Obama does not deserve a Nobel Peace Prize

Yes I don't agree with health care at all, but Obama is far less wasteful money wise than Bush was. I don't think the health care bill will pass the way democrats wanted.

And as far as peace, he's ruled out any cuts of troops in Afghanistan and that have already hurt his numbers, and he has not ruled out any surge of troops there.

Which stimulus was spent wrong? The one Bush passed was... Obama's helped more to keep financial institutions afloat.

A parasite? How on earth could you call him a parasite? He's the politician who simply isn't like other politicians. He's a new face... yes a new face on a system that has many problems doesn't solve much, but the man is an idealist. I don't agree with many of the things he has done, but calling him a parasite or any other insult is just ridiculous and phony.

How has Obama used his race to manipulate people? Were you under a rock for the elections? He distanced himself away from race... he put himself out as a man of the people (take it as you wish).

 

Democrats themselves want different things, you have blue dog Democrats from Georgia trying to make compromises with very liberal democrats from say California.

Yes, Afghanistan needs more troops, this is obvious.

This is just a misconception of economics. I didn't agree with either, but Bush's TARP sole purpose was to keep financial institutions afloat under the theory that if banks had more credit to loan, it would get more money back into the market and to people and jump start the economy. Obama's stimulus wasn't aimed at financial institutions per se, but was under the theory that if money was used on projects, that it would jump start the economy by creating more jobs.

Many people are disillusioned with politicians

What politician doesn't put himself out there as a man of the people?

 

Duh. Where did I say otherwise? Obama has angered liberal constituents actually because he hasn't done everything or even close to what they wanted. Obama has done more compromise... h'es not a blue dog democrat as some want to paint him as.

Actually, it sounds like you're posting the misconception. You don't seem to have a very strong grasp of economics. The reason why Bush's plan failed is that it misdirected funding. It was basically misspent. And yes, Obama's stimulus was aimed at the financial institutions. Either way, I point to Europe as more of what I wanted, where very little stimulus money was spent at all.

He's not just another everyday politician. He's a new face. And some are more radical and stupid... and align themselves with smaller groups.

Sorry but republicans are just a sorry dumb bunch of people, and Obama is a fresh breath of air... some intelligence in the White House... been waiting for that since Bill Clinton. Obama does know what he's doing... and he is taking this country, GENERALLY, in the right direction.

 

I'm sorry to tell you...


But he is just another everyday politician...

 

Tons of stimulus money was spent in Europe, at least by the UK. Britain's stimulus was larger then the US's as a percent of the economy. Even financially strict Germany did the unthinkable and did a stimulus plan for its industrial base
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_European_Union_stimulus_plan#National_plans
Aiming for $200 billion Euro's, about $360 billion in another words

And you can't say if Bush's plan failed or not, just like you can't say if Obama's did. There's no "right" option in economics, hence why there's different schools of thought. I could play devil's advocate and say Bush's plan kept a domino effect of banks and insurance companies from failing while keeping the fall from becoming catastrophic for pumping money into a credit industry that was refusing to lend, and combine that with Britain's massive credit stimulus plan, since the US and Britain have very large financial sectors both in their domestic economies and with world wide implications kept the crisis from becoming an all out shit storm

And how is Obama a fresh face aside from the fact he gives really good speeches? Politicians should be judged on their actions and votes, not speaking abilities

 

No, Germany and France did not spend large amounts of money on a stimulus. Almost nothing compared to what the UniteD States has spent (which measures in the trillions, or up to 20% of the GDP). And please don't use wikipedia as a source. It's not a valid one. Europe avoided spending large amounts because of the fear of inflation.

You don't know enough about economics apparently. Bush's plan did next to nothing to help the situation.

Obama isn't just about speeches, he's provided some proof that he means good, and has taken appropriate steps that Bush did not, and failed to take. I said absolutely nothing about speaking abilities... please don't make things up when talking to me. I'm not that kind of person. Also red herrings don't seem to help your argument or lack of.

Learn your economics before you argue with me please... and don't use wikipedia as the backing for your argument. Government spending is usually misspent money... so while I may seem like I'm arguing both sides, I'm really not. I'm just pointing out the obvious fallacies in your argument.

 

Stop fucking hi-jacking my thread.

 

we're not hijacking as it as we are clearly talking about Obama. Simple as that.

 

This is my thread and I say you are hi-jacking.


Cease and desist.


And I also dont like your tone.


Play nice.

 

Fine. I will say nothing more here.

 

Fail, when you say wikipedia isn't a good source and don't come up with your own or just don't check the links in said wikipedia article, automatic fail.

If you can't look at it from a different school of thought and see why Bush's plan(which isn't just Bush's plan, Britain did the same thing on a much larger scale) could've had merit for people who believed in it in a country that is dominated by it's financial sector, a financial sector that dominates the world economy, an economy dominated by the lending and spending of money, in a problem that began with a mortgage crisis followed by a near freeze in credit both large and small, well your understanding of economics is severely flawed. You have no ability to see something from the side you don't agree with.

 

I'll only say this. As far as wikipedia, it's not valid. I will reply with a valid source once you post a valid one. And as far as Britain, they privatized heavily in the 1980s. My understanding of economics is sound.

Good day to you. I don't wish to cause anymore trouble here. Nor do I wish to take this thread off topic anyfurther. My apologies.

It's still my position that Obama needs to do more to get such an award.

 

Actually most studies have shown wikipedia is generally correct, or again you know you can just not be lazy and check the references at the bottom like anyone should for any article anywhere vs just going "hurrr, wikipedia" In fact, experts in their fields have ranked wikipedia more accurate then non experts
http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2006/11/8296.ars

And what does Britain privatizing in the 80's have to with their stimulus plans of this recession?

 

I don't get that. Has he spent as much as bush did on war already?

 

Our deficit this year is $1.4 trillion. In 5 years, it will be back where it was 2 years ago supposedly, which was circa $400 billion. Yes at this rate Obama will beat Bush pretty quick.

 

$1.4 trillion.... that's an almost unimaginable sum of money....

 

Here is the kicker.... The deadline for voting was Feb 1st... So he was in office for 11 days! Seems a little off???

 

That's nothing, that's just the deficit, the actual expenses and spending of the federal government is circa $3.2 trillion

 

Americans sure are fickle aren't they??

All I had to endure on my television screen in my native is how great you are thought he bloody was, now statistically has a better chance of being slapped by a wet fish then giving the ol' salute.

I know nothing of the topic overly, but I feel it is a little early on to tell whether anyone should be earning anything of such calibre. I mean to win such an award, surely putting a stop to war would be a good start? As far as I am aware, it's definitely not over.

Where's this peace he has been awarded for again?

 

/thread
:cheers2: