Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I feel it is a good thing to have discussion. Every other administration seems to have had no problem with it. It is just that Team Obama seems to be affronted when everyone in their own party - plus everyone on the opposite side of the aisle - doesn't fall in line and march w/ the dictates of the administration.
I have found it most perplexing, frankly, that Obama feels no one is to oppose him. No administration has everyone who is in agreement with everything that is proposed.
So I agree with Hillary. Discussion is good.
What I don't understand is . . . why folks have made any sort of questioning or disagreement into something unthinkable. This IS a democratic republic last time I checked. I don't think any President has assumed that every policy or piece of legislation he introduced would be accepted without discussion. So why this President is prickly about the checks and balances that come with a two party system is kinda strange to me.
Which brings me to what Obama has failed at doing - gaining a consensus within his own party and at least some degree of consensus with the opposing party.
I have been saying, as well as a lot of people I talk to in my political circles, that I do not like the way this Administration wants to fix issues. I don't believe large government or federal solutions are the answer as well as deficit spending. These are the solutions that are going to be put forward by this Administration. So although I think he is doing a bad job as President (so would anyone else at this point), he hasn't failed, not yet. By the time this term is up, no one will remember what he said on the Gates incident.
Your view is obviously a valid one to hold, but is someone really doing a "bad job" if they are simply enacting policies that disagree with your ideology?
He said he was going to do precisely what he's doing, which is using the levers of government to fix problems created by a runaway free market.
Reagan emerged from an era of runaway government intervention and successfully loosened up the markets. I just see Obama coming in to do the same but from the other end - the end of an era of runaway market liberties that collapsed the economy in much the way liberalism did before Reagan. To me, the answer is balance and the tools Obama's using are necessary for this particular post-Reagan era period.
By the measures he set forth in his campaign, therefore, he is succeeding. I say this because you would have an issue with any Democrat in power because they, by their core ideology, see the need for a greater balance between government and markets.
Obama's been officially in office...what...6-7 months out of a 4 year term?
Yet all I hear, even on TV and entertainment shows is "Obama failed". I wasn't aware it was possible to fail before you even started, or that your failure can be rated when you're not done. That's like watching an Olympic swimming track and right when they jump in the water, say Phelps or whatever that one guy is, failed. Right after he jumped in and nowhere near the finish line. It's stupid.
Now, I don't necessarily agree with every policy that has been enacted, or how it has. I also note certain things that were different from when he was campaigning, but every President has told fibs...it's how these things roll. Even if Ron Paul got elected by some minor miracle it'd be the same thing. A lot of what Obama's administration is putting in place happen to be good, they just have negative ramifications that are not being considered (or are being disregarded wholeheartedly in favor of the 'greater good').
So...my question for you is this. Can you explain to me, respectfully to both me and the President, how exactly he has "failed" this early in the game? Meaning...what has you convinced that things won't improve in the next 3 and a half years?
Note: Any activity that every previous President has done, is not a valid response to the question. "He increased the deficit!!" for example, is not valid because the last 5 Presidents have all done the same thing.
I'd rather stay positive and list the things he's done right:
Gave money to the banks (that was going to happen regardless but I'll give it to him)
I'd rather stay positive and list the things he's done right:
Gave money to the banks (that was going to happen regardless but I'll give it to him)
That's all I got.
What you really mean to say...is that you can only think of one thing that you consider a good thing. Not that he's "done them right", but that he's done things you agree with. That's the big difference with the question I asked.
Because if we want to go along those veins, here are what I agree with:
- Payroll taxes on the employees did decrease. Not much, but they did decrease, which is a first in a long time.
- Some state and federal jobs were created with the stimulus money.
- High speed rail has come back on the radar after years of neglect.
- Cash for Clunkers, though a flawed program, is a step in the right direction for helping the environment.
- CARD Act, though will increase fees, is a step in the right direction against credit card abuses.
- Homeowner tax credit is a step in the right direction for first time home buyers.
I count a lot more positive actions. But that's because those are from my opinion. It has nothing to do with whether he is doing a "good" or "bad" job. Also, the commonality with all of those above is that each one has a downside, meaning they're not going to please everybody. But so far he hasn't done anything that is 100% evil or terrible, that I can see. About the worst thing he has done is go back on his word about transparency, concealing records from Guantanamo. It was expected - politicians make promises and always break them - but transparency was one that he could have solidified his legacy on, being the first president to be clear and candid with the people.
Mind you, I'm not trying to sway you. But my opinion is this: I know a lot of people think he's doing a bad job, and even more seem to think he somehow "failed", but isn't the idea of a good job vs. a bad job rather subjective? You can disagree with the choices he's made, of course. But what makes it a "bad" job? That we don't like those choices? To me that's more an issue of his political alignments than his presidential term. He's not the one making this stuff up as he goes, the Senate and the House are pushing it through. Yes, he's signing off on it, I know. But he's following the people underneath him and trusting their judgment.
To me the problem is the government as a whole. Labeling Obama as a fraud (not you, just saying), a failure, and doing a bad job is rather unfair.
Have you ever heard of Socialism, Facism or Communism?? I think that's really the concern, plain and simple. It's a frightening thing for real Americans.
I feel it is a good thing to have discussion. Every other administration seems to have had no problem with it. It is just that Team Obama seems to be affronted when everyone in their own party - plus everyone on the opposite side of the aisle - doesn't fall in line and march w/ the dictates of the administration.
I have found it most perplexing, frankly, that Obama feels no one is to oppose him. No administration has everyone who is in agreement with everything that is proposed.
So I agree with Hillary. Discussion is good.
What I don't understand is . . . why folks have made any sort of questioning or disagreement into something unthinkable. This IS a democratic republic last time I checked. I don't think any President has assumed that every policy or piece of legislation he introduced would be accepted without discussion. So why this President is prickly about the checks and balances that come with a two party system is kinda strange to me.
Which brings me to what Obama has failed at doing - gaining a consensus within his own party and at least some degree of consensus with the opposing party.
I think you're finally waking up to the carpet being pulled out from under you.
Your view is obviously a valid one to hold, but is someone really doing a "bad job" if they are simply enacting policies that disagree with your ideology?
He said he was going to do precisely what he's doing, which is using the levers of government to fix problems created by a runaway free market.
Reagan emerged from an era of runaway government intervention and successfully loosened up the markets. I just see Obama coming in to do the same but from the other end - the end of an era of runaway market liberties that collapsed the economy in much the way liberalism did before Reagan. To me, the answer is balance and the tools Obama's using are necessary for this particular post-Reagan era period.
By the measures he set forth in his campaign, therefore, he is succeeding. I say this because you would have an issue with any Democrat in power because they, by their core ideology, see the need for a greater balance between government and markets.
you're right, he is doing exactly what he said he was going to do. The problem is, the American people never in their life thought they'd be going down this road. Never in their lives. This country spent years of blood, sweat and tears fighting communism, it is insulting that this administration, and anyone else for that matter, feels that they can try and pull the wool over the eyes of the American People.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
