Total Posts:54|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

What do you think about Obama?

YYW
Posts: 36,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I. Grade him; A - F.

II. What have been his biggest successes? What have been his most significant failures?

III. How do you compare him to George W. Bush...
a. ...in matters of domestic politics?
b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

IV. How is the US economy doing, relative to where it was in 2008?

V. To what extent do you attribute The United States of America's present economic state to Barack Obama?
Tsar of DDO
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2014 5:51:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
I. Grade him; A - F.

C

II. What have been his biggest successes? What have been his most significant failures?

III. How do you compare him to George W. Bush...

Well George W. Bush is a grade A idiot, so I'd be surprised if I found anything to put Obama behind him for...

a. ...in matters of domestic politics?
b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

Well, when talking to me about these two guys, the answers are pretty obvious. I want to get to the economy, so I'm going to skip detail on this.

IV. How is the US economy doing, relative to where it was in 2008?

As a whole, it's hard to say.

The poverty rate still needs to be fixed. Although, I think it should be noted that red states tend to have higher poverty rates than blue ones. Maybe that speaks about their state governments. That's a minus, though with consideration to Republican incompetence.

Unemployment is at a very low rate in comparison to where it started in his Presidency. I believe it's 5.8% right now. That's a plus.

The median household income is on par with what it was in the mid 1990s, a few years before the Clinton years' peak. It's stalled, with very slight growth. That's a plus for stopping continuing losses, but the next two years and how much the average American earns in comparison to now will be critical when examining him.

Something needs to be done about proper wages, as Americans are not being properly compensated for their work (which is increasingly productive) as they were in the past. The beginning of this problem was in the 1970s, but it has blown up in the 2000s: http://cdn.americanprogress.org...

http://cdn.americanprogress.org...

The second of those graphs show that it is increasingly difficult for families to properly live. That's a huge minus.

Though, I must quote William H. Gross, the managing director of PIMCO: "Even conservatives must acknowledge that return on capital investment, and the liquid stocks and bonds that mimic it, are ultimately dependent on returns to labor in the form of jobs and real wage gains. If Main Street is unemployed and undercompensated, capital can only travel so far down Prosperity Road."

V. To what extent do you attribute The United States of America's present economic state to Barack Obama?

Somewhat, but not too much. A lot more should be attributed to single states and their governments. The President does not hold all-power in the economy, although some decisions that could've been made haven't, and some things that could've been pushed for with a complete democrat hold in legislation in 2008-10 were not pushed for. Though, some blame for not allowing the economy to recover should be, IMO, placed on the average citizens. They gave the Republicans a gargantuan hold on the House in the 2010 elections (242 [244 this year]) and the gubernatorial races (29 Republicans after that election [31 after this year]) which can be then attributed to the inability to recover well enough.

So I pray, that Americans realize the way to progress is not in giving the opposite party of the President they just reelected 2 years before a full grip of the government.

And I hope my reasoning is coherent.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
debate_power
Posts: 726
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2014 7:45:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
I. Grade him; A - F.

II. What have been his biggest successes? What have been his most significant failures?

III. How do you compare him to George W. Bush...
a. ...in matters of domestic politics?
b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

IV. How is the US economy doing, relative to where it was in 2008?

V. To what extent do you attribute The United States of America's present economic state to Barack Obama?

Barack Obama is a political figurehead. He's the public relations man of Congress.
You can call me Mark if you like.
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,138
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2014 7:52:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
I. Grade him; A - F.

Overall I give him a B/B-

II. What have been his biggest successes? What have been his most significant failures?

Biggest successes: pulling out of Iraq, killing bin Laden, stabilizing the economic downturn with aggressive government spending (stimulus package)
Biggest failures: Obamacare is not a good long term solution to this country's healthcare cost problems, failed to make good on his promises to reform the immigration system (an executive or two don't count, since they will simply be reversed by the next republican president). Also would have been nice to see him reverse the trend of nominating extremely partisan supreme court justices, but he didn't.

III. How do you compare him to George W. Bush...
a. ...in matters of domestic politics?

Better, but not by much. Trying to end the bush tax cuts was good. Overhauling the medical insurance system was a good idea but the bill that got passed was not helpful to many people. Hard to blame him too much when he had to deal with obstructionist tactics so much, though.

b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

Significantly better, though it would be hard not to be! Obama steered our country away from the "we are Clint Eastwood" mentality that Bush possessed and which was harmful to our international image, despite providing few benefits. Would have been nice to see him scale down American involvement in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict as well, but that's politically hard to do. Ending our involvement in Iraq was huge though, as well as finally bringing down the man responsible for the 9-11 attacks.

IV. How is the US economy doing, relative to where it was in 2008?

Overall, better. Not to get into a huge treatise here, but we are essentially in a better place now than in 2008 and hopefully have learned a lesson about the predatory lending practices and unregulated housing market that destroyed our economy.

V. To what extent do you attribute The United States of America's present economic state to Barack Obama?

Actually not that much. I do think his stimulus plan was helpful, and I do think mandating closer oversight of the banking and housing industries helped. But these were fairly obvious steps to take in the aftermath of the housing bubble, and historically Americans tend to overestimate the impact a President can have on the national economy. So he gets some credit for making some solid moves, but it's not enough to bump him up to an A or even a B+.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,268
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2014 9:01:57 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 7:52:32 PM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
I. Grade him; A - F.

Overall I give him a B/B-

II. What have been his biggest successes? What have been his most significant failures?

Biggest successes: pulling out of Iraq, killing bin Laden, stabilizing the economic downturn with aggressive government spending (stimulus package)
Biggest failures: Obamacare is not a good long term solution to this country's healthcare cost problems, failed to make good on his promises to reform the immigration system (an executive or two don't count, since they will simply be reversed by the next republican president). Also would have been nice to see him reverse the trend of nominating extremely partisan supreme court justices, but he didn't.

III. How do you compare him to George W. Bush...
a. ...in matters of domestic politics?

Better, but not by much. Trying to end the bush tax cuts was good. Overhauling the medical insurance system was a good idea but the bill that got passed was not helpful to many people. Hard to blame him too much when he had to deal with obstructionist tactics so much, though.

b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

Significantly better, though it would be hard not to be! Obama steered our country away from the "we are Clint Eastwood" mentality that Bush possessed and which was harmful to our international image, despite providing few benefits. Would have been nice to see him scale down American involvement in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict as well, but that's politically hard to do. Ending our involvement in Iraq was huge though, as well as finally bringing down the man responsible for the 9-11 attacks.

IV. How is the US economy doing, relative to where it was in 2008?

Overall, better. Not to get into a huge treatise here, but we are essentially in a better place now than in 2008 and hopefully have learned a lesson about the predatory lending practices and unregulated housing market that destroyed our economy.

V. To what extent do you attribute The United States of America's present economic state to Barack Obama?

Actually not that much. I do think his stimulus plan was helpful, and I do think mandating closer oversight of the banking and housing industries helped. But these were fairly obvious steps to take in the aftermath of the housing bubble, and historically Americans tend to overestimate the impact a President can have on the national economy. So he gets some credit for making some solid moves, but it's not enough to bump him up to an A or even a B+.

I'll agree with most of this, but saying Obama was better than Bush is setting a pretty low bar for expected leadership.

It's like saying the retarded spaz beat the paraplegic in the special Olympics.
twocupcakes
Posts: 2,748
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2014 9:43:41 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
I. Grade him; A - F.

I would rate him a B.

II. What have been his biggest successes? What have been his most significant failures?

I like that he has in general been pushing for progressive policies(stimulus spending, gay rights, looking out for lower class ect). He has not gone really war crazy and seemed to try and end the wars. I think Obamacare is a big success. I hope it is a step for the USA to eventually get a universal healthcare system similar to Canada, Europe, Australia, Most Modern Western democracies ect.

III. How do you compare him to George W. Bush...
a. ...in matters of domestic politics?

I think that Bush should have paid down more of the debt instead of wasteful spending (wars) and tax cuts. Obama (with the economy in recession) should have stimulus spent more.

b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

I think the Iraq war was really stupid. No need to spend so much money for no other reason than fighting in the Middle East which did not really accomplish much except for dead people and money lost that could have been used to help Americans.

Also, Bush "lied" to the world to start the war. I do not think highly of Bush at all.

IV. How is the US economy doing, relative to where it was in 2008?

It is recovering from the recession faster than Europe thanks to Obama's stimulus spending.

V. To what extent do you attribute The United States of America's present economic state to Barack Obama?

I attribute Obama's stimulus spending (which should have been more) to the USA recovering better than Europe from the recession.

I cannot blame Obama for past administrations failure to pay down the debt in good times and stupid spending (mainly wars), or the recession on Obama.
1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2014 10:46:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
I. Grade him; A - F.

D+

II. What have been his biggest successes? What have been his most significant failures?

Success? Continuing operation to kill Bin Laden and pardoning turkeys.

Failures? Slow recovery, unclear foreign policy that has caused more trouble, terrible healthcare reform, and skyrocketing national debt at a time when it could have been cut.

III. How do you compare him to George W. Bush...
a. ...in matters of domestic politics?
Sightly worse
b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?
Worse

IV. How is the US economy doing, relative to where it was in 2008?
Better, but not where it should be.

V. To what extent do you attribute The United States of America's present economic state to Barack Obama?

Significantly since he has been able to achieve policies that affect the economy. All presidents are significant in economic terms.
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,268
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 8:06:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/7/2014 10:46:07 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
IV. How is the US economy doing, relative to where it was in 2008?
Better, but not where it should be.

V. To what extent do you attribute The United States of America's present economic state to Barack Obama?

Significantly since he has been able to achieve policies that affect the economy. All presidents are significant in economic terms.

Do you truly think it feasible for Obama to have the average household income recovered and returned to levels enjoyed 8 years ago?
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 8:35:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
I. Grade him; A - F.

D+

II. What have been his biggest successes? What have been his most significant failures?

Well let me think... Understand that success here can be based largely off opinion.
Successes:
-I know of a few, but I can't recall what they were... I knew of at least 2 or 3.

Failures:
-Obamacare.
-Amnesty.
-Handling of the Middle East.
-Handling of Russia.
-Handling of Congress.
-Handling of Ferguson and the Treyvon Martin case.

III. How do you compare him to George W. Bush...
a. ...in matters of domestic politics?
Worse. Bush didn't destroy the economy, that's not hard to see. The bubble economy crashing did. I feel most government related issues came out of Congress, with Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac abusing the low interest rates, and Congress allowing it when Bush said to stop them.

b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?
While Bush didn't make the US look weak, he also didn't make us look great, although that's because of how people perceive his actions, and not whether they were the right actions. I'd say equal.

IV. How is the US economy doing, relative to where it was in 2008?
Much better. The recession is almost gone. This isn't president-related though. Economic issues are really the Presidents doing.

V. To what extent do you attribute The United States of America's present economic state to Barack Obama?

Depends on which area we are talking about. Economically, very little. The US as a whole is simply to complex for me to rightly give an opinion here.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 8:48:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 8:06:44 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 12/7/2014 10:46:07 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
IV. How is the US economy doing, relative to where it was in 2008?
Better, but not where it should be.

V. To what extent do you attribute The United States of America's present economic state to Barack Obama?

Significantly since he has been able to achieve policies that affect the economy. All presidents are significant in economic terms.

Do you truly think it feasible for Obama to have the average household income recovered and returned to levels enjoyed 8 years ago?

Somewhat. If we are talking the value of money that can go to both Obama and the Federal Reserve. If we are talking about income as simply dollars then Obama's fiscal policy is more key here than the Fed's monetary policy (although in that case the Fed still plays some role).
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
YYW
Posts: 36,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 9:44:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
I. Grade him; A - F.

On the economy, B+.

On foreign relations, D.

On domestic policy, B+.

II. What have been his biggest successes? What have been his most significant failures?

The Affordable Care Act is his biggest success, the state of the world as it is now is his biggest failure.

III. How do you compare him to George W. Bush...
a. ...in matters of domestic politics?

Better.

b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

Worse.

IV. How is the US economy doing, relative to where it was in 2008?

Better.

V. To what extent do you attribute The United States of America's present economic state to Barack Obama?

Some, but less than most people think.
Tsar of DDO
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 9:50:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 8:35:56 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
I. Grade him; A - F.

D+

II. What have been his biggest successes? What have been his most significant failures?

Well let me think... Understand that success here can be based largely off opinion.
Successes:
-I know of a few, but I can't recall what they were... I knew of at least 2 or 3.

Failures:
-Obamacare.
-Amnesty.
-Handling of the Middle East.
-Handling of Russia.
-Handling of Congress.
-Handling of Ferguson and the Treyvon Martin case.

III. How do you compare him to George W. Bush...
a. ...in matters of domestic politics?
Worse. Bush didn't destroy the economy, that's not hard to see. The bubble economy crashing did. I feel most government related issues came out of Congress, with Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac abusing the low interest rates, and Congress allowing it when Bush said to stop them.

b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?
While Bush didn't make the US look weak, he also didn't make us look great, although that's because of how people perceive his actions, and not whether they were the right actions. I'd say equal.

IV. How is the US economy doing, relative to where it was in 2008?
Much better. The recession is almost gone. This isn't president-related though. Economic issues are rarely the Presidents doing.


V. To what extent do you attribute The United States of America's present economic state to Barack Obama?

Depends on which area we are talking about. Economically, very little. The US as a whole is simply to complex for me to rightly give an opinion here.

***edit.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 10:06:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 9:44:55 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

Worse.

So you think spending trillions of dollars in the Middle East and invading a country for "'nucular' weapons" (as my science teacher put it) is better than what Obama has done?
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
YYW
Posts: 36,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 10:20:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 10:06:38 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 9:44:55 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

Worse.

So you think spending trillions of dollars in the Middle East and invading a country for "'nucular' weapons" (as my science teacher put it) is better than what Obama has done?

Your science teacher was wrong. We knew that Saddam had VX nerve gas, and a variety of other nerve agents, because we gave them to him during the Iran-Iraq war. What we didn't know is that he used all of those nerve agents to wage genocide on the Kurds, and it appears that he did. Saddam could have prevented the invasion by allowing international inspections, but he didn't, because he wanted the Kurds (and other countries in the middle east) to think that he had them. Basically, Saddam was bluffing and we called him on it, but everyone tried to paint Bush as a liar when there were no weapons found -which was a total distortion of what actually happened.

But, invading Iraq isn't the same as allowing ISIS to come into existence, and allowing the former Soviet Union (read: Vlad Putin and his brigade of oligarchical thug) to violate the territorial integrity of a sovereign nation by way of a 19th century land grab. That was worse than anything Bush ever did.
Tsar of DDO
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 10:31:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 10:20:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:06:38 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 9:44:55 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

Worse.

So you think spending trillions of dollars in the Middle East and invading a country for "'nucular' weapons" (as my science teacher put it) is better than what Obama has done?

Your science teacher was wrong. We knew that Saddam had VX nerve gas, and a variety of other nerve agents, because we gave them to him during the Iran-Iraq war. What we didn't know is that he used all of those nerve agents to wage genocide on the Kurds, and it appears that he did. Saddam could have prevented the invasion by allowing international inspections, but he didn't, because he wanted the Kurds (and other countries in the middle east) to think that he had them. Basically, Saddam was bluffing and we called him on it, but everyone tried to paint Bush as a liar when there were no weapons found -which was a total distortion of what actually happened.

Lol she was lamenting on his pronunciation of the word "nuclear."

But, invading Iraq isn't the same as allowing ISIS to come into existence, and allowing the former Soviet Union (read: Vlad Putin and his brigade of oligarchical thug) to violate the territorial integrity of a sovereign nation by way of a 19th century land grab. That was worse than anything Bush ever did.

Vladimir Putin isn't the Soviet Union. He displayed imperialistic tendencies at most. It was a bad thing, but he did not end a regime that was more or less stabilizing the Middle East.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
YYW
Posts: 36,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 10:41:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 10:31:26 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:20:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:06:38 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 9:44:55 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

Worse.

So you think spending trillions of dollars in the Middle East and invading a country for "'nucular' weapons" (as my science teacher put it) is better than what Obama has done?

Your science teacher was wrong. We knew that Saddam had VX nerve gas, and a variety of other nerve agents, because we gave them to him during the Iran-Iraq war. What we didn't know is that he used all of those nerve agents to wage genocide on the Kurds, and it appears that he did. Saddam could have prevented the invasion by allowing international inspections, but he didn't, because he wanted the Kurds (and other countries in the middle east) to think that he had them. Basically, Saddam was bluffing and we called him on it, but everyone tried to paint Bush as a liar when there were no weapons found -which was a total distortion of what actually happened.

Lol she was lamenting on his pronunciation of the word "nuclear."

Fair enough. It's my personal view that doing so is a cheap shot. I mean, when I'm tired I speak with an accent too... sort of... but w/e. Bush's IQ as tested by the military is higher than most Americans, so I think that most of the criticism of him is absurd.

But, invading Iraq isn't the same as allowing ISIS to come into existence, and allowing the former Soviet Union (read: Vlad Putin and his brigade of oligarchical thug) to violate the territorial integrity of a sovereign nation by way of a 19th century land grab. That was worse than anything Bush ever did.

Vladimir Putin isn't the Soviet Union. He displayed imperialistic tendencies at most. It was a bad thing, but he did not end a regime that was more or less stabilizing the Middle East.

I said "former" Soviet Union, and he's acting like an imperial thug, yes.

Iraq was not stabilizing the Middle East.
Tsar of DDO
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 10:44:58 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 10:41:57 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:31:26 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:20:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:06:38 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 9:44:55 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

Worse.

So you think spending trillions of dollars in the Middle East and invading a country for "'nucular' weapons" (as my science teacher put it) is better than what Obama has done?

Your science teacher was wrong. We knew that Saddam had VX nerve gas, and a variety of other nerve agents, because we gave them to him during the Iran-Iraq war. What we didn't know is that he used all of those nerve agents to wage genocide on the Kurds, and it appears that he did. Saddam could have prevented the invasion by allowing international inspections, but he didn't, because he wanted the Kurds (and other countries in the middle east) to think that he had them. Basically, Saddam was bluffing and we called him on it, but everyone tried to paint Bush as a liar when there were no weapons found -which was a total distortion of what actually happened.

Lol she was lamenting on his pronunciation of the word "nuclear."

Fair enough. It's my personal view that doing so is a cheap shot. I mean, when I'm tired I speak with an accent too... sort of... but w/e. Bush's IQ as tested by the military is higher than most Americans, so I think that most of the criticism of him is absurd.

I don't think he's necessarily retarded: but he was too incompetent to hold that much power.power

But, invading Iraq isn't the same as allowing ISIS to come into existence, and allowing the former Soviet Union (read: Vlad Putin and his brigade of oligarchical thug) to violate the territorial integrity of a sovereign nation by way of a 19th century land grab. That was worse than anything Bush ever did.

Vladimir Putin isn't the Soviet Union. He displayed imperialistic tendencies at most. It was a bad thing, but he did not end a regime that was more or less stabilizing the Middle East.

I said "former" Soviet Union, and he's acting like an imperial thug, yes.

Iraq was not stabilizing the Middle East.

But ripping him out of power destabilized it to a further degree.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 10:45:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
"I have my detractors in Washington. There are bastards who spread things around, of course, who planted nasty things in the media."

-Hans Blix
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 10:48:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 10:44:58 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:41:57 PM, YYW wrote:
Fair enough. It's my personal view that doing so is a cheap shot. I mean, when I'm tired I speak with an accent too... sort of... but w/e. Bush's IQ as tested by the military is higher than most Americans, so I think that most of the criticism of him is absurd.

I don't think he's necessarily retarded: but he was too incompetent to hold that much power.

Fvcking phone...
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
YYW
Posts: 36,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 10:48:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 10:44:58 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:41:57 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:31:26 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:20:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:06:38 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 9:44:55 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

Worse.

So you think spending trillions of dollars in the Middle East and invading a country for "'nucular' weapons" (as my science teacher put it) is better than what Obama has done?

Your science teacher was wrong. We knew that Saddam had VX nerve gas, and a variety of other nerve agents, because we gave them to him during the Iran-Iraq war. What we didn't know is that he used all of those nerve agents to wage genocide on the Kurds, and it appears that he did. Saddam could have prevented the invasion by allowing international inspections, but he didn't, because he wanted the Kurds (and other countries in the middle east) to think that he had them. Basically, Saddam was bluffing and we called him on it, but everyone tried to paint Bush as a liar when there were no weapons found -which was a total distortion of what actually happened.

Lol she was lamenting on his pronunciation of the word "nuclear."

Fair enough. It's my personal view that doing so is a cheap shot. I mean, when I'm tired I speak with an accent too... sort of... but w/e. Bush's IQ as tested by the military is higher than most Americans, so I think that most of the criticism of him is absurd.

I don't think he's necessarily retarded: but he was too incompetent to hold that much power.power

It wasn't that he was too incompetent, it was that Dick Cheney did some crazy sh1t that Bush took most of the blame for.

But, invading Iraq isn't the same as allowing ISIS to come into existence, and allowing the former Soviet Union (read: Vlad Putin and his brigade of oligarchical thug) to violate the territorial integrity of a sovereign nation by way of a 19th century land grab. That was worse than anything Bush ever did.

Vladimir Putin isn't the Soviet Union. He displayed imperialistic tendencies at most. It was a bad thing, but he did not end a regime that was more or less stabilizing the Middle East.

I said "former" Soviet Union, and he's acting like an imperial thug, yes.

Iraq was not stabilizing the Middle East.

But ripping him out of power destabilized it to a further degree.

Not really. What destabilized the Middle East was when the United States pulled out.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 10:49:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 10:48:50 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:44:58 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:41:57 PM, YYW wrote:
Fair enough. It's my personal view that doing so is a cheap shot. I mean, when I'm tired I speak with an accent too... sort of... but w/e. Bush's IQ as tested by the military is higher than most Americans, so I think that most of the criticism of him is absurd.

I don't think he's necessarily retarded: but he was too incompetent to hold that much power.

Fvcking phone...

lol
Tsar of DDO
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 10:52:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 10:48:54 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:44:58 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:41:57 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:31:26 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:20:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:06:38 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 9:44:55 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

Worse.

So you think spending trillions of dollars in the Middle East and invading a country for "'nucular' weapons" (as my science teacher put it) is better than what Obama has done?

Your science teacher was wrong. We knew that Saddam had VX nerve gas, and a variety of other nerve agents, because we gave them to him during the Iran-Iraq war. What we didn't know is that he used all of those nerve agents to wage genocide on the Kurds, and it appears that he did. Saddam could have prevented the invasion by allowing international inspections, but he didn't, because he wanted the Kurds (and other countries in the middle east) to think that he had them. Basically, Saddam was bluffing and we called him on it, but everyone tried to paint Bush as a liar when there were no weapons found -which was a total distortion of what actually happened.

Lol she was lamenting on his pronunciation of the word "nuclear."

Fair enough. It's my personal view that doing so is a cheap shot. I mean, when I'm tired I speak with an accent too... sort of... but w/e. Bush's IQ as tested by the military is higher than most Americans, so I think that most of the criticism of him is absurd.

I don't think he's necessarily retarded: but he was too incompetent to hold that much power.

It wasn't that he was too incompetent, it was that Dick Cheney did some crazy sh1t that Bush took most of the blame for.

He could have overridden him. And he did a whole speech on Saddam not cooperating after a UN report stating he was, and a failed CIA investigation to discredit Hans Blix's findings. Never mind who's idea any of this was: it was his ultimate decision.

But, invading Iraq isn't the same as allowing ISIS to come into existence, and allowing the former Soviet Union (read: Vlad Putin and his brigade of oligarchical thug) to violate the territorial integrity of a sovereign nation by way of a 19th century land grab. That was worse than anything Bush ever did.

Vladimir Putin isn't the Soviet Union. He displayed imperialistic tendencies at most. It was a bad thing, but he did not end a regime that was more or less stabilizing the Middle East.

I said "former" Soviet Union, and he's acting like an imperial thug, yes.

Iraq was not stabilizing the Middle East.

But ripping him out of power destabilized it to a further degree.

Not really. What destabilized the Middle East was when the United States pulled out.

We can't stay there forever: unless you'd plan on colonizing them and collecting taxes from them.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 11:00:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
I. Grade him; A - F.

D+. In general, he has failed to make any discernible impact besides Obamacare, despite having a historic Congress his first year; what impact he has made has been below average. He's a below-average President.

II. What have been his biggest successes? What have been his most significant failures?

Biggest success - killing Osama bin Laden.

Biggest failures - Destroying his own party, passing a health care bill that nobody wanted and everyone hates instead of fixing the economy, dividing the country

III. How do you compare him to George W. Bush...
a. ...in matters of domestic politics?

Worse. Bush entered office with a split Congress and still managed to pass laws - for better or worse. He had very little time to focus on domestic policy after 9/11, derailing any future ideas. Obama, on the other hand, has very little legislative accomplishments despite a historically Democratic congress and few pressing foreign policy issues.

b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

Obama has basically been a worse version of George Bush in this regard... take that as you will.

IV. How is the US economy doing, relative to where it was in 2008?

Slightly better in some regards (stock market), much worse in others (gas prices, jobless, food stamps, etc.)

V. To what extent do you attribute The United States of America's present economic state to Barack Obama?

His impact has been marginal at best.
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 11:02:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 10:20:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:06:38 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 9:44:55 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

Worse.

So you think spending trillions of dollars in the Middle East and invading a country for "'nucular' weapons" (as my science teacher put it) is better than what Obama has done?

Your science teacher was wrong. We knew that Saddam had VX nerve gas, and a variety of other nerve agents, because we gave them to him during the Iran-Iraq war. What we didn't know is that he used all of those nerve agents to wage genocide on the Kurds, and it appears that he did. Saddam could have prevented the invasion by allowing international inspections, but he didn't, because he wanted the Kurds (and other countries in the middle east) to think that he had them. Basically, Saddam was bluffing and we called him on it, but everyone tried to paint Bush as a liar when there were no weapons found -which was a total distortion of what actually happened.

You nailed it... I'm genuinely impressed here.

But, invading Iraq isn't the same as allowing ISIS to come into existence, and allowing the former Soviet Union (read: Vlad Putin and his brigade of oligarchical thug) to violate the territorial integrity of a sovereign nation by way of a 19th century land grab. That was worse than anything Bush ever did.
YYW
Posts: 36,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 11:03:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 10:52:33 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:48:54 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:44:58 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:41:57 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:31:26 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:20:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:06:38 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 9:44:55 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

Worse.

So you think spending trillions of dollars in the Middle East and invading a country for "'nucular' weapons" (as my science teacher put it) is better than what Obama has done?

Your science teacher was wrong. We knew that Saddam had VX nerve gas, and a variety of other nerve agents, because we gave them to him during the Iran-Iraq war. What we didn't know is that he used all of those nerve agents to wage genocide on the Kurds, and it appears that he did. Saddam could have prevented the invasion by allowing international inspections, but he didn't, because he wanted the Kurds (and other countries in the middle east) to think that he had them. Basically, Saddam was bluffing and we called him on it, but everyone tried to paint Bush as a liar when there were no weapons found -which was a total distortion of what actually happened.

Lol she was lamenting on his pronunciation of the word "nuclear."

Fair enough. It's my personal view that doing so is a cheap shot. I mean, when I'm tired I speak with an accent too... sort of... but w/e. Bush's IQ as tested by the military is higher than most Americans, so I think that most of the criticism of him is absurd.

I don't think he's necessarily retarded: but he was too incompetent to hold that much power.

It wasn't that he was too incompetent, it was that Dick Cheney did some crazy sh1t that Bush took most of the blame for.

He could have overridden him. And he did a whole speech on Saddam not cooperating after a UN report stating he was, and a failed CIA investigation to discredit Hans Blix's findings. Never mind who's idea any of this was: it was his ultimate decision.

Actually, I'm not so sure about that. Even though the "ultimate decision" was Bush's, Cheney screened, edited and changed everything that came across Bush's desk. So, Bush could only pick from the options that Cheney wanted, and he only saw them in the light that Cheney wanted him to see them in. The real kicker is that Bush really didn't realize the extent to which Cheney was manipulating him, because Bush wasn't in a position to know what his briefings might have looked like before they crossed his desk. It's really screwed up, on a whole lot of levels.

But, invading Iraq isn't the same as allowing ISIS to come into existence, and allowing the former Soviet Union (read: Vlad Putin and his brigade of oligarchical thug) to violate the territorial integrity of a sovereign nation by way of a 19th century land grab. That was worse than anything Bush ever did.

Vladimir Putin isn't the Soviet Union. He displayed imperialistic tendencies at most. It was a bad thing, but he did not end a regime that was more or less stabilizing the Middle East.

I said "former" Soviet Union, and he's acting like an imperial thug, yes.

Iraq was not stabilizing the Middle East.

But ripping him out of power destabilized it to a further degree.

Not really. What destabilized the Middle East was when the United States pulled out.

We can't stay there forever: unless you'd plan on colonizing them and collecting taxes from them.

Hahaha... well....
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 11:05:04 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 11:02:34 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:20:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:06:38 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 9:44:55 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

Worse.

So you think spending trillions of dollars in the Middle East and invading a country for "'nucular' weapons" (as my science teacher put it) is better than what Obama has done?

Your science teacher was wrong. We knew that Saddam had VX nerve gas, and a variety of other nerve agents, because we gave them to him during the Iran-Iraq war. What we didn't know is that he used all of those nerve agents to wage genocide on the Kurds, and it appears that he did. Saddam could have prevented the invasion by allowing international inspections, but he didn't, because he wanted the Kurds (and other countries in the middle east) to think that he had them. Basically, Saddam was bluffing and we called him on it, but everyone tried to paint Bush as a liar when there were no weapons found -which was a total distortion of what actually happened.

You nailed it... I'm genuinely impressed here.

My command of American political history is formidable. Sometimes it cuts in favor of the GOP, sometimes it cuts in favor of the DNC. But, I don't mince words to go to a party line. Even though I am a Democrat, most of what has come to be the popular memory of the Bush administration is a complete fantasy.

But, invading Iraq isn't the same as allowing ISIS to come into existence, and allowing the former Soviet Union (read: Vlad Putin and his brigade of oligarchical thug) to violate the territorial integrity of a sovereign nation by way of a 19th century land grab. That was worse than anything Bush ever did.
Tsar of DDO
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 11:08:58 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 11:05:04 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 11:02:34 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:20:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:06:38 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 9:44:55 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

Worse.

So you think spending trillions of dollars in the Middle East and invading a country for "'nucular' weapons" (as my science teacher put it) is better than what Obama has done?

Your science teacher was wrong. We knew that Saddam had VX nerve gas, and a variety of other nerve agents, because we gave them to him during the Iran-Iraq war. What we didn't know is that he used all of those nerve agents to wage genocide on the Kurds, and it appears that he did. Saddam could have prevented the invasion by allowing international inspections, but he didn't, because he wanted the Kurds (and other countries in the middle east) to think that he had them. Basically, Saddam was bluffing and we called him on it, but everyone tried to paint Bush as a liar when there were no weapons found -which was a total distortion of what actually happened.

You nailed it... I'm genuinely impressed here.

My command of American political history is formidable. Sometimes it cuts in favor of the GOP, sometimes it cuts in favor of the DNC. But, I don't mince words to go to a party line. Even though I am a Democrat, most of what has come to be the popular memory of the Bush administration is a complete fantasy.

Well, I can certainly appreciate that.

But, invading Iraq isn't the same as allowing ISIS to come into existence, and allowing the former Soviet Union (read: Vlad Putin and his brigade of oligarchical thug) to violate the territorial integrity of a sovereign nation by way of a 19th century land grab. That was worse than anything Bush ever did.
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 11:12:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 11:00:12 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
IV. How is the US economy doing, relative to where it was in 2008?

Slightly better in some regards (stock market), much worse in others (gas prices, jobless, food stamps, etc.)

The unemployment rate is on par with (or close to) the pre-recession rate. There are still too many underworked, which is a different story, but the hiring rate during Obama's Presidency has been reasonably high.

I don't know where you're getting gas prices from...unless you're on that bullish!t about gas prices doubling under Obama...
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 11:16:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 11:03:01 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:52:33 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:48:54 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:44:58 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:41:57 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:31:26 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:20:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/9/2014 10:06:38 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 12/9/2014 9:44:55 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/6/2014 4:49:44 PM, YYW wrote:
b. ...in matters of international relations/foreign policy?

Worse.

So you think spending trillions of dollars in the Middle East and invading a country for "'nucular' weapons" (as my science teacher put it) is better than what Obama has done?

Your science teacher was wrong. We knew that Saddam had VX nerve gas, and a variety of other nerve agents, because we gave them to him during the Iran-Iraq war. What we didn't know is that he used all of those nerve agents to wage genocide on the Kurds, and it appears that he did. Saddam could have prevented the invasion by allowing international inspections, but he didn't, because he wanted the Kurds (and other countries in the middle east) to think that he had them. Basically, Saddam was bluffing and we called him on it, but everyone tried to paint Bush as a liar when there were no weapons found -which was a total distortion of what actually happened.

Lol she was lamenting on his pronunciation of the word "nuclear."

Fair enough. It's my personal view that doing so is a cheap shot. I mean, when I'm tired I speak with an accent too... sort of... but w/e. Bush's IQ as tested by the military is higher than most Americans, so I think that most of the criticism of him is absurd.

I don't think he's necessarily retarded: but he was too incompetent to hold that much power.

It wasn't that he was too incompetent, it was that Dick Cheney did some crazy sh1t that Bush took most of the blame for.

He could have overridden him. And he did a whole speech on Saddam not cooperating after a UN report stating he was, and a failed CIA investigation to discredit Hans Blix's findings. Never mind who's idea any of this was: it was his ultimate decision.

Actually, I'm not so sure about that. Even though the "ultimate decision" was Bush's, Cheney screened, edited and changed everything that came across Bush's desk. So, Bush could only pick from the options that Cheney wanted, and he only saw them in the light that Cheney wanted him to see them in. The real kicker is that Bush really didn't realize the extent to which Cheney was manipulating him, because Bush wasn't in a position to know what his briefings might have looked like before they crossed his desk. It's really screwed up, on a whole lot of levels.

I'd criticize him for lack of vision in that regard, but I'm not much of a trusting person at all...very paranoid, apparently, so...

But, invading Iraq isn't the same as allowing ISIS to come into existence, and allowing the former Soviet Union (read: Vlad Putin and his brigade of oligarchical thug) to violate the territorial integrity of a sovereign nation by way of a 19th century land grab. That was worse than anything Bush ever did.

Vladimir Putin isn't the Soviet Union. He displayed imperialistic tendencies at most. It was a bad thing, but he did not end a regime that was more or less stabilizing the Middle East.

I said "former" Soviet Union, and he's acting like an imperial thug, yes.

Iraq was not stabilizing the Middle East.

But ripping him out of power destabilized it to a further degree.

Not really. What destabilized the Middle East was when the United States pulled out.

We can't stay there forever: unless you'd plan on colonizing them and collecting taxes from them.

Hahaha... well....

To be honest, I wouldn't be in such disfavor if it both stopped the shitstorm that is...that, and the US didn't lose too much money because of it.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King