Obama's legacy will be greater than Bush's
Debate Rounds (3)
Categories of Policy Include:
Foreign Affairs, Domestic Policy, Civil Rights, Environment, Immigration, Health Care & Energy
First Round: Acceptance
Second Round: Arguments
Third Round: Rebuttal
The debater that shows the President to whom has greatest overall legacy using the categories listed above shall be deemed to be the winner.
I do not argue to popular opinion such as found in polls, newspapers and blogs but rather from a cold scholarly consideration from an objective perspective. There is little doubt there will be those historians that will agree with the doctrine of one or the other of these two and those I dismiss as not scholarly or historical.
What I refer to as "popular" as an example is what can easily be found about the Civil war which involves a vast array of complex human perspectives or milieu if you will that can only be understood with a solid foundation of Philosophy and Anthropology yet is reduced to popular acerbic political jargon such as "racists" and "hatred." To me this is not history and I assert if any of our arguments here are made along such lines as popular opinion then the other in the debate may and should declare this not valid as any observers. The cheer of the crowd should not be mistaken for the cold objective view of the historian.
You seem to list a series of anecdotal instances on the one hand laying at Obama's feet great difficulty then on the other tremendous forces against him preventing him from doing more. In your challenge question you refer to legacy and yet you respond in your argument to particulars, this is very confusing to me.
Allow me to explain. When we think of George Washington do you recall the conditions he inherited that prevented his ability to do more or for that matter Abraham Lincoln? Do you read in the text books that only if these men had no detractors he would have been a better president? No we do not because these issues as you have laid out do not appear to be in the mind of historians as they evaluate legacy. So how is it they evaluate these two and others we would claim have the distinction as great president's and certainly over the achievement of both Bush and Obama but what are the differences?
I submit an evaluation of legacy is not issues such as you lay out, most of which I believe are questionable in interpretation but refuting each one by one then assembling all the individual circumstances of things done, coming up with a scoring system of contraceptives versus the Patriot Act etc is untenable and would get us nowhere.
Instead I suggest we look at the character of these two men and not what is popularized on one side of the divide or the other. In this let us start at the top and that is how one president treats the other?
Obama clearly blamed George Bush for everything that befell him for at least the first four years and here you are offering excuses for Obama some 6 years into a two term presidency. Now let us consider that act of blaming someone else for the problems a person has? Is this what you do when you get a ticket for speeding, you accuse the officer of being unfair, or you blame the car company for not making a visible enough speed indicator or you might even blame the kids or wife for delaying you this morning causing you to rush to work and thereby get the ticket.
By the evidence of your own words of excusing the flaws of Obama without admitting them in your laundry list you do provide evidence that indeed Obama participated in this blame game never turning his attention to himself and there you are polemically supporting all he says suggesting you are in not position to evaluate the claim you make regarding legacy. This is akin to you and I arguing about the legacy of your father or mother. You have such a deep personal connection to your parents and would find all manner of nuance to support the aspirational way you view them much the same as you do with Obama.
I am a Conservative and I personally do not care for Bush but I believe his legacy if based on character which the historians appear to favor in terms of legacy and here we have Obama blaming George Bush (John Kerry even blamed him for not having enough flu shots ready in one year) as opposed to George Bush that you will not find has ever uttered a negative, derogatory word criticizing Obama.
So in your own life would you hold the character and thereby the legacy of a person who blames everyone else over the character of those that accept responsibility over excuse?
What is the basis of the honesty and integrity exhibited by Obama?
For instance would you hold a person as honest and of high integrity who so much blames their opposition? Is this a characteristic of a Leader in the long arc of history?
If so please refer to the philosophy that holds up as virtuous those that hurt their enemies and reward their friends and that those enemies can be citizens of a person's own country and particularly as the leader of that country?
To me history will be kind on those that bring people together not drive them apart as Obama has done.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.