to the Beirut bombing showed "the decline of American power and the weakness of the American soldier, who is ready to wage cold wars but unprepared to fight long wars. This was proven in Beirut in 1983, when the Marines fled."
Hillary Clinton wasn't saying that the deaths of four Americans didn't matter you goddamned liar, she was saying that the motivation behind the killings was irrelevant. Here's what she actually said;
With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d they go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.
You're an idiot Carol!
Okay, try and stay with me. The bombings in the 1980s were the first attacks against the U.S. by radical Islam. We had not been attacked by jihadists before that time. There were no repeated requests by ambassadors for extra security which were repeatedly denied leading up to these attacks.

And, most importantly....now pay attention....President Reagan did not go out in front of America and the rest of the world and lie about a video for weeks afterwards to win an election.

You might not be able to digest the raw truth and common sense, so chew on it slowly.

Since: May 11

New Oxford, PA

#1064792 Jan 18, 2014
Liberals R Defective wrote:
<quoted text>She still looks young and fit enough to play starting linebacker in the NFL. How does she do it? Must be that authentic slave blood running through her. She be down for the struggle.
Wow, you right whiners really think slavery & racism are funny.

And you wonder why people identify the far right as racist.

Since: May 11

New Oxford, PA

#1064793 Jan 18, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, try and stay with me. The bombings in the 1980s were the first attacks against the U.S. by radical Islam. We had not been attacked by jihadists before that time. There were no repeated requests by ambassadors for extra security which were repeatedly denied leading up to these attacks.
And, most importantly....now pay attention....President Reagan did not go out in front of America and the rest of the world and lie about a video for weeks afterwards to win an election.
You might not be able to digest the raw truth and common sense, so chew on it slowly.
Carol likes to trash the deaths of 4 Americans by continuing to tell lies about some sort of cover up.

God forbid we actually investigate to know what the reason was ( we still don't know).

Perhaps Carol can tell us why it was impossible that the attack had something to do with that video - a video that did cause demonstrations & riots in other Muslim cities.

Since: May 11

New Oxford, PA

#1064794 Jan 18, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hope she thanks us for the $800,000 gift we gave her. Her husband is so generous with our money - and using our tax paid Air Force One like it's his personal possession.
But what's $800,000 and using Air Force One as a taxi cab? It's only money.
Just glad it wasn't Laura Bush who needed a ride home so she could have some "me" time. Liberals would have gone ballistic. Conservatives wouldn't have been too happy either.
But it wasn't Mrs. George Bush. It was Mrs. Barack Obama. So what's the big deal?
We should all just say, "Happy Birthday, Mrs. President Obama!" She wouldn't feel the need to thank us but we could still say,"You're welcome!" .Just to be polite.
So you re claiming that Laura Bush never rode on AF1 without the President?

How many trips did AF1 make to Crawford Texas??

How many trips has Obama made on AF1 for personal time.

When you figure that out, maybe, just maybe, you will shut the f*ck up.

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#1064795 Jan 18, 2014
PDUPONT wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes Carol I firmly believe that not only freedom of religion but also freedom from religion is the only way to preserve freedom in this country. There should be no laws that reflect a particular religious bias. Period. James Madison the "father of the Constitution" and a secularist stated;
“Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christianity, in exclusion of all other Sects?”
In addition to arguing for religion to be free of government control, Madison argued that government also must be free of religion:“If Religion be not cognizance (sic) of Civil Government, how can its legal establishment be said to be necessary to Civil Government?”
Just because some religious denominations are opposed to marriage equality doesn't mean they get to codify their beliefs into laws that affect the population in general.
No one is being denied the right to believe or worship as they see fit. That's because we have a secular government.
The Ten Commandments are etched in wood in the Supreme Court chambers. Pretty sure we base our moral laws on religion.

Freedom OF religion automatically includes freedom FROM religion.

But where in the Constitution does it say the wishes of the people about social and moral issues, i.e. abortion and gay marriage, should be ignored - even if based on religious bias?

It's not like slavery. Killing life after it's created and undermining the definition of marriage which many believe to be the foundation of any society isn't like enslaving human beings.

Slavery was clearly morally wrong. Abortion and gay marriage to many people is equally morally wrong.

The majority of democrats voted down gay marriage in California and it's my guess the majority didn't do it based solely on a religious bias.

Democrats and especially atheists against abortion don't necessarily have a religious bias in abhorring the legalization of mass killing of the unborn.

It's too simple-minded to think that moral issues are divided strictly along party lines.
PDUPONT

Chicopee, MA

#1064796 Jan 18, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
Democrats face another hurdle with Obamacare - whether to vote to uphold the Constitution and freedom of religion or vote to deny it under Obamacare.
A Denver chapter of the Little Sisters of the Poor says signing a release form that would authorize other people, over the nuns’ moral objections, to provide birth control services to employees of their nursing facility for the aged is an unacceptable outcome.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jan/...
It's like David versus Goliath. The Supreme Court is now involved - yet again.
It will be interesting to see how many Democrats will face their constituents and explain why they voted for Obamacare and voted to deny freedom of religion in lieu of big government's dictatorship.
It's already beginning and it's just day 6.
No Carol, the Little Sisters of the Poor are trying to impose their own religious objections to contraception on their employees who may or may not agree with their beliefs. Their argument is specious. A federal judge and two appellate judges in Denver have already ruled--the plaintiffs' arguments are absurd. What they're objecting to, when you boil it down, is to signing a form stating (truthfully) that they're exempt from providing contraceptive coverage to their employees. The plaintiffs' claim "reads too much into the language of the Form, which requires only that the individual signing it certify that her organization opposes providing contraceptive coverage," wrote District Judge William J. Martinez. And in this case, he added, the form "does not authorize any organization to deliver contraceptive coverage to Little Sisters' employees.
He said that requiring an organization merely to certify that it opposed contraception under circumstances hardly rose to the level of a burden on anyone's religious beliefs.

Since: May 11

New Oxford, PA

#1064797 Jan 18, 2014
Frank wrote:
<quoted text>The 800,000 jobs lost in one month the the month that Obama was elected and two years after Obama was elected into The Senate. Our economy has not improved in five years. Obama needs to take personal responsibility,then he needs to change his philosophy. His economic policies are obviously not working and they haven't been working for the past seven years that he has been in Washington DC.
1) We did not lose 800.000 jobs in November of 2008.

2) Our economy has improved

3) The recession started 4th quarter of 2007

4) The President does not take office the day after the election.

5) A US Senator does not set policy. If you want to argue that point, then Joh Boehenr is responsible for all debt since he was elected.

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#1064798 Jan 18, 2014
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Carol likes to trash the deaths of 4 Americans by continuing to tell lies about some sort of cover up.
God forbid we actually investigate to know what the reason was ( we still don't know).
Perhaps Carol can tell us why it was impossible that the attack had something to do with that video - a video that did cause demonstrations & riots in other Muslim cities.
A bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee reported not only gross neglect and incompetency stating Benghazi could have been prevented but implicitly implied a cover up afterwards.

But don't mind that. There are squirrels to chase.
sonicfilter

United States

#1064799 Jan 18, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, try and stay with me. The bombings in the 1980s were the first attacks against the U.S. by radical Islam. We had not been attacked by jihadists before that time. There were no repeated requests by ambassadors for extra security which were repeatedly denied leading up to these attacks.
And, most importantly....now pay attention....President Reagan did not go out in front of America and the rest of the world and lie about a video for weeks afterwards to win an election.
You might not be able to digest the raw truth and common sense, so chew on it slowly.
The bipartisan report on Benghazi released Wednesday by the Senate intelligence committee should finally convince conspiracy theorists of the obvious: There is no there there.

Administration officials did not orchestrate any kind of attempt, politically motivated or otherwise, to deceive the American people. In their public statements, including the infamous talking points, they relied on what intelligence analysts told them.

In other words, if Susan Rice was wrong when she went on the Sunday talk shows and said that the attacks were the violent outgrowth of a spontaneous anti-American demonstration in Libya rather than a long-planned terrorist assault, it was only because the intelligence community was wrong.

That said, the initial assessment given by Rice — then serving as ambassador to the United Nations, now as President Obama’s national security adviser — may turn out to have been correct. We don’t yet know. Says the report:“The IC [Intelligence Community] continues to review the amount and nature of any preplanning that went into the attacks.”

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

so carol, let's see you prove that someone lied.

but you can't. so why don't you quit acting like you're the last word.

btw.....

The neocons would have us believe that Reagan was also a foreign policy genius. Space prevents me from detailing his administration’s adventures and blunders in Grenada, in Beirut and the visit to the Nazi cemetery in Bitburg. So let’s just remember aid to the Nicaraguan Contras, whom Reagan likened to the Founding Fathers, and the revelation that the CIA had produced a manual that taught them, in part, how to kidnap and “neutralize” government officials. Iran-Contra–the secret and illegal selling of weapons to our sworn enemy, Iran, to then fund the Contras–was both a constitutional disaster and a foreign policy blunder about which we were asked to believe Reagan knew nothing. His administration was also thoroughly corrupt: Eight senior officials in his administration were indicted.

Fabrication, lying, cruel and counterproductive policies at home and abroad, bloating of the deficit, widening the gap between rich and poor: These are the Reagan legacy. As Republican candidates seek to wear his mantle, their Democratic opponents need to remind Americans exactly what they are putting on.

http://inthesetimes.com/article/3242/

Since: May 11

New Oxford, PA

#1064800 Jan 18, 2014
dont snow me wrote:
<quoted text>
Did Bush leave Afghanistan? Funny, Doorknob, I never heard of that.
Didn't the liar in chief say al quiada was on the run?
Did they all run to Libya?
Why, yes many if them did as soon as Gaddafi was gone, with Oblamers assistance in the form of missiles that killed innocents, including women and children.
The Drone King.
Bush left Afghanistan stagnate as he went into Iraq who had no Al Qaeda, no Bin Laden & no connection at 9-11., no nuclear weapons, no nuclear program.

Yep, Al Qaeda is soooooo strong that they hide out in northern Mali in the far reaches of Afghanistan.

Hw many innocents did Bush kill in his invasions of Afghanistan & Iraq? Let me know, when you want to compare those numbers with drone deaths.
sonicfilter

United States

#1064801 Jan 18, 2014
LoisLane59 wrote:
<quoted text>
A bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee reported not only gross neglect and incompetency stating Benghazi could have been prevented but implicitly implied a cover up afterwards.
But don't mind that. There are squirrels to chase.
The Majority concludes that the interagency coordination process on the talking points followed normal, but rushed coordination procedures and that there were no efforts by the White House or any other Executive Branch entities to "cover-up" facts or make alterations for political purposes.

http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/benghazi20...

maybe instead of the parrot act, you should read it.

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 Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 1 min The Northener 205,211
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 4 min thetruth 21,203
Time to go? (Jun '15) 12 min Into The Night 12,546
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 23 min loose cannon 222,675
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 33 min Calvin_Coolish 239,739
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 36 min Agents of Corruption 393,357
News News 14 Mins Ago Trump rebukes racism claims as... 1 hr gwww 118
News Trump Isn't Bluffing, He'll Deport 11 Million P... 1 hr Swedenforever of ... 7,921
News Trump calls on GOP to improve African-American ... 2 hr asd 395
News Who is the real 'racist,' Clinton or Trump? Thi... 4 hr Mothra 89
More from around the web