CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:155
Arguments:73
Total Votes:192
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
  (73)

Debate Creator

MKIced(2510) pic



What we hate about Obama...

What do you hate about Obama, specifically? Please no spam, racism, etc.

 

Love Obama? Comment on the other debate: http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/What_we_love_about_Obama

Add New Argument

The more the state does for the citizens, the more government bureaucracies are required to do the task and the more money the citizens need to pay in taxes in order to support such bureaucracies. These bureaucracies are not efficient and they are normally designed to help a specific group in society and sometimes ends up hurting another group.

Obama is not reducing the size of government bureaucracies. Forget about eliminating them. And that's what I hate about all presidents.

Side: doesn't reduce the size of bureaucracies
jessald(1915) Disputed
4 points

Yes it's inefficient, but there are some problems that only government can address. For example: global warming, medical care and education for the poor, national defense, law enforcement, social security, etc.

How would you solve these problems? Pixie dust? Ignore them and hope that go away? Most small government "solutions" involve a combination of both.

Side: doesn't reduce the size of bureaucracies
MKIced(2510) Disputed
1 point

I kind of like the pixie dust solution. I've always been intrigued by magic. :)

Side: doesn't reduce the size of bureaucracies
dtrimble(32) Disputed
0 points

Global warming....please its still a myth. The globe is always warming and cooling and there is NO positive proof that we are doing it harm. The amount of money and control they want us to throw at it is just plain irresponsible. (ducking my head from all the greenies throwing insults my way)

While it is obvious that there are some who do not have adequate health care who ever said it should be free? Why must we continue to make those that do have health care give up what they have so all of us can have less health care? The founders by and large were strictly against the Federal Government being involved in charity.

The poor already have access to education. They just have to WANT it enough to go get it. My wife was not born with a silver spoon in her mouth. She worked two part time jobs, and joined the Army Reserve to pay for her education. Took her 5 years to graduate but I dint ever recall he asking for a freebie. She got her degree and owed NO money when she was finished. People will only respect what they have earned.

It goes without saying that National Defense MUST be a top priority. Peace comes from strength. It is actually one of the few things that the Constitution specifically assigns to the Federal Government.

Law enforcement is a LOCAL issue. Deal with it there. We should all ck out the 10th Amendment "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Social Security has never been social nor secure. The system was doomed to fail the moment the government decided to pay benefits to people who never paid in one dime.

It is only a matter of time before the system collapses.

Side: Socialist
3 points

Personally, I don't like that he seems greedy. The stimulus bill for cripes sake, was ginormous. And I'm pretty appalled that the last goal in the Governments minds is to get this country out of damn debt. It's serious bad role modeling.

Side: Socialist
Pineapple(1448) Disputed
2 points

Yeah. He pocketed all that money (sarcasm).

That is not the last goal in Government. He already has a strict plan to repay that debt....

Or would you prefer we let the situation escalate to a depression before we do anything about our economy?

Side: Socialist
dtrimble(32) Disputed
2 points

Progressives interfered with the economy by passing destructive policies back in the thirties that turned A depression into THE GREAT depression...which by the way kept over 20% of the people in the US out of work for years?

Even FDR admitted that it was NOT the New Deal that "repaired" the economy...it was , in his opinion, the war.

Wouldnt it make sense that if politicians actually knew anything about economies then wouldn't that be the end of depressions?

Side: Socialist
xaeon(1093) Disputed
2 points

Keynesian economics is a tried and tested method of fighting against a recession. They're taking a short term hit to get the country out of recession and have a much better chance of paying back that debt.

Without a massive injection of public funding, recession will become depression and you'll find your country being in a much worse position then it currently is. Greed has absolutely nothing to do with.

Supporting Evidence: Wiki: Keynesian Economics (en.wikipedia.org)
Side: Socialist
dtrimble(32) Disputed
1 point

Is Wiki really a valid place to get info considering that it is created on opinion as much as it is fact?

There are as many legitimate arguments against Keynesian economics as there is for.

Side: Socialist
ledhead818(637) Disputed
1 point

In a recession that really should be the last goal. Cutting spending during a recession will deepen it

Side: nothing
dtrimble(32) Disputed
1 point

"...In a recession that really should be the last goal. Cutting spending during a recession will deepen it"

but isnt that only true when that economy is based on spending instead of producing?

Compare the USA economy just before WW1 and China's current economy. The similarities are down right scary!

Side: Socialist

Let see, we have:

Federal control of ALL water, surrounding land, activities, (US Senate Bill 787 called the Clean Water Restoration Act)

Federal control of ALL food, (HR 2749)

Federal control of ALL electronic Communications, (Senate bills No. 773 and 778 both part of what's being called the Cybersecurity Act of 2009)

Federal control of ALL media, (Fairness Doctrine, others)

Federal control of weapons (the Blair Holt bill, the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009)

Multiple cases of attempting to classify dissent as terrorism or extremism (DoD training, DHS memo, Missouri State Police memo)

Side: loss of liberties
2 points

He's as close to a socialist as it gets

-Joe Lieberman

Side: Socialist
1 point

The one thing I ahte about him is that he has taken over GM and then put a man in charge that knows nothing about cars. That is just one thing. Did I mention that he is a socialist?

Side: Socialist
Pineapple(1448) Disputed
3 points

I keep hearing "he's a socialist." How is he a socialist?

He's as socialist as Canada, tops.

Side: Socialist
5 points

One of the major problems here is that many of the people who throw the label of socialist around don't actually understand what socialism is, and instead of making up their own minds about his position on a certain political ideology, they simply repeat tried and tested conservative rhetoric.

People forget that the society we have now is heavily influenced by socialist as well as capitalist ideology.

Side: nothing
dtrimble(32) Disputed
2 points

Well where should we start?

Take from haves and give to have nots (spread the wealth..sound familiar? "..from each his ability. To each their need?)

Control of salaries.

Cancel contracts.

ACORN (nuff said)

Nationalization of Industry and Banks

16 Czars (The removal of over-site by Congress. Anyone here ever here of checks and balances?)

I know that past Presidents have done some of the same, I don't argue that...that makes them no better so don't bother with that argument. They were wrong as well and just as guilty.

Its the scale and scope of what he is doing that is so troubling.

In 100 days he has, with the help of Congress, run up more debt than all the previous Presidents COMBINED!! Thats over 200 years of Presidents people.

We could go on for ever here but I think that this is enough to at least make a small point. There is no doubt that Obama is a Socialist at heart, regardless of how bad we in the United States would like to think that we would never go that way here.

BTW He is not the 1st Socialist elected here in the States...just the latest.

Side: Socialist
1 point

Nothing really well I'm from Aus so i don't really get the news about obama but from what i have heard it sounds like he is a good prime-inister and a good person.

Side: nothing
Tugman(749) Disputed
1 point

That is not true. He is turning the US into a socialist state as well as ruining it for the future generations who will be paying for the trillion dollars he is using to help the economy that needs less taxes and less government intervention.

Side: Socialist
1 point

As is with everything sir it depends where you get your info!

Side: Socialist
1 point

I am not a big fan of any change that he is trying to make in our healthcare system. For as long as I could remember, I've found human anatomy and physiology to be the most interesting topics out there and I love almost everything biology. I loved them all so much that my plan for life was to go into medicine and hopefully become a doctor. The problem is that medical school and 4 years of undergrad college would easily run me upwards of $300,000 in student loans! I've always seen this as worth it because doctors are supposed to make a lot of money, which would pay this off and help them to raise families, etc. Note: I am not a very greedy person. But his healthcare reforms would make being a doctor out of the question!

His reforms would require that all patients be seen, even if they don't have insurance. The patients without insurance would thus cause physicians to take a hit because who else would pay for that? This would mean that doctors would have to deal with so many patients that they are not even getting paid for. I see this as a waste of time, no offense, because being a physician and going to college for 8 difficult years means this man or woman deserves to get paid. So in a sense, Obama's policies have caused me to think twice about my life choices and reevaluate my dream. I think any president that does this to me, in reference to any dreams I have, is a bad president by my book. Say what you will about loving him, but I just can't stand him.

Side: healthcare reform
xaeon(1093) Disputed
4 points

The fact that you're against universal healthcare because you want to make lots of money as a doctor is quite possibly the most selfish thing I've ever heard, not to mention totally and utterly wrong. NHS doctors in the UK (a socialist healthcare system which is ranked 19 places above the US healthcare system [source]) are some of the most well paid people in the country, earning an average wage of £110,000 ($180,000) per year [source], with senior consultants being able to earn £180,000 ($290,000) [source]. So, essentially, the whole premise of the argument made here is false. But, you know, don't let facts get in the way of your unsubstantiated two minute hate.

"His reforms would require that all patients be seen, even if they don't have insurance. The patients without insurance would thus cause physicians to take a hit because who else would pay for that?"

Uhm, the state would pay. That's the whole point.

Side: nothing
dtrimble(32) Disputed
2 points

And who do you think "the State" is?

The "State" is comprised of the Citizens of the United States. Government has no ability to pay anything that it does not first TAKE from the Citizens as it is a completely non productive entity.

All purchases made by the "State" are third party in nature. That is they are purchases made with money that does not belong to them on items and services they will not use and therefore very inefficient.

Side: Socialist
MKIced(2510) Disputed
1 point

You clearly misread the argument. I want to become a doctor to save lives but I also realize that I need money to live a comfortable life. I will NOT go to college for 8 years and rack up $300,000+ in student loans to give out free medicine. If I become a doctor I need the money to pay off loans and to raise the family I hope to have. So don't give me that sh*t.

Side: healthcare reform
Tugman(749) Disputed
1 point

The problem is that the taxpayers pay doctors 180,000 dollars whether they have patients or not. You should be paid on what you do not what some bureaucrat thinks. This is not the UK, the US has four to five times the population as the UK, thus more people needing healthcare.

Side: Socialist
jessald(1915) Disputed
2 points

"$300,000 in student loans"

Really? That's insane. The government should invest in the education of its citizens. We would all be better off.

Side: Socialist
2 points

In an ideal world, yes it should. But that would be really expensive and we're in too much debt as it is. I don't think the government can fund universal health care, college education, and everything else without collapsing. But I wish it did. :)

I'm just estimating that figure based on a $25,000/year undergrad degree and a $200,000 med school cost. Seems legitimate enough, although I'd probably have even more than that. My undergrad school, with scholarship, is $35,000/year... :|

Side: Socialist
1 point

Another thing I really don't like about him is how he's pulling out of Iraq completely. I understand that the Iraqis need to become responsible for themselves and I understand that we don't need such a large army over there, but I still think we need to be there a little bit. Regardless of anything you say, I feel very unsafe with this decision, especially living close to New York, Philadelphia, and Washington D.C. (among other big cities). It's only the first place any terrorist would attack. :|

Side: war on terror
3 points

He has yet to remove anyone, what he has said and what he has done, are two completely different things. He may say the best thing is withdrawal, but he has to do anything but deploy more troops.

Side: war on terror
MKIced(2510) Disputed
1 point

He's already set a date to leave. So unless he's a liar or something drastic happens, they have already been sentenced to leave.

Supporting Evidence: Obama sets a date. (www.msnbc.msn.com)
Side: war on terror
1 point

He is very very successful and has made it to the top. (I don't know the exact history of how he became that successful. But I know that he has.)

Yet he tells people that Government is the only answer. That you can't make it on your own. He doesn't talk about hard work. He focuses on the weak points in america to sell his big government pitch.

I also don't like his ears.

Side: entitlement and big government
4 points

Here is where I have an issue with almost all the critics of Obama. Just because the guy wants to slightly increase taxes on the rich, and lower taxes on the working class, means that somehow he is devaluing hard work?

How?

Because he's making it slightly easier to climb the latter? Because he has some empathy for the people who have to work two jobs just so that they can decide whether they want to send their kids to college, pay the rent, or pay health insurance? (True story by the way, the guy chose his kids and couldn't afford insulin). If anything he's making the American dream more accessible...he's making America into exactly what we've all claimed that it is for the last 200 years.

As you said, Obama became successful, and started from almost nothing. He had to work his way up to the top, and did a great job of it. You would think that this would convince him that the system works, but he's smarter then that. He knows that for every one story like his, there are thousands of stories of people who worked equally as hard, but for some reason beyond there own control, couldn't reach the same level of success. He also knows that we can't abandon those people, or right them off as lazy or undeserving of basic human rights.

Tell me one time Obama said "you can't make it on your own" or that "government is the only answer."

What is your fear Jake? Doctors will still make more than waiters. The system is still going to be based on capitalism...but capitalism alone doesn't work. No system that puts the vast majority of the wealth in the hands of a small minority of people ever works. When people can't survive they turn to crime and violence. Look at Mexico. Look at almost all of Africa. There nations have vast natural resources, but the people are seeing none of it.

If you don't fix the disparity of wealth, then a society cannot function.

Side: nothing
Tugman(749) Disputed
2 points

He raises taxes on households that make 250,000 dollars a year or more. People you make that much money usually work there asses off. My mother works 8 to 10 hours every day, and makes less than 100,000 a year and pays 50 percent taxes. The way to stop this economic crisis is by letting people keep their money and use it to stimulate the economy.

Side: Socialist
2 points

I agree with the american dream, but not everyone can live the "american dream." If everyone was living the american dream, we wouldnt have people doing ordinary but needed jobs. Fixing disparity doesnt have to come from the wealthy, there is no need for these rise in taxes, if Obama took troops out of the middle east,like he promised, it wouldnt require the billions of dollars for funding, which can go toward other things.

Side: nothing
JakeJ(3255) Disputed
1 point

The flaw you have is that you think it's the governments job to help people financially. It's not, that's our job, weather it's us or our neighbor. Of course people need help! Are you saying it's better to have the government involved in charity rather than the people?

Side: entitlement and big government
2 points

"I also don't like his ears."

lol. Every president has some exaggerated aspect. :)

Side: entitlement and big government
jessald(1915) Disputed
1 point

He never says any of those things. In fact he often says that government is not the only answer. He talks about working hard in every other speech. Maybe you should look at some of the things he has actually said, instead of just the out of context sound-bites Rush Limbaugh and friends want you to hear.

A New Foundation for Growth
Side: entitlement and big government
dtrimble(32) Disputed
0 points

If there is ANYTHING we should have learned by now about Obama is that any thing he says will be diametrically opposite from what he does

Side: Socialist
1 point

from what Ive heard everyone's talking about what obama wants to do(little of what he is already doing). obama has made promises on his campaign and boy did he promise alot, He promised an end to NAFTA, criticizing it, calling it a mistake. after his inauguration his story changed, he endorsed it. DOES ANYONE KNOW WHERE THE MONEY FROM THE STIMULUS PACKAGE GO? The reason why this "president" is in office is because hes charismatic and a hell of an actor, did you see how many people cried when he was elected, how many smiles and hopes people had, and how many promises he broke. In his inauguration speech he kept blaming us the American people for the recession, i beg to differ. I picked up the newspaper, Headlined: First Black President, but when will it say the first good president. we've had a few great presidents JFK and Lincoln to name a few but we all know what happened to them.

some of you will not believe me and thats okay, but if some do believe than look up the obama deception on you tube.

Obama Deception
Side: Broken Promises
iamdavidh(4856) Disputed
1 point

LMAO,

wow, you're a regular conspirator aren't you?

Don't worry though, I have biggy and tupak hanging out in my basement, we're currently disecting bigfoot, aliens actually assassinated jfk because he threatened to make area 51 public, and I'm a magical unicorn writing this with my hoofs.

Side: nothing

What I "love" is that, he had promised during his campaign that he would remove troops from the middle east, that was one of his main vocal points. During Bush's presidency nobody would shut up how Bush keeps sending troops and funding this war, but since Obamas presidency has started, he hasn't removed any troops, but deployed more, but you have nobody complaining about that. Thats what I "love" about him, you don't really hear anything from the democratic public about what he needs to do better, because he has a lot of them in a trance because they are still so awed at how he has overcome such diversity, blah blah blah, I could care less is our president is purple, who cares about the color of his skin, and if you vote for him because of his promises, fine, but if you vote for him because the color of his skin, the american public doesnt deserve the right to vote. I hate that he isnt being held accountable for his "promises" that he delivered during his campaign trail. I guess all the presidential election is, is telling the american public what they want to hear, even if you have no plan on carrying it out.

Side: Broken Promises
jessald(1915) Disputed
1 point

He said he would end the war and bring our troops home after consulting with the generals in Iraq. He has done that and has since created a timetable for bringing the troops back.

One reason for not bringing them back immediately is the success of the surge. Before the surge Iraq looked like a hopeless case. But after the surge, violence levels dropped sharply and a stable, democratic Iraq became a real possibility.

No I'm not defending the war -- I think it was a big mistake -- but the fact is we've come so close and it makes sense to see it through.

Side: Broken Promises
1 point

"He's a socialist"...

Seriously. I don't know if I should laugh or cry. Where do you get your facts? Have you ever met one?

I'm surrounded by socialists every day and for the most part they're good people. In my opinion so is Obama. But he IS NOT a socialist.

At last tourists from USA won't have to say they're from Canada.

Side: Broken Promises
jtopolnak(158) Disputed
1 point

Read my comment below and definition. We are quickly moving that way. Adding to the industries and ownership that Government has which is the definition of Socialism. The more obvious one that people forget is property tax. if you pay off your home and own it scott free you will always have property tax and if you don't pay that even though you have paid off your land and home government will take it away from you. That by the way is Communism. Simple def of Communism state owned always. So there you go.

Side: Broken Promises
1 point

I dont' hate Obama he's a likeable guy i think that away from it all he is probably pretty cool to hang out with even though he may be a radical. i would love to play a round of golf with him. i can say that i hate Nancy Pelosi and it's scary to think that she is third in line to be President. Obama policies I hate but not the person.

Side: Broken Promises