I challenge Blackrook to a debate. I am the Obama supporter, he is the Obama hated. I challenge him to debate me over any aspect of this notion. I really don't think this debate will need moderation as I plan to blow Blackrook out of the water to the point of where he concedes defeat. First shot's yours, Blackrook...
What can I say jmpet, I am honored that you have considered me worthy of your attention. Do you really think anyone will watch this thread way down in this forum? I hate to spend valuable time posting here if you are my only audience.
OK, well I saw that 101 people have viewed this thread, so I guess that's good enough. I guess the number one reason I don't like Obama is because, in the core of his being, he hates America and everything it stands for. He has made his hatred of America clear in everything he says and does. And not only that, but he hates Americans as a people. He thinks we've had it too good, and he wants to knock us down a few pegs. So the lost wealth of the typical American family since Obama was elected is no accident. Obama is doing it to us on purpose. He has deliberately impoverished us, and he plans to impoverish us even more in his second term. He is not an incompetent who is in over his head, as Romney thinks. He knows exactly what he is doing. He is turning America into a third-world country, a society with a very small class of the ultra-wealthy (Obama and his friends) and a very large class of the desperate poor. And that's what he meant when he said he would "Change" America.
Well our President is making the best of the bad situation he was handed in 2008. Most of our current problems stem from 2007-2009 and their roots go back years further. Obama is tackling that as best as any capable man can. Please point out a specific issue and I will show you where it came from, because it all was a pile of problems handed to him when he took office.
How long will Obama blame Bush? I thought he would stop once he got re-elected, but apparently not. It reminds me of an old story from the Soviet Union. A man was assigned to take over as manager of a factory in Kiev. The outgoing manager shook his hand, and gave him two sealed envelopes. "In each envelope is a letter, with my advice to you. If you find yourself in a crisis, open the first envelope. If the crisis continues, open the second envelope." And so the new manager took over. There were cost overruns, supply problems, dissent with the workers, and difficulties meeting the quotas set forth in the Five-Year Plan. The plant manager opened the first envelope. The letter inside said, "Blame me." So the manager took that advice and it worked for a while. But a few months later, things were even worse, and it seemed that everything was on the brink of chaos. The manager opened the second envelope: "Write two letters..."
Between Blackrook and jmpet involves only Blackrook and jmpet. Unless you think that whomever you're rooting for can't handle themselves, just stay out of it and watch.
And if you were jmpet, you'd have a great point. jmpet challenged Blackrook because he feels confident that he can handle himself. Unless you think he's wrong, let him point it out.
While rule-based debate was suggested a while ago, it seemed to have died in committee, so to speak. Without any real authority, rules are hard to enforce (largely because their interpretation is wide open). Outside of rules such as: 1) This is between Blackrook and jmpet 2) Do not violate forum rules I would see very little purpose in setting rules of any sort. Ideally, the debate would end when both side have: 1) Made their respective points 2) Found either where they agree and disagree in the interpretation of the facts 3) Agree on the resolution amicably I don't have particularly high hopes that this would occur on this particular forum, but I've been surprised before, and expect I'll be surprised again My suggestion would be mostly that jmpet and Blackrook should set some ground rules, thus ensuring that both feel comfortable with the limits and interpretations, and ensuring their compliance with said rules.
How about a point system Black? For every fact you want to count as a point, you number and highlight it. If jmpet debunks, he scores a point, if he can't, you get a point. Can you agree to that so far?
Our problems- as a nation- stem from a few things. The housing crisis from a few years ago wasn't the fault of Obama, it was the fault of greedy banks and equally greedy investors. They en masse caused the problem of 2008 which reverberates to today. Our National Debt is a train that's been moving up and up for decades. Dubya accelerated it and Obama was left to deal with it. Dubya's antics made it hyper and Obama for the past four years has been trying to reign it in. As it stands, we still borrow a trillion a year but it's not two Trillion and we have Obama to thank for that. Unemployment has been on the rise for the past 40 years since we fell flat to China and took everything they exported to us. Today we rely on China for our useless plastic crap that we can't live without. This is not the fault of Obama- it's a decades-long trend. Tell me exactly what Obama did or didn't do that was a mess up because you have yet to make a salient point.
I'm not sure how I can debate you. Most of what you have just said is simply untrue, and I note that you have not provided links to back any of it up. I would have to sit here and educate you about American history for the last 40 years or so, and I don't have the time or the energy.
I would start by saying that Obama inherited a bad situation, but he had four years to fix it, and didn't. And worse, he has created a hostile anti-business environment with his demagouging against the "rich" and onerous burden of thousands of new regulations. Obamacare is now causing businesses to lay people off and cut back working hours. Also, Obama has TWICE told Americans not to come to Las Vegas and spend money here. This has cost our city millions in lost tourism dollars. Obama never retracted these statements, and our wonderful Senator Reid didn't even ask him to.
Yes, Obama had a bad situation and he did not make it worse- we avoided a depression because of Obama. Even if McCain won in 2008 we would be in a worse situation today and that's thanks to Obama. Re: regulations. It was a lack of regulations that allowed the banks to give out NINJA loans. Regulation is good- it makes sure there's no lead in baby toothpaste or crayons. Without regulations, business has no standard of safety for the public... I honestly don't know how you can say less regulation is good. As far as the rich, they should pay more in taxes because they have more money and the system is set up to make the rich richer. Never has it been harder to open your own business today because banks aren't giving out the loans they used to a few years ago, which makes a healthy competitive situation to where the best survive and the rest don't. We have regulation to thank for that. Obamacare is a good thing because it insures millions of people who don't have insurance. And on the other side it cuts out the giant HMOs who tell doctors how to be a doctor and what they can and cannot do. Since when should you rely on an HMO tech support guy over a doctor??? Obamacare will straighten itself out over the next four years and the people will adopt it and it will do what it set out to do- insure everyone. "But that leads to employers cutting hours." Yes it does for the moment, but the employees will over time fall into full time positions when the corporations realize they need healthy and happy workers. Once again those who don't adapt will fall to the wayside. Las Vegas? Yeah- the game is skewed against the gambler. Go somewhere else instead of Vegas. Do you mean to tell me that Obama has that much influence over people to where he says don't go there and people don't? I find that hard to believe. Point out something relevant like Detroit which I partly blame Obama for- there is a legitimate gripe. Apart from that, I don't see an example of Obama failing anything- or better put- McCain doing it better if he was Prez. People have been conditioned to hate Obama from non-stop attacks against him that began even before he took office. Every move he makes is debated and the may-sayers weigh in. I remember in 2008-2009 Obama adopting a Republican plan for something, then the Republicans going against it JUST BECAUSE OBAMA WAS FOR IT. This is a sickness and you are part of it with your non-stop attack threads.
I am not awarding any victories. Too much generalization. I would prefer a single point be raised and addressed and then move onto another point. But its your debate- not mine.
I would agree. Victories are subjective. Discussing until the point has been resolved, is the best method for debating.
