I would vote for me again. JVG would be great for our national defense. MadMax would be good also (I feel like if he became president I could get a job in government- something like ambassador to Tahiti )
agree- I'm fine with an atheist in that office, I see it more a responsibility to the US Constitution etc. I make a big deal out of the national debt all the time and I realize it is too huge an issue probably to solve in one president's term. debt to me says way too much about the overall health and direction of any society I think it is morally sensitive and affects how much GOOD we can do for others in the long run (I got those ideas out of the bible)
As someone who has bashed (very rarely if ever hated), I suppose it is just easy. It takes a lot less work, energy and thought, really, to tear down rather than build. And it probably feels safer, more defensible. I see this in science all the time. Had a long conversation, last night, with a brilliant but now jobless physicist who lost a major political battle that had nothing to do with truth or competence.
You didn't vote Ron Paul because he would be "killed" in the office, but you voted yourself to be killed. Very Jesus-like!
1. I don't think he will decrease the federal deficit, particularly when we know it will only grow substantially in the short-term. Maybe we see if that change come year 2 or 3. 2. He probably will. Will there be negative effects of that, and if so how much? We'll see 3. We are already planning for withdrawal from Iraq, so I'm not worried about that. He will send more troops to Afghanistan, but how long will we be there for? 4. I guess you are hoping that a chance in the way sex ed is taught will lead to fewer abortions? I don't really envision him being able to have a large effect on the number of abortions. I'm going to judge him largely on number 1 because it is the number one topic on my list right now. He's got 4 years, and at minimum 2yrs of a Democrat led congress.
I agree this is different than what I'm asking in my thread as you are defining success in a narrow range whereas I was asking if Obama can reverse a wide range of things that are on a negative course. I think he is but I don't think he ranks them in importance as you have and there are other issues like health care, education and the environment that he would also list. Those I think he would list above reducting abortions and dramatically decreasing the Federal debt. His measure of success is likely very different from your measure of success so I'm not sure that using this as a basis will be a very fruitful to measure the overall success of the Obama Admin.. Whether he can do any of those my own take are: 1. Very unlikely especially since he is already pushing for much more spending and more tax cuts. 2. Somewhat more likely but I don't expect too much. I predict there will be some rewriting of the Patriot act but it won't be scrapped altogether. Obama will reign in some of the excesses of the Unitary Executive but will reserve some of it. Considering that Obama has already voted for revising FISA to allow warrantless wiretaps I don't expect drastic change in regard to civil liberties. 3. The withdrawl from Iraq has already started so that will happen. He has already said he wants to increase the force in Afghanistan and given the nature of the conflict I expect we will still be in Afghanistan at least through his first term. As far as having official declarations of war that I don't know if we ever will see one again since the last one was WWII. While I don't agree with Authorizations of the Use of Force that Congress has been passing those legally have the same force as a declaration of war. 4. If you are looking for a legal remedy I think that an Obama Admin will never seek to change the law to outlaw or even restrict abortion any more than it is now. What the Obama Admin. might do is work on programs that seek to reduce the need for abortions, pushing sex ed, access to contraceptives and social welfare programs to help poor parents. Those might reduce abortions but I think there are many other factors outside of what the executive branch can do thta would have a drastic affect.
I recall somewhere that Confidence in the presidence has an almost direct effect on Consumer confidence Eerily that is sometimes. . inspiration is enough Rocket River
Here is what I believe about Healthcare. We need a far better understanding about regulation, Insurance Companies, Drug Companies and the current legal system. I know too many doctors that are disgusted with the system as is, but are terrified of a national healthcare system. (Of the 5-6 I know- 100% feel this way) My step brother is an orthopedic surgeon who especially wants a fullscale analysis of the whole system. I don't think most doctors are greedy predators. The hospital systems, regulations, insurance industry and drug companies need to be examined. I prefer a private sector analysis (a broad team of people/expertise) of the complete system. I would give it 2 years. At which point a public analysis be presented to both Congress and the White House giving recommendations to acheive 3 things: 1. Availability to all. 2. Affordability in the context of free market forces 3. Safety nets for the disadvantaged I would prefer that the default setting not be federalization of health care- that is a lazy too easy answer that demonstrates a lack of creativity, intellect, and dilligence to problem solving. The proper role of government, insurance, individual responsibility, compassion and free market must all be carefully examined to find the BEST answer, not just the democrat or republican answer. I tend to like detailed unbiased analysis that is driven by root cause analysis and results in efficiency, acheiving defined goals and ensuring long term benefit when considering problems this large. I view this approach to most political issues.
1. A dramatic decrease in total federal debt. -This is a good long term goal, but, as every business knows, sometimes you have to spend money to make money. Right now he needs to spend, spend wisely but spend nonetheless, and he needs to do this to get needed work done and to stimulate the economy, and that in turn in increase tax revenues which he can use to start paying down the debt several years down the road. 2. Restoration of Constitutionally protected civil liberties; which would include a removal of the Patriot Act and associated laws and executive orders. -sounds good to me. 3. A withdrawal from conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan; including a stop to military interevention into other sovereign nations without a Congressional and Constitutional declaration of war. -I think he needs to withdraw from Iraq, completely, but I think there needs to be a handoff to some other policing body, possibly the UN. In Afghanistan unfortunately I think he needs to pick up where W. dropped the ball and shifted his focus from chasing terrorists to starting a war in Iraq. Unlike Iraq there are a lot of other countries who believe in the mission there. Over 100 Canadians have been killed there so far, for example. http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/afghanistan/casualties/list.html 4. A dramatic reduction in the total number of abortions. -Again, this is a good long term goal, but they way to do it is to address the conditions that lead to abortions. This is likely the only way to bring lasting change in any event. Merely waving a judgmental fingers and passing punitive laws is not an answer to teh problem. -Regarding healthcare, i believe every other first world country has a national healthcare system of some sort, so there are lots of examples to learn from, and all of them are much more efficient than the current US system. There are huge savings to be realized by implementing such a system and Obama really needs to get on with implementing one for the US. This is an example of massive, needless, waste that the US just can’t afford anymore.
Absolutely. Some people will evaluate each step with some objectivity, having the ability to praise some steps they like, and criticize the steps they don't like using real arguments and data. Others will big_texxx, basso, and such as, the Iraq.
I don't think you can talk deficit reduction until the economy is back on track. Balancing the budget has to give way to avoiding economic hardship right now.
Balancing the budget is not important at all. It is the size of the budget that matters. Most of the money spent is borrowed so the budgets are political speak tools... The question of reducing debt has to do with how wisely you spend, how you can slow down the size of spending thus reducing the need to borrow more. You cannot borrow your way out of economic hardship that is caused by trying to borrow your way out. There needs to be a damage assessment to determine the amount of hardship that is acceptable to maintain a stable country.
The Obama's will succeed. Why? Because of what they do. (explained in this video) <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Cg89ZnNJ_KQ&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Cg89ZnNJ_KQ&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
