Obama made the mess that you see in the world today
True
Side Score: 57
|
 |
False
Side Score: 25
|
|
|
|
|
Domestically, Obama widened the gap between Democrats & Republicans, and failed to support our police, then eroding the mistrust between races and still had time to ridicule people with different policy or political views than his own. Internationally Obama has shown only weakness and indecision. He has successfully evoked both fear in our allies, and laughter from our enemies. In short Obama made the world worse for everyone. Side: True
I feel Obama's political cowardice and inertia has resulted in many issues, both economic and military, being significantly worse now than they need be had he addressed them years ago. He seemed to be frozen with a combination of fear and indecisiveness and failed to act to stop difficult situations turning into crises. Russia's illegal annexation of the Crimea and continuing aggression in Eastern Europe needed to be confronted at the time. Russia being allowed to call the shots in Syria was a serious mistake. China's expansionist ambitions and illegal ''appropriation'' of territories positioned within international waters should have been robustly challenged, as they are being now. The crackpot-despot Kim jong un presents a significantly greater threat now than he would have 5 to 6 years. The great orator just kicked all those cans up the road for someone else to handle. To stop America being used as a dumping ground for cheap and shoddy Asian goods Obama should have introduced legislation requiring all nations wishing to export their produce to the U.S, to have in place the same, or very similar wage levels, industrial relation requirements, heath & safety laws and the string of worker protection measures as exist in this country. Due to his cowardice and ultra left wing ideology the nation's economy is heavily reliant on cheap imports which in turn has seen the decimation of countless manufacturing concerns along with the inevitable loss of jobs and skills. We are all reaping the woeful harvest of his, whatever you do, do nothing, mentality. History will not treat this play actor President kindly. Side: True
WASHINGTON — President Obama came into office seven years ago pledging to end the wars of his predecessor, George W. Bush. On May 6, with eight months left before he vacates the White House, Mr. Obama passed a somber, little-noticed milestone: He has now been at war longer than Mr. Bush, or any other American president. If the United States remains in combat in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria until the end of Mr. Obama’s term — a near-certainty given the president’s recent announcement that he will send 250 additional Special Operations forces to Syria — he will leave behind an improbable legacy as the only president in American history to serve two complete terms with the nation at war. Mr. Obama, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 and spent his years in the White House trying to fulfill the promises he made as an antiwar candidate, would have a longer tour of duty as a wartime president than Franklin D. Roosevelt, Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard M. Nixon or his hero Abraham Lincoln. What more is to be said ! Side: True
1
point
Liberals will never admit the harm Obama did to to nation. They are likeinsecure narcissists who are incapable of admitting what a total failure their ideology. I could understand that decades ago there were Liberals who may have had noble intentions of supposedly helping those who could not help themselves. What they succeeded in doing was to condition people to believe they are entitled to other's money and that they no longer have to work for their livelyhood. All they did was bankrupt our Government programs, such as social security, and turned them into never ending social give away programs that our nation can not afford. Money does not grow on trees but the Democrats acts like it does. These big spending politicians will take America down with their thirst for power. When a people become addicted to Government giveaways, even Republicans can not stop the trend because it would mean they never get elected. So we now have a Government run by politicians who would have to commit political suicide if they actually addressed our bankrupted Social security, medicare, medicaid, etc. programs. So tell me, what happens to tens of millions of people when our nation collapses from debt? IT HURTS ALL AMERICNS FAR WORSE THAN THE HARDSHIPS LIBERALS WERE SUPPOSEDLY SO CONCERNED WITH TO BEGIN WITH. It has become a radical corrupt big Government failure and Liberals REFUSE to admit it. Most intelligent people will admit when an ideology has so obviously failed. This speaks volumes to either their total stupidity, or their total self absorbed political extremism. Side: True
1
point
Obama intentionally got the trust of Liberals, knowing he would be the king pawn, being a black man, and that they would stand behind him to any end. What they didn't know is that Liberalism is actually something he wants to destroy, but first he must destroy Conservativism. Side: True
|
The thing I don't understand about the Obama haters is generally they argued for eight years he was utterly ineffective as a President, but also utterly effective in pushing a crazy agenda. Which is it? Because you really can't have it both ways. One moment he's a criminal mastermind to you and the next he's an incompetent boob. Hey, despite the people on this site who try to paint me as all things they hate - Liberal, Progressive, Obama lover, Clinton lover - despite all of that, I genuinely did not like many things that Obama did during his Presidency. And I was against the bailout(s). And I didn't like his foreign policy. But, but, his rabid attackers lose any chance of winning over the people like me which they could win over simply because they keep slamming on him in ridiculous ways. He was NOT the worst President in US history. He was NOT communist. He was NOT a Hitler. He was NOT a Muslim, or an agent of the terrorists. And, above all of that, he was NOT cooperated with by Congress for any of his eight years in office. So if you want to blame him for the mess in the world, make sure you bring your Republicans in Congress in to share that blame, because they twisted the knife in anything he ever tried to do. And now with all that said, can you honestly, in good conscious, say Trump is fixing this mess? Can you? Because hey, the Republicans have a monopoly on Washington right now so nothing should be stopping him. And yet all he's got is a line of executive orders. Can he executive order the world back into shape? Foolish Side: False
Isn't it amazing how they keep bashing him yet completely ignore the fact that Congress blocked him in any way they could? How can he possibly do anything when the Republicans in Congress basically stamped their feet and pouted, refusing to cooperate because the big bad meany President wasn't one of them. But everything is all Obama's fault....sure. I wasn't a fan of him either but the way he handled himself in office is better than the tangerine we have now. He wasn't the best but he certainly isn't the worst. Side: False
2
points
Most people with an ounce of humanity, an ounce of honesty and an ounce of discernment, do not need others to present their case in the most perfect polite way in order to understand the truth of what they are saying. You say "Obama's rabid attackers lose any chance of winning over the people like me which they could win over simply because they keep slamming on him in ridiculous ways." Do you mean in the same way you slam on Trump? Nahhhhhhhh So I guess we are not suppose to believe anything you say about Trump because you are a rabid attacker of him. Nahhh, you are a moderate and would never slam on Trump right? LOL, what a hypocrite you are. So you are saying that you lack the most basic humanity to understand that No Restriction abortions of viable babies for any reason is pure selfish evil. You are saying that on your own, you lack the abiity to understand how evil it is to support killing viable babies, so proife life people must explain it to you in a gentle way so that you will then have an epiphany and finally understand how barbaric it is to dismember viable babies weeks from birth. It's truly sick how many times you spew the same laughable garbage, that somehow you can't see the simple humanity of protecting viable babies unless we explain it to you in some other fashion that does not turn you off. So you are saying that drawing and quartering viable babies does not turn you off, but people who speak out against it do? How about you stop wasting everyone's time on a debate site, and simply admit what an ultra Liberal Leftist you are. There are less than 20% of Americans who support no restriction abortions which makes you a radical Liberal that you claim not to be. You are outside the main stream view of humanity. Please spare us all your lies and deception of being so called moderate and independent. You voted for a rabid no restriction abortion proponent Hillary Clinton. Nuff said. The truth of Obama is that he brought back race riots in the streets, cop assasinations, he brought huge divisions between americans with his ultra Liberal ideology, he tried to force people to pay for abortions, forced public schools to allow so called Transgender boys in our daughter's bathrooms against the will of the parents, appointed Liberal justices so they would force every state to change their marriage laws, doubled our national debt, destroyed our foreign policy, allowed Russia to expand, allowed ISIS to come to power out of nowhere, etc.etc. and you need people to present their case in a more polite way so that you can grasp those facts? Otherwise you just can't see it for yourself? LOL Side: True
Nice rant. First off, it's about 5 times longer than any of the paragraphs where I get accused of ranting. Second, a full third of it is back to your unrestricted abortion pet topic, which we've already debated and disagreed on dozens of times already. Not new. And yet, it's a confirmation of what I'm always saying about you beeing a single issue extremist. Third, my criticism of Trump is shared by a huge swath of the world. And yet despite that, I'm still on record multiple times on this site saying now that he was elected President we have to give him a chance. I did. And yet what he has done with that chance is utterly abysmal, so far. Fourth, your last paragraph is a rant on society with no proven link back to Obama. Race riots, cop assassinations, are due to societal abuses of minorities, not because of Obama. And the transgender bathroom issue has yet to produce an epidemic of bathroom abuses despite the hysteria drummed up by your side. Heck, the only salvagable parts of your last paragraph are the foreign policy criticisms, and my original post up top says I disagreed with his foreign policy, too. Basically, all you get for your rant is proof that you rant, particularly on just one or two core topics, and that you rant against what you imagine your opponents say instead of what they actually do say. Sloppy and ineffective. Side: False
1
point
1
point
-----But, but, his rabid attackers lose any chance of winning over the people like me which they could win over simply because they keep slamming on him in ridiculous ways.----- There's nothing ridiculous about pointing out that the experts warned how and why Obamacare would tank. There's also nothing ridiculous about pointing out that the Democratic leadership actually said,"We need to just get it passed, and we'll read what it says later." What? Side: True
1
point
WASHINGTON — President Obama came into office seven years ago pledging to end the wars of his predecessor, George W. Bush. On May 6, with eight months left before he vacates the White House, Mr. Obama passed a somber, little-noticed milestone: He has now been at war longer than Mr. Bush, or any other American president. If the United States remains in combat in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria until the end of Mr. Obama’s term — a near-certainty given the president’s recent announcement that he will send 250 additional Special Operations forces to Syria — he will leave behind an improbable legacy as the only president in American history to serve two complete terms with the nation at war. Mr. Obama, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 and spent his years in the White House trying to fulfill the promises he made as an antiwar candidate, would have a longer tour of duty as a wartime president than Franklin D. Roosevelt, Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard M. Nixon or his hero Abraham Lincoln. Side: True
1
point
1
point
Bush had his faults, but what he didn't do was... 1)Pull out of Iraq, leaving thousands military grade weapons and vehicles behind, creating a vacuum for ISIS. 2)Bomb Libya into oblivion, and oust Mobarek from Egypt and Kudafi from Libya. 3)Create the abomination nightmare called Obamacare. 4)Divide the nation by race. 5)Bush didn't drop half as many bombs. 6)Bush didn't back down from Russia and watch Syria get destroyed. Side: True
2
points
Bush set the DATE, agreed to the terms, signed the agreement to "get out of Iraq"! Obama had to follow that Presidential Agreement. Obama dropped MORE bombs?? Bush dropped more the first night of "Shock and Awe" than Obama dropped throughout his Presidency (well, maybe not just that one night!) That "abomination" is, if you haven't noticed, FAR more popular than the abomination suggested by Ryan and company! THAT would have likely killed your Grammaw! Amazing how this nation has come together under Trump! Nothing has been passed by Congress, The only way he could get a SC Justice was by making his own rules! Thousands of Americans are on the streets protesting about every weekend. He complained about Obama "playing too much golf" Hahahahahaaa! He complained about Obama using AF1 for personal trips (I'm tired of laughing!) CONGRESS "backed down and watched Syria get destroyed"! Obama went to them, asked them to allot money and call for Americans to go to war in Syria, THEY refused (wanted it to be on HIS shoulders, the cowards!). He was willing to share responsibility, they were not! Your reasoning is so much BS! Side: True
What he DID do was: Sent hundreds of millions of dollars in cash to the Baghdad Airport on pallets that immediately disappeared. It was never found! HMMMM, I wonder where ISIS gets the money to buy better weapons than much of it's opposition?????? Bush wasn't in office when Russia went into Syria, no one knows what he would have done. Bush divided the Iraqi nation by "religious group, put in place a "President" that was a KNOWN divider and let HIM do it! The ACA has grown in popularity DESPITE the right wing attempt to destroy it, it's SOOO much better than the "Industry controlled one" we had when he took office .... the one whose ridiculously high rates were about to skyrocket when he took over ... you know, the one with the REAL death panels that could cancel your insurance (or not cover you at all), and let you die ... or at least go bankrupt! Libya was going to be bombed/attacked by NATO, we just assisted ... Gadhafi was OUT as far as they were concerned! Any weapons left behind were for Bush's President to protect himself with, If he let them get away it was on him and Bush! Your whole argument is BS! Side: True
What he DID do was: Sent hundreds of millions of dollars in cash to the Baghdad Airport on pallets that immediately disappeared. It was never found! HMMMM, I wonder where ISIS gets the money to buy better weapons than much of it's opposition?????? Bush wasn't in office when Russia went into Syria, no one knows what he would have done. Bush divided the Iraqi nation by "religious group, put in place a "President" that was a KNOWN divider and let HIM do it! The ACA has grown in popularity DESPITE the right wing attempt to destroy it, it's SOOO much better than the "Industry controlled one" we had when he took office .... the one whose ridiculously high rates were about to skyrocket when he took over ... you know, the one with the REAL death panels that could cancel your insurance (or not cover you at all), and let you die ... or at least go bankrupt! Libya was going to be bombed/attacked by NATO, we just assisted ... Gadhafi was OUT as far as they were concerned! Any weapons left behind were for Bush's President to protect himself with, If he let them get away it was on him and Bush! Your whole argument is BS! Side: True
What he DID do was: Sent hundreds of millions of dollars in cash to the Baghdad Airport on pallets that immediately disappeared. It was never found! HMMMM, I wonder where ISIS gets the money to buy better weapons than much of it's opposition?????? Bush wasn't in office when Russia went into Syria, no one knows what he would have done. Bush divided the Iraqi nation by "religious group, put in place a "President" that was a KNOWN divider and let HIM do it! The ACA has grown in popularity DESPITE the right wing attempt to destroy it, it's SOOO much better than the "Industry controlled one" we had when he took office .... the one whose ridiculously high rates were about to skyrocket when he took over ... you know, the one with the REAL death panels that could cancel your insurance (or not cover you at all), and let you die ... or at least go bankrupt! Libya was going to be bombed/attacked by NATO, we just assisted ... Gadhafi was OUT as far as they were concerned! Any weapons left behind were for Bush's President to protect himself with, If he let them get away it was on him and Bush! Your whole argument is BS! Side: True
WASHINGTON — President Obama came into office seven years ago pledging to end the wars of his predecessor, George W. Bush. On May 6, with eight months left before he vacates the White House, Mr. Obama passed a somber, little-noticed milestone: He has now been at war longer than Mr. Bush, or any other American president. If the United States remains in combat in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria until the end of Mr. Obama’s term — a near-certainty given the president’s recent announcement that he will send 250 additional Special Operations forces to Syria — he will leave behind an improbable legacy as the only president in American history to serve two complete terms with the nation at war. Mr. Obama, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 and spent his years in the White House trying to fulfill the promises he made as an antiwar candidate, would have a longer tour of duty as a wartime president than Franklin D. Roosevelt, Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard M. Nixon or his hero Abraham Lincoln. What you got to say now Jacoby ? Side: True
|
