Barack Obama, our next President

There are 20 comments on the Nov 5, 2008, Hampton Roads Daily Press story 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

#652732 May 29, 2012
Obama Verboten wrote:
Read this you are going to be surprised.
There’s a surprise ending...
I was born in one country, raised in another.
My father was born in another country.
I was not his only child.
He fathered several children with numerous women.
I became very close to my mother, as my father showed no interest in me.
My mother died at an early age from cancer.
Although my father deserted me and my mother raised me, I later wrote a book idolizing my father not my mother.
Later in life, questions arose over my real name.
My birth records were sketchy.
No one was able to produce a legitimate, reliable birth certificate.
I grew up practicing one faith but converted to Christianity, as it was widely accepted in my new country, but I practiced non-traditional beliefs and didn't follow Christianity, except in the public eye under scrutiny.
I worked and lived among lower-class people as a young adult, disguising myself as someone who really cared about them.
That was before I decided it was time to get serious about my life and embarked on a new career.
I wrote a book about my struggles growing up.
It was clear to those who read my memoirs, that I had difficulties accepting that my father abandoned me as a child.
I became active in local politics in my 30s then, with help behind the scenes, I literally burst onto the scene as a candidate for national office in my 40s.
They said I had a golden tongue and could talk anyone into anything.
I had a virtually non-existent resume, little work history, and no experience in leading a single organization.
Yet I was a powerful speaker and citizens were drawn to me, as though I were a magnet and they were small roofing tacks.
I drew incredibly large crowds during my public appearances.
This bolstered my ego.
At first, my political campaign focused on my country's foreign policy...
I was very critical of my country in the last war, and seized every opportunity to bash my country.
But what launched my rise to national prominence were my views on the country's economy.
I pretended to have a really good plan on how we could do better, and every poor person would be fed and housed for free.
I knew which group was responsible for getting us into this mess.
It was the free market, banks and corporations.
I decided to start making citizens hate them and, if they became envious of others who did well, the plan was clinched tight.
I called mine "A People's Campaign".
That sounded good to all people.
I was the surprise candidate because I emerged from outside the traditional path of politics and was able to gain widespread popular support.
I knew that, if I merely offered the people 'hope', together we could change our country and the world.
So, I started to make my speeches sound like they were on behalf of the downtrodden, poor, ignorant to include "persecuted minorities."
My true views were not widely known and I kept them unknown, until after I became my nation's leader.
I had to carefully guard reality, as anybody could have easily found out what I really believed, if they had simply read my writings and examined those people I associated with. I'm glad they didn't.
Then I became the most powerful man in the world.
And then the world learned the truth.
Who am I?
great post. I saw a program the other night, the reporter was holding Obama's book and showing people different parts. i.e. his frequent cocaine use in college, interest in Marxism and Socialism; and other interesting items written by Obama about Obama. most had never heard of any of the negative information.

the difference is how the media writes about it all--Obama has been and still is being protected.
TheIndependentMa jority

Mount Vernon, KY

#652733 May 29, 2012
Frank wrote:
<quoted text>Someone is not a 'hero' for attacking someone and trying to kill him.
Especially while on unsupervised suspension from school. Where the kid was SUPPOSED to be.

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#652734 May 29, 2012
lily boca raton fl wrote:
<quoted text>
Do any of these fools understand how government works?


Baby Budget Hawks of the GOP
by Michael D. Tanner

Michael Tanner is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and author of Leviathan on the Right: How Big-Government Conservatism Brought Down the Republican Revolution.

Added to on May 23, 2012

This article appeared in National Review (Online) on May 23, 2012.

The conventional wisdom, pushed for very different reasons by both Republicans and Democrats, is that Republicans in Congress, controlled by radical tea-partiers, have been slashing government spending. Thus it becomes a little hard to understand how, in the few short months since last year’s debt-ceiling deal, the federal debt has increased by more than $1.5 trillion, roughly $13,000 per household. If Republicans are such great budget cutters, how come we continue to spend more, run more deficits, and accumulate more debt?

The latest evidence suggests that it is because, contrary to conventional wisdom, Republicans still aren’t such radical budget hawks after all.

For example, the latest Club for Growth scorecard suggests that, on the whole, Republicans in this congress have actually been less fiscally responsible than those in past congresses. For 2011, the average Republican received a weighted score of 69.5 out of 100. That’s far short of the 86.3 average score in 2010, and it hardly suggests a tea-party-led wave of austerity ...
Level 1

Since: Oct 08

Somewhere, Tennessee

#652735 May 29, 2012
JEB wrote:
<quoted text>
won with fewer popular votes?

WON with the most electoral votes.

Yall still obsessed with Bush? Rush? Savage? Beck? Palin?

Sly Fox

Stuart, FL

#652736 May 29, 2012
loulee rat mouth fl wrote:
<quoted text> What's appalling is the number of Obama-worshipping fools who are still supporting the incompetent after almost 4 years of utter failure.
And, Its close to 60 years if you reflect on past Lib/Dem failures going back to The "Great" Society.

Level 1

Since: May 11

Newville, PA

#652737 May 29, 2012
Frank wrote:
<quoted text>You already paid taxes on that first $5K when you earned it,before you invested it. The new $1K should be taxed fairly,but it should be confiscated by the government just because you made the correct prediction about an uncertain outcome .
I give up.

Frank is now on the list with DAWriter, Carol, I'mright, Fred, etc

Right wingers too stupid to argue with.
TheIndependentMa jority

Mount Vernon, KY

#652738 May 29, 2012
Baba Yaga wrote:
<quoted text>
Get back to us when pundits and the media start comparing Romney to God and Jesus.
May they spare us that type of demented and warped gag and pukiness.

Rockville, VA

#652739 May 29, 2012
ImRight59 wrote:
<quoted text>
So why does he feel the need to amass zillions of dollars for a blowout campaign?
If he has so many "accomplishments" and is such a brilliant success, why bother?
I was right. Again.
Are you for real? Why would a president campaign? Would it matter one bit what his record is or what he has accomplished to an airhead like you? If for no other reason he has to stay busy just countering all of the nutcases lies, hatred and ignorance from the baggers. Heck you could keep him busy with your over abundance of "You might be a redneck if" third grade mentality.

Spokane, WA

#652740 May 29, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
The recession started in the 4th quarter of 2007. Show me the legislation these evil Democrats passed in the first 9 months of 2007 that created this recession.
Democrats took control of Congress during the November 2006 election.

Level 1

Since: May 11

Newville, PA

#652741 May 29, 2012
Note to DAWriter & other right wingers:

Repeating dumbass posts over & over after they have been shown to be rally stupid does not help. They are still really stupid.
lily boca raton fl

Boca Raton, FL

#652742 May 29, 2012
Grampy wrote:

<quoted text>
"Envy is best defined as a resentful emotion that occurs when a person lacks another's (perceived) superior quality, achievement, experience or possession and wishes that the other lacked it."
The Obama campaign is banking on the underachieving slacker's envy of successful people. "Hope and Change" replaced with "Envy and Redistribute".

Carol replied:

Not only successful people but people who are innovative and driven and make things happen for others - like an income.

Does anyone else find this conversation hilarious?
Level 1

Since: Oct 08

Somewhere, Tennessee

#652743 May 29, 2012
JEB wrote:
<quoted text>
Gore won the popular vote
Spotted Al Bore LOST the electoral vote.

No matter how may re-re-counts there were.

Even his magnificent LIBERAL goon machine couldn't manufacture enough phoney votes to steal that election !

Bada-bing !!

Newington, CT

#652744 May 29, 2012
Tenzing wrote:
<quoted text>
You're spinnin' yer wheels, Frank's retarded. Can't grasp causal relationships, just synchronistic relationships.
Big words from the autistic freak.

Spinning reality again douche bag?


Why does the lizard have an office of management and budget if not to produce a budget. duh
lily boca raton fl

Boca Raton, FL

#652745 May 29, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
I give up.
Frank is now on the list with DAWriter, Carol, I'mright, Fred, etc
Right wingers too stupid to argue with.
Just another dummy Tuesday!!
Jane Says

New York, NY

#652746 May 29, 2012
Another deadly taste of ObamaCare

The US Preventive Services Task Force ruled last week that screening for prostate cancer is a waste of money.

Get ready for many more such outrages: This is the agency that will determine which preventive services ObamaCare will require health plans to cover free of charge.

The task force claims that screening all adult men with the PSA (protein-specific antigen) test doesn’t prevent death from the disease. It argues that “the number of men who avoid dying of prostate cancer because of screening after 10 to 14 years is, at best, very small.”

Adding to the “costs” of the test are “false positives”— they tell people they have cancer when they don’t about 10 percent of the time. The task force thinks this problem makes the cost of screening higher than the tiny benefit screening generates for society.

It’s worth analyzing the road to this conclusion, because it tells us a lot about how ObamaCare rations medicine.

First, the task force measures the effect of testing on the death rate from any disease (all-cause mortality). That’s a bogus benchmark, because, as John Maynard Keynes famously noted, in the long run we all die. In fact, death rates from prostate cancer have dropped 57 percent among men ages 49 to 64 and 80 percent among adult men over 75. National Cancer Institute data show that prostate cancers are being detected and treated earlier and that life expectancy is rising as a result.

The task force claims there is no evidence that screening directly reduces prostate cancer. But how, then, did death rates decline, if screening doesn’t work?

It does, of course. As prostate-cancer expert William Catalano notes, PSA screening is why the horror of not diagnosing this cancer until it has metastasized (advanced and spread) has all but disappeared.

The task force states that because the PSA test is imprecise, it will always lead to overdiagnosis. But false positives are a risk of all screening, and the error rate for prostate-cancer screening is no higher than screening for other illnesses or cancers.

Catalano also points out that it’s regular testing — not the test being used — that has likely contributed to raising the odds against the disease.

The task force also claims that the PSA test can’t tell us which tumors to treat. Yet it gives the patient and his doctors time to figure that out.

For most patients, PSA screening gives a 5-to-10-
year lead time — a vital window in which other new techniques (needle biopsies plus improvements in surgery and radiotherapy) can work.

Finally, the task force argues that PSA testing causes men to suffer from painful treatments and endure anxiety about false-positive results. It doesn’t measure this cost or have any data to support it. Worse, it disregards the scientific evidence that treatments reduce suffering and improve quality of life, even if they don’t always increase survival.

In reality, this ban is based on politics, not science. The task force — and similar ObamaCare agencies — applies standards that aren’t achievable. Going forward, new technologies would require decades of data and would have to demonstrate they’re nearly 100 perfect before ObamaCare would cover them.

Unless, of course, the procedure is politically popular: ObamaCare will treat contraception as cost-effective, although there’s no hard data to support that claim.

The value of health-care services, in other words, will be measured by political criteria, not by their ability to reduce suffering and death.

That’s an ugly future, indeed.

by Robert Goldberg

“Constitutionalis t”

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#652747 May 29, 2012
Homer wrote:
Government Getting Smaller in the U.S.
FOR the first time in 40 years, the government sector of the American economy has shrunk during the first three years of a presidential administration.
Spending by the federal government, adjusted for inflation, has risen at a slow rate under President Obama. But that increase has been more than offset by a fall in spending by state and local governments, which have been squeezed by weak tax receipts.
In the first quarter of this year, the real gross domestic product for the government — including state and local governments as well as federal — was 2 percent lower than it was three years earlier, when Barack Obama took office in early 2009.
The last time the government actually got smaller over the first three years of a presidential term was when Richard M. Nixon was president. That decrease was largely because of declining spending on the Vietnam War.

Here's the real numbers, dupe:

Where in the hell did you get that crap your posting?

Spring Lake, NC

#652748 May 29, 2012
cway wrote:
<quoted text>
First, two wrongs don't make a right.
Your post here doesn't challenge the accusation that Bush stole the 2000 election. It merely tries to "right" your position by accusing Obama of doing the same.
If you concede Florida was stolen in 2000, it's not unreasonable for Dems to have despised Bush for it.
As for "lost military votes" in the 2008 election, never heard of it. Enlighten me.
There were some military ballots challenged by Gore in 2000 on the basis they weren't stamped with the date, which is required by law.
dont believe either bush or obama stole an election. do believe our country will continue downhill if ea side whines and stonewalls every time they lose an election.
i was far too young to vote but read about the hanging chad it was ridiculous.
hanging chads lost votes. were starting to sound as tho were a third world country. pretty pathetic.
TheIndependentMa jority

Mount Vernon, KY

#652749 May 29, 2012
Tenzing wrote:
<quoted text>
Did Bush get UN approval to invade Iraq?
Its a simple yes or no.
Start twisting.

How's that uprising going?

Egypt's not sounding too happy either these days.

Dictatorships do that to people...and so does anarchy.

United States

#652750 May 29, 2012
Frank wrote:
<quoted text>Bush never wanted to go to Afghanistan,it was then Senator Obama that had the biggest voice on Afghanistan.
fk off you lying old piece of shit.

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#652751 May 29, 2012
carol wrote:
<quoted text>
Ummm. We're fighting an enemy in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Because they hide behind innocents, we should let them continue to plot and plan our demise?
You just plain kooky.
We're fighting criminals, not a foreign power therefore it doesn't meet the definition of War, just the definition of war like the war on poverty.

That must be how they confused you.

Tell me, would it be ok with you if the police killed a baby that a drug dealer was using as a shield? Does it matter what color the baby is?

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.

Orlando Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 36 min Progressive Democrat 52,858
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict? (Mar '10) 1 hr A duck 496,315
Stroll down memory lane... (Jan '09) 1 hr Tazo 62,592
Inspiration Lane - Don't Quit (May '09) 1 hr Murph 71,684
Montessori Schools (Jul '13) 4 hr Tazo 13
keep a word----drop a word (Feb '11) 12 hr Princess Hey 17,681
Double Fun Word Game (Mar '11) 12 hr Princess Hey 12,425
Let's Chat (Jan '12) 16 hr A duck 18,087
More from around the web

Orlando People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]