CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:65
Arguments:45
Total Votes:79
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
  (45)

Debate Creator

altarion(1955) pic



Obama - Realized Liar

What promises did Obama make that you supported that he has not come through with yet that he should have done a long time ago?

Add New Argument
3 points

i think the promises that he went will hurt me more than the ones he broke.

Closing down Gitmo and going against the Bush anti-terror method puts me and my family in danger. Not to mention the troops, who some are personal friends of mine, have to fight with their dicks in their hands because of so many restrictions (due to the Geneva Convention) and the fact that so many Gitmo detainees have been released (which many are already caught shooting at our troops again).

so, for putting some of my friends in harms way, i'm more pissed at him keeping his promise.

Side: Harming the Troops
JakeJ(3254) Disputed
2 points

Yeah hgrey is right, how dare you have an opinion based on the safety of your family and friends, are you serious? what is wrong with you!?

Side: Sarcasm
1 point

Your friends' selfless and noble contributions to our country aside, I have a feeling that they may have a more favorable opinion of the Geneva Convention if they were the ones, say, being held captive. Let's remember that this is not the first conflict to have been fought under the application of the Geneva Convention.

Side: Short of three months in office
ThePyg(6737) Disputed
2 points

Trust me, soldiers captured by the Taliban or al-Qaeda have much more to worry about than water boarding. yes, it would be great if we could go by war rules, but guess what, the enemy doesn't go by these rules. They're much worse than we can possibly imagine (our guys come back in pieces).

if the enemy decided to fight a gentleman's war, than i can accept the Geneva Convention. But they don't, and we can't even be as evil as they are in treatment of the enemy. hell, they torture their own people for God's Sake.

Side: Harming the Troops
HGrey87(750) Disputed
0 points

Are you seriously trying to argue against the Geneva Convention? What's wrong with you?

Side: Harming the Troops
ThePyg(6737) Disputed
1 point

i don't know. what was wrong with the abolitionists when they argued against popular sovereignty?

what was wrong Plato who argued against majority rule since it resulted in the death of his teacher?

Side: Harming the Troops
2 points

Obama has let me down. I didn't think he would do everything he said, in fact i was skeptical that he would not follow through on a lot of his promises that got him the votes, especially from the grass roots population. To see obama actually going agaist what he said he would do, instead of just ignoring it like i thought he would, is very depressing. All i hope is that, due to the poor economy he has had to realocate resources and will return to his promises after the economy picks up again.

Side: Harming the Troops
1 point

He promised to fill up my car with petroleum fuel and yet my Expedition is still sitting in my driveway with more than 3/4 of an empty tank! That liar needs to come and fill up my car's fuel tank!

Side: Fuel Tank
2 points

Are you a pessimist? Haha. You said "3/4 of an empty tank". I would've said "1/4 of a full tank." But I'm an optimistic guy. :D

Side: Fuel Tank
1 point

I'm not a pessimist, I just wanted to emphasize that it is empty and not full and that Obama is lieing to me! (;

Side: Fuel Tank
1 point

Unrealized Potential?

In my judgment you missed the mark once, and hit it the second try.

Missed- unrealized potential

Hit- realized liar

Side: a liar before the start
1 point

So what do you think? Should I change the title of this debate to "Obama - Realized Liar"? I bet that would attract a lot of people to this debate! (;

Side: a liar before the start
1 point

At this point most intelligent people know that he is better at running for than he is at being the President. But most are too biased to realize or admit it.

Watch, before you know it, this debate will be filled with the "give him time, he just started" argument. Well we don't have time for that!

This country can't afford Barack Obama.

Side: cant afford it
3 points

And certainly, I would be one of those while you are one of the others. What can he do in such a short time with so much to overcome? Bush put this country in the deepest of black holes so there will be many others who think as I do and say give him time. I do not believe John McCain and Sarah Palin would be anywhere near where President Obama is today. He is trying to tackle and address so many things at once, give the guy a chance. It's not been 3 months but close to it.

Tell me you're not biased Jake. That is really an unfair statement to all who believe in him. We're no dummies by any stretch and I for one will put him down hard if needs be...but not at this point! I think you want too much too soon.

Side: Short of three months in office
1 point

He has not been in office a long time yet for it to be a long time ago!

Side: Short of three months in office
altarion(1955) Disputed
2 points

I think that three months is long enough to make an attempt at going around filling up people's fuel tanks. I mean, if I had heard that he was starting in D.C. and making his way to California then I'd be somewhat content, but I have heard no such news so I feel that it has been long enough to call him a liar in that aspect.

(;

Side: Fuel Tank

This is my only comment....Obama has been in office for less than 4 months. Done.

Side: Fuel Tank
JakeJ(3254) Disputed
1 point

Yeah, I'm sure you didn't criticize Bush when he was only in office for 4 months. I'm sure you didn't have a lot to comment on then.

Side: Fuel Tank
1 point

Actually, I didn't. And as any person who knows politics understands, the presidential role is minor to that of congress.

Side: Fuel Tank
-1 points

Even if he doesn't do a thing he promised, he's already way better than the last guy.

That said, both are human shitstains.

Side: cant afford it
JakeJ(3254) Disputed
1 point

That is a very weak argument.

What if he did a worse job than bush, would he still be better in your judgment?

You didn't add any reasoning. How is he already better?

Your bias is showing.

Side: cant afford it
HGrey87(750) Disputed
1 point

Because it wasn't an argument, it was an opinion. That doesn't quite belong on this site, so I can't complain that I was voted down.

I won't start to list the reasons I hate George WarCriminal Bush-- the gaping chasm of reason between his detractors and supporters prevents any effective dialogue. The main reason I like Obama relatively is that at least he's reversed some of the mistakes of the past decade. I don't like either because they're both fundamentally the same.

What do you mean by the bias comment? Bias isn't objectionable in a private citizen's opinions. Seems genitals aren't the only things everyone has that you Righties want people to be ashamed of ;)

Side: cant afford it