I truly do not care about politics. This might be my first post in the D&D. However, most of these claims are indirect and have nothing to do with the President's actual, direct policies.
They do, if you would like to tell me specifically which ones are not brought about by DIRECT policies, I will give you a direct link showing the legislation.
I don't want to deal with this, but let's look at two of your examples: "tried to stop Guantanamo Bay." The idiocy of that statement speaks for itself. "Stem cell research" is a half-truth: Bush allowed stem cell research, just not embryonic stem cells.
Does it feel like this country has 5% unemployment? Oh, that's right. It's because everyone stopped looking for jobs.
I was hoping to enjoy a rational discussion where we could both possibly learn from one another, but I'll take just making you look like an ass-backwards clown. Regarding Guantanamo Bay, the first step to closing it down would be transferring the prisoners to Federal prisons, but they would have to be given trials. Obama tried to do this, but congress vetoed his efforts, and nobody else would take the prisoners http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jan/20/barack-obama-guantanamo-congress-veto As for the stem cell research, you are correct. Embryonic stem cells, due to their undifferentiated germination state, have much much more applicable uses to potential advances in medicine. He reversed the Bush restrictions on research embryonic stem cell research http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/mar/09/obama-administration-stem-cell-funding and increased funding for biomedical and stem cell research (Bush mandated that no new stem-cell lines open with government funding, Obama overtuned that as well) http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/mar/09/obama-administration-stem-cell-funding
Sorry, that last link should have been this http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1908954,00.html
The idiocy of you saying most of the list is false and then only giving 2 examples, with you conceding that one is at least half true, speaks for itself. "Tried to stop Guantanamo bay" should be left of an accomplishment list though.
One thing is almost certain... The Senate won't be the place where House bills go to die anymore. Currently, there are almost 400 House passed bills sitting in the Senate with no action being taken including some that have been there for over a year and/or have bi-partisan support. And they say the House is do nothing. SMH. Good riddance to the lame duck Senate Majority leader Harry Reid.
What's scary is in 2012, democrats actually received majority of the vote nationwide in U.S. Congressional elections yet, still lost seats. Gerrymandering...
Ok, let's see what republicans have got. Disappointing evening but America has spoken. I truly hope the republican majority will now try and do the country's work instead of threatening impeachment or shutting down the government. We'll see
So, you're more interested in how unemployment "feels" than the actual measure of unemployment. As far as labor participation, it has been pointed out time and again that this trend is due to the retirement of baby boomers and will continue to happen regardless of any elected official's actions.
Well Bob, the Presidency is an Executive position, he doesn't make laws, he can only influence the exercise of law. For example, if it had been within the power of the Presidency to close Guantanamo as an offshore prison exempt from US law, he would have done that. And, a President really can't push harder for legislation than Mr. Obama did for the Jobs Bill. A President with a Congress that vows to render him ineffective with filibusters and denied appointments so they can campaign against him as being ineffective is going to look ineffective. He has to take the small victories of administrative policy where he can.
i was hoping for a rational discusiion so i thought i would call you a 'ass-backwards clown' MY favorite from your list (which i thought was a joke but now realize isn't): 'Got us out of Iraq' . Is that what you call losing the Iraq war?
To be fair, it's not an insult, just a statement of fact framing the context of the discussion. If I say the sky is blue and you say it's red, we aren't going to have a rational discussion. The Iraq war was lost before the first shot was fired. It was lost by not understanding that an irrational regional religious civil war could not be won by an outside occupier who was unwilling to enforce tyranny on one side or the other. I'm guilty of that myself, but it's pretty clear now. Continuing to occupy Iraq with American combat troops was just a waste of blood and money. The regional forces were going to wait us out and continue their 1400 year conflict.
Only a liberal would call a failure an accomplishment. Either Obama had no idea of the politics behind shutting Guantanamo Bay or it was simply a false promise to garner the votes. I suspect it was a lot of both. And why is shutting down Guantanamo Bay so important? Answer: Its not. Whether you ship them to federal prisons or over seas, its still prison.
