No

^Are you referring to OP or myself?

Well, No simply for the fact I'm a born and raised corn-fed Midwestern Republican.
-I think (hope) he has the best interests in America, again I been raised on Nigel Farage, Jefferson, and Eisenhower. (Yet, I do have a soft spot for Wilson)

-I dislike his Mid Eastern Policies (Palestine comes to mind; If I was a head of state I would regonize Palestine but, that's another story) It seems no President of my life has yet to learn anything about the Middle East, read the Quran, or have sort of meanfully open mindness.

-I hate that I haven't even graduated high school yet and in theory I'm in debt. Then again the Maya calender ends before I grad possibly my worries mean nothing.

-My pet peeve is not usually against Obama (yet he does present quite a target) is usually the Senate which I find...distessing.

"It seems no President of my life has yet to learn anything about the Middle East, read the Quran, or have sort of meanfully open mindness. "

I'm fairly certain Obama has read the Qu'ran (or parts of it at least), although I imagine there would be no public admission of this due to domestic political concerns, of course. Remember he spent several years of his childhood in Indonesia (a predominantly Muslim country), and both his father and stepfather were both Muslims.

Of course, this has amounted to exactly squat in Obama's foreign policy. But what, really, can you expect? The president is really just a figurehead at this point.

hurr, has anyone seen Obama's birth certificate?

Haven't seen it myself personally, but to be honest, I couldn't care less about it.

Yes Minister has a great euphemism for politicians like Obama; "courageous". He enacted policies that actually do stuff, and doing stuff is the best way to lose votes. In the states there are three surefire way to make sure you get crucified at the polls. Invest public money in the economy. Spend in order to improve infrastructure. And three, the worst of all, the cardinal sin, pass legislation that requires people to do something good for them. No right is as important to Americans as their right to neglect their own health and safety, and to leave their own well being to the depredations of the market. And sadly I have to say Obama has done all of those things. In any other country he'd be the best leader in decades. But in the USA sadly he gets a passing grade.
Sorry to any Americans who find this post needlessly harsh. It's just following your politics gives me headaches, and I'm taking it out on you.

Errr wow. that one sentence should read "But in the USA sadly he gets a <failing> grade."

@ Mafialligator

We give him (at least I do) a failing grade because he is spending money that the United States does not have. We may be a bunch of dumb backwards knuckle-dragging gun-toting rednecks, but we do value individual liberties. Personally, I do not want the government providing for my healthcare. I value the freedom to choose (or neglect) my healthcare to fit my needs as an individual, and I pay less taxes as a result.

The thing with arguments that like "Oh spending is bad because it increases the national debt" is that it's something of a canard. Most people don't actually know what increasing the national debt does, they just know it's bad. So anything that increases the national debt is automatically a bad idea, because you know, debt, and stuff...uhhh...yeah, not good. And yes, you may pay less taxes, but really, it's more important to protect your freedom not to have health care if you want, over and above making sure that your health will always be provided for? I suppose you and I just have different priorities, but that seems a little skewed to me. The right not to have healthcare if you don't want it is pretty meaningless, actually having a doctor when you need one is not.

Support. Especially when you look at the group of republican contenders, which if I had to say, is a joke.

-The stimulus that Obama and Congress passed kept the economy from spiraling into another Great Depression, even showing relatively small growth in the past two years. So, anyone saying that he fucked up the economy by passing the stimulus bill are need to look at the facts.

-Passed a badly needed credit card reform bill that protects the consumers.

-Passed health insurance reform that's needed in a country that has 40 million plus people without even basic health insurance and where HMO's have commited horrid abuses to its costumers.

-Has a sensible and rightly progressive foreign policy. However, Obama needs to put a lot more pressure on Syria and other Middle Eastern nations that choose to murder their own citizens. It's human lives, people.

-Supports the DREAM Act which provides for immigration reform.

-Added much needed regulations that reigned in Wall Street's blatant frauds and abuses to Main Street. (The crash of 2008 is what happens when you let the market do as it pleases with no accountability.)

All in all, he's done a very good job considering the disaster of an economy Bush left him with and a toxic political environment that he has to put up with.

"No right is as important to Americans as their right to neglect their own health and safety, and to leave their own well being to the depredations of the market."

That's an unfortunate reality of the American mentality.

"No right is as important to Americans as their right to neglect their own health and safety, and to leave their own well being to the depredations of the market. And sadly I have to say Obama has done all of those things. In any other country he'd be the best leader in decades. But in the USA sadly he gets a passing grade.
Sorry to any Americans who find this post needlessly harsh. It's just following your politics gives me headaches, and I'm taking it out on you."

If webdip debates were Mortal Kombat, I'd call this a Fatality. Well said.

@ Mafia

No. It is not about the freedom to neglect your health. It is the freedom to protect your health as much or as little as you want, and also the knowledge that your tax dollars didn't just buy a dental checkup for a welfare-suckling deadbeat.

"So anything that increases the national debt is automatically a bad idea, because you know, debt, and stuff...uhhh...yeah, not good."

Anything that increases the national debt had better be worthwhile. Most things that increase the debt are bad. What's wrong with that mentality? That mentality keeps you out of trouble. Any financially successful person who has ever lived will tell you that debt is generally bad.

@ StevenC.

I'm going to counter you point by point.

-The negative effect on the national debt outweighed any positive economic benefit.

-Credit reform bill does little to protect consumers.

-Passed a wasteful, ineffective health reform bill that only worsens the current system. Health care is not a right in America.

-I agree that Obama needs to put more pressure on Syria et al. However, I would not call his foreign policy sensible or progressive.

-We have an existing system for legal residency and naturalization. The DREAM Act would reward criminals for committing a crime, which is NOT an American ideal.

-The regulations only slow growth and recovery. The new regulations do very little to protect "Main Street". You cannot blame the crash of 2008 on a lack of accountability on Wall Street.

-You cannot blame the crash on Bush. The President is not omnipotent. He cannot simply foresee and stop economic crashes. Like a natural disaster, sometimes things just go bad.

"No right is as important to Americans as their right to neglect their own health and safety, and to leave their own well being to the depredations of the market."

That is completely false. The most important right is the right to bear arms.

kudos to gunfighter! almost. that's number two. number one is freedom of speech.

"The most important right is the right to bear arms."

Thank you for buttressing Mafia's point.

"Anything that increases the national debt had better be worthwhile. Most things that increase the debt are bad. What's wrong with that mentality?" - OK then, if you mean that, make cuts in military spending.

To respond to gunfighters responses to steven's points one by one.
"-The negative effect on the national debt outweighed any positive economic benefit." - Umm no. The US economy completely collapsing, as it almost certainly would have done without the stimulus package, would have made the national debt more insurmountable than the increase in the debt caused by actually spending it.

- I actually don't know about credit reform.

- Healthcare is not a right anywhere until you make it one. nothing is a right anywhere until you make it one. What the hell does that even mean. Secondly, I agree the health care plan passed by Obama was not ideal. That said, it was about all the republicans would allow him to pass, because they had poisoned the well so much against any other, more comprehensive form of universal health care. And even now they're screaming blue murder. That said, in every single other country where universal health care systems exist (in spite of the problems some of them have) you do see an increase not only in general health of the population, it also turns out to be good for the economy in the long run. As it happens, a workforce who's health is provided for is good for the economy.

- You may not call it sensible or progressive, but those words could be applied with more justice to Obama's foreign policy than to any other administration in living memory.

- Obviously the existing system of legal residency and naturalization is inadequate or illegal immigration would not be such a big problem. (Spoiler alert, it's actually not.) Nevertheless the American immigration system is labyrinthine and arbitrary and a little racist. Immigrating to the US is actually exceptionally difficult. Illegal immigration is a crime, but perhaps understanding WHY people feel it is necessary would be a good way to tackle the issue? Get to the heart of the matter, that sort of thing?

- Your statements on banking regulations are patently false. If you look at the G8 or the OECD you'll find the countries that did have more banking regulation are suffering much less in this downturn than the US. In fact it is a well known fact that existing banking regulations have helped Canada come through relatively unscathed.

- Just because Bush could not foresee the economic crash that doesn't mean he is in no way responsible for it. No one can foresee anything. But that does not absolve us from wrongdoing forever. Sure accidents happen, but when there's no system which can adequately handle a disaster, moreover a disaster that has precedent, there is some blame to go around.

@ Mafialligator

I'm on my way to work as I type this, so I'll address your first point and get back to the other points later today.

Military spending increases the national debt, but military spending is the best investment the American government could ever make. Military spending creates jobs, infrastructure, and security. When I am filing my taxes, I like to tell myself that my tax dollars bought ammunition for our soldiers. (sorry for the little anecdote, but I felt it was necessary)

@ JakeBob

I would argue that the right to bear arms is more important than freedom of speech. If the government took away free speech, you would not be able to resist unless you had the right to bear arms. The right to bear arms protects all of your other rights from the government.

@ Gunfighter - So Military spending is ultimately good, because of the infrastructure and economic bonuses but stimulus packages which prevent the economy from collapsing, and direct investment in infrastructure are bad...?

Secondly that argument is extremely problematic. It appears that military spending is good for the economy but really, it just becomes a runaway expense. The Military-Industrial complex has become this massive, sprawling machine that stimulates growth only within, and for itself. Investment in the military is this black hole, it would be more effective to shovel money down a pit, because you have to constantly invest more and more in it, and ultimately it never pays out on the investment you put in.

Also I find your response to JakeBob laughable. A bunch of rednecks with shotguns are not going to be able to rise against the government effectively. That's ridiculous, and a complete fantasy, though I don't know what else I thought I was expecting from someone called "Gunfighter". Secondly, as I've said thousands of times, other countries which do not maintain a right to bear arms are not these Orwellian dictatorships where rights are virtually non-existent. Your rights are protected by a constitution and checks and balances existing between the legislative, executive and judicial branches of the government, not by guns.

Also, isn't it funny you say that things which increase the national debt must be worth it, and then you get to judge what is "worth it" and find that only right wing sacred cows are important enough to be worth increasing the national debt over?

"Military spending creates jobs, infrastructure, and security. When I am filing my taxes, I like to tell myself that my tax dollars bought ammunition for our soldiers."

You keep telling yourself military spending is good for the economy. It isn't. Military equipment is damn expensive. Single aircraft or tanks cost tens of millions of dollars, that's not including maintenance costs. ICM rounds are around ten times more expensive than normal HE shells. Ammunition generally doesn't last more than thirty days, meaning stocks must be continually replaced. So you have all this heavy spending on goods that aren't very productive and won't contribute to the economy. But you know, shooting people overseas is much more important than keeping people at home alive.

If people want to let their health waste away while doing nothing about it, and NOT have health insurance, then I have no problem with that. BUT, then hospitals should be allowed to deny those people treatment when they are inevitably wheeled into the ER suffering a massive heart attack / stroke. But currently hospitals are NOT allowed to do this. They must treat such patients, even though they are not paying into the system. And herein lies the problem. I'm not trying to say that socialized medicine is the magical answer to everything. What I am saying is that in this country we have all the downsides of socialized medicine (hospitals must treat uninsured) without any of the benefits. (And please don't try to say there are no benefits. The "List of countries by life expectancy" article on Wikipedia would beg to differ).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezcr18NTOtA

enuff said.

@max
my health insurance premiums recently doubled. don't tell me we already had all the downsides.

@ Mafialligator

"So Military spending is ultimately good, because of the infrastructure and economic bonuses but stimulus packages which prevent the economy from collapsing, and direct investment in infrastructure are bad...?"

In a word, yes. Direct investments in infrastructure aren't what they once were. Because of the increased mechanization of construction, less humans are working, which does not stimulate the economy as much as FDR's New Deal did. However, investing in the military gives us safety, security, and the priceless ability to project power around the world.

"It appears that military spending is good for the economy but really, it just becomes a runaway expense."

That's a moot point. Everything the government spends money on becomes a runaway expense. That's why we have a big national debt.

"The Military-Industrial complex has become this massive, sprawling machine that stimulates growth only within, and for itself."

So? Growth is growth, and growth means jobs.

"A bunch of rednecks with shotguns are not going to be able to rise against the government effectively."

First of all, don't stereotype gun owners as "rednecks with shotguns". I am a gun owner. I do not own a shotgun, and I am not a redneck. Second, an armed revolt against an oppressive government (even if the "armed" is just hunting rifles, shotguns, and pistols) is more likely to be successful than an unarmed revolt.

"as I've said thousands of times, other countries which do not maintain a right to bear arms are not these Orwellian dictatorships where rights are virtually non-existent. Your rights are protected by a constitution and checks and balances existing between the legislative, executive and judicial branches of the government, not by guns."

If those countries without a right to bear arms wanted to oppress their people and didn't really give a damn about other rights, there would be nothing between the government and the people. My rights are insured by the Constitution, but if the government decides that the Constitution is no longer in effect, my guns (and everyone else's) serve as a failsafe.

"Also, isn't it funny you say that things which increase the national debt must be worth it, and then you get to judge what is "worth it" and find that only right wing sacred cows are important enough to be worth increasing the national debt over?"

The government's number one priority is to protect its citizens from external threats. The best way to do that is with a massive military. I would not call military spending a rightwing sacred cow because the left does not understand the government's top priority.

@ largeham

"You keep telling yourself military spending is good for the economy. It isn't. Military equipment is damn expensive."

So? The money stays in America. Let's say the government buys a F-22 fighter jet. The money goes to Lockheed Martin, which is an American company with American workers. The profit from the sale goes to the Lockheed Martin employees, who are American citizens. What's wrong with putting cash in the hands of Americans? If you cut military spending, some of those American citizens might lose their jobs, which means that the government would have to support them anyway, but we wouldn't get any F-22s out of the deal.

"shooting people overseas is much more important than keeping people at home alive."

Only some people at home need the government. If we don't shoot those people overseas, everyone at home is in danger.

@ Max_Fischer

I agree. That is one healthcare problem that needs to be solved.

Let no one ever say gunfighter is a deficit hawk who dislikes government waste. He's defending the epic boondoggle known as the F-22, because it provides jobs! That's probably the most inefficient use of taxpayer money in the history of the country, and it's being defended by a so-called 'conservative'.

Let no one ever say gunfighter is a deficit hawk who dislikes government waste. He's defending the epic boondoggle known as the F-22, because it provides jobs! That's probably the most inefficient use of taxpayer money in the history of the country, and it's being defended by a so-called 'conservative'.

lolol