Can you give 5 policies from Obama that you liked, and 5 policies that you didn't...

[Billy000]

... like. Not only that, but can you support them with facts and/or sources? Let's face it: if you can't give all 10 policies, then you obviously do not have a balanced and informed viewpoint on Obama.

 

[WatertheTree]

Well I can list the dislikes. I am not going to find anything for you. Its your job to keep yourself informed not me. So far as what I like, nothing. He is a shitty president. He is a corporate liberal and he has done as much damage to the country as bush.

ok here we go
1) All the bailouts
2) Obamacare, which should be renamed to humanacare
3) Continued, never ending, perpetual war
4) No change in any policy, except for gifts to corporate america
5) Military action by executive order

That should sum it up. Cant wait for 2012 when we get the black bush the fuck out of the white house.

 

[Conservative]

... like. Not only that, but can you support them with facts and/or sources? Let's face it: if you can't give all 10 policies, then you obviously do not have a balanced and informed viewpoint on Obama.

So, if you cannot find 5 policies of the President that you agree with, you're not 'fair and balanced'? I disagree. People can find no policies they agree with, or agree with 10, without being a partisan hack.

It's not the agreement or disagreement with policy... it's the attitude it's presented with that makes someone a partisan hack.

 

[martybegan]

Not sure I can do 5 of each, but here it goes:

1. Boming Libya. Agreed. If anyone needed a tomahawk missile up the ass, it was quadaffi.

2. Obamacare: Disagree. Too much government intervention. If someone want to take a step towards universal health care, let a state try it first and see what happens.

3. Consumer Protection Agency. Disagree. Too many federalist issues, with duplication at the state level.

4. Dont ask, Dont tell repeal act. Agree. Military should take any non felon that is qualified for the job.

5. Keeping Gutanamo Open. Agree. Reality trumped politics.

6. Withdrawl from Iraq: Disagree. We've kept soliders in Germany and Japan for over 60 years, we should have kept some in Iraq as a trip wire to prevent Iran from getting frisky.

7. START treating: Mixed review: Overall concept is solid, but reducing warheads to TOO small an amount is more risky than having too many. Elimination of MAD is risky.

 

[Billy000]

Well I can list the dislikes. I am not going to find anything for you. Its your job to keep yourself informed not me. So far as what I like, nothing. He is a shitty president. He is a corporate liberal and he has done as much damage to the country as bush.

ok here we go
1) All the bailouts
2) Obamacare, which should be renamed to humanacare
3) Continued, never ending, perpetual war
4) No change in any policy, except for gifts to corporate america
5) Military action by executive order

That should sum it up. Cant wait for 2012 when we get the black bush the fuck out of the white house.

See, i think your post is evidence of the polarization and misinformation in politics of today. I bet you don't know anything about this country besides what you watch on Fox News and that is sad.

 

[Billy000]

... like. Not only that, but can you support them with facts and/or sources? Let's face it: if you can't give all 10 policies, then you obviously do not have a balanced and informed viewpoint on Obama.

So, if you cannot find 5 policies of the President that you agree with, you're not 'fair and balanced'? I disagree. People can find no policies they agree with, or agree with 10, without being a partisan hack.

It's not the agreement or disagreement with policy... it's the attitude it's presented with that makes someone a partisan hack.

I see your point, but there is always room for critical thinking on every political figure and issue. If you were to come up with 10 issues that you disliked about Obama and 5 that you did like, there would be nothing wrong with choosing a side based upon your research. But if you cannot come up with at least 5 things that Obama did right, then you are either willfully ignorant or you are very misinformed.

I didn't like Bush, for instance, but that doesn't mean that he didn't get some things right.

 

[Lakhota]

It's not the agreement or disagreement with policy... it's the attitude it's presented with that makes someone a partisan hack.

Holy shit, I must remember that.

 

[idb]

... like. Not only that, but can you support them with facts and/or sources? Let's face it: if you can't give all 10 policies, then you obviously do not have a balanced and informed viewpoint on Obama.

So, if you cannot find 5 policies of the President that you agree with, you're not 'fair and balanced'? I disagree. People can find no policies they agree with, or agree with 10, without being a partisan hack.

It's not the agreement or disagreement with policy... it's the attitude it's presented with that makes someone a partisan hack.

I see your point, but there is always room for critical thinking on every political figure and issue. If you were to come up with 10 issues that you disliked about Obama and 5 that you did like, there would be nothing wrong with choosing a side based upon your research. But if you cannot come up with at least 5 things that Obama did right, then you are either willfully ignorant or you are very misinformed.

I didn't like Bush, for instance, but that doesn't mean that he didn't get some things right.

Hmmmm...but how could you judge whether one side had greater weight than the other?

For example, what if you could think of 73 things you disliked about him and they all related to his dress-sense and personal grooming, however you could only think of 3 things you liked about him and they all related to his economic and foreign policies leading you to believe that he was shoring up the US's world influence as well as safeguarding it's competitiveness and fiscal wellbeing.

73:3 ratio against...is that fair?

 

[Billy000]

So, if you cannot find 5 policies of the President that you agree with, you're not 'fair and balanced'? I disagree. People can find no policies they agree with, or agree with 10, without being a partisan hack.

It's not the agreement or disagreement with policy... it's the attitude it's presented with that makes someone a partisan hack.

I see your point, but there is always room for critical thinking on every political figure and issue. If you were to come up with 10 issues that you disliked about Obama and 5 that you did like, there would be nothing wrong with choosing a side based upon your research. But if you cannot come up with at least 5 things that Obama did right, then you are either willfully ignorant or you are very misinformed.

I didn't like Bush, for instance, but that doesn't mean that he didn't get some things right.

Hmmmm...but how could you judge whether one side had greater weight than the other?

For example, what if you could think of 73 things you disliked about him and they all related to his dress-sense and personal grooming, however you could only think of 3 things you liked about him and they all related to his economic and foreign policies leading you to believe that he was shoring up the US's world influence as well as safeguarding it's competitiveness and fiscal wellbeing.

73:3 ratio against...is that fair?

Well, if you noticed, I was asking for policies specifically. His dress-sense and personal grooming habits are irrelevant to my topic.