Because of Barack Obama...

[ensbergcollector]

hey,

just thought I would post this and see the reactions. I was looking at an article on huffington post and the side ad was for obama's 2012 campaign and the add said:

Because of Barack Obama

The combat mission in Iraq ended

Don't ask don't tell is history

first latina on the supreme court

32 million new people will have health care



so, people from both sides, how does this ad make you feel in regards to how he has done in 4 years as seen through 4 bullet points?

[pghin08]

He's done things that have impressed me and disappointed me. But more importantly, why were you on the HuffPo? I'm liberal and I don't even touch that site!

[mrveggieman]

hey,

just thought I would post this and see the reactions. I was looking at an article on huffington post and the side ad was for obama's 2012 campaign and the add said:

Because of Barack Obama

The combat mission in Iraq ended

Don't ask don't tell is history

first latina on the supreme court

32 million new people will have health care



so, people from both sides, how does this ad make you feel in regards to how he has done in 4 years as seen through 4 bullet points?

I like most of those points. They only thing that I disagree with was DADT. I think that he should have left it just the way it was. Other than that President Obama is doing a good job despite the impossible circumstances that he inherited when he took the job.

[duane1969]

Honestly, if this is what he is touting as his major accomplishments, I am not impressed. But in reality, this is as good as it gets. These are his major accomplsihments of his first term as President.

*Iraq end of combat mission? - Has the fighting over there ended? I realize we are pulling out the bulk of our troops but the combat aspect is not over. If he wants credit for the troop drawdown then fine, I give him that, but even that would have happened eventually regardless of who was president.

*DADT - Probably would have been eliminated anyway. Doesn't seem to have made much of a difference in the military. With or without it things seem to be pretty much the same. I commend him for his role in getting it eliminated but don't think it carries much value in regards to getting re-elected.

*First Latina on SC - Why is this a big deal? Are latino women oppressed in America and I didn't know it? Just not seeing this as a major accomplishment on his part. Other than nominating her he really did nothing.

*Health care - 2 out of 3 Americans opposed it. They still are not sure how to pay for it. Not a positive accomplishment IMO.

[pghin08]

Honestly, if this is what he is touting as his major accomplishments, I am not impressed. But in reality, this is as good as it gets. These are his major accomplsihments of his first term as President.

*Iraq end of combat mission? - Has the fighting over there ended? I realize we are pulling out the bulk of our troops but the combat aspect is not over. If he wants credit for the troop drawdown then fine, I give him that, but even that would have happened eventually regardless of who was president.

*DADT - Probably would have been eliminated anyway. Doesn't seem to have made much of a difference in the military. With or without it things seem to be pretty much the same. I commend him for his role in getting it eliminated but don't think it carries much value in regards to getting re-elected.

*First Latina on SC - Why is this a big deal? Are latino women oppressed in America and I didn't know it? Just not seeing this as a major accomplishment on his part. Other than nominating her he really did nothing.

*Health care - 2 out of 3 Americans opposed it. They still are not sure how to pay for it. Not a positive accomplishment IMO.

Agree with you on the payment process (BTW, they used 10 years of revenue to pay for 7 years of the program. I love government accounting). However, with Obamacare, there's a large gap between rhetoric and reality. Here's a link to page 6 of a Bloomberg BusinessWeek article from a few months back:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine...117_page_6.htm

Have a look at some of the numbers, and remember, these are TEA PARTIERS they're polling, not just a random mix of Americans:

83% of Tea Partiers, when asked, would repeal Obamacare.

Not surprising, right? Well here's what is. When asked about the major provisions of Obamacare individually, a small majority of Tea Partiers actual SUPPORTED them:

57% want to prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage to patients with preexisting health problems.

52% would add more prescription drug benefits to Medicare

53% would require states to set up plans for citizens with major health issues.


That's why some of these polls are problematic. People don't read. They hear "Obamacare", and the media has automatically associated that with "socialized medicine". Which scares the crap out of the majority of Americans...until they, like above, read what the bill entails. Remember, those numbers above are from people from the Tea Party. Supposedly the small government folk. Those are pretty staggering if you ask me.

[duane1969]

57% want to prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage to patients with preexisting health problems.

52% would add more prescription drug benefits to Medicare

53% would require states to set up plans for citizens with major health issues.

Most people, including myself, don't disagree with these components. I think the biggest flaw with Obamacare is that nobody knew what was in it (a contradiction of an Obama campaign promise) and didn't care for the "do it or else" aspects of it.

[pghin08]

Most people, including myself, don't disagree with these components. I think the biggest flaw with Obamacare is that nobody knew what was in it (a contradiction of an Obama campaign promise) and didn't care for the "do it or else" aspects of it.

The first thing you mention irks me a bit. Let me preface my comment by saying that I think the Obama PR team did a crappy job talking about the bill. However, I simply don't buy the "people don't know what's in it" thing. The full text of the bill, like every other one proposed in the modern age, is available online. It takes a half second Google search to find. I'm realistic to a point though, it's a 900+ page bill. In an era where a 30 second commercial outlasts the average American attention span by about 25 seconds, I understand why people didn't read the whole thing. But my goodness, you could read the two page table of contents and have a good idea for the bill's provisions. If you don't know what's in the health care bill, it's because you were too lazy to find out.

(Allow me to stop to say that I hope you know, Duane, that when I say "you" in that last sentence, I'm not directing that at you personally. We have our different views, but I will never dispute your knowledge of the issues, as it is head and shoulders above most people.)

Secondly, the "do it or else" thing was at least somewhat dulled by the elimination of the public option. Like most bills, the original text and provisions will still go through massive changes as time wears on. The "Obamacare" that we end up with is going to be far different than that which was originally proposed.

[duane1969]

The first thing you mention irks me a bit. Let me preface my comment by saying that I think the Obama PR team did a crappy job talking about the bill. However, I simply don't buy the "people don't know what's in it" thing. The full text of the bill, like every other one proposed in the modern age, is available online. It takes a half second Google search to find. I'm realistic to a point though, it's a 900+ page bill. In an era where a 30 second commercial outlasts the average American attention span by about 25 seconds, I understand why people didn't read the whole thing. But my goodness, you could read the two page table of contents and have a good idea for the bill's provisions. If you don't know what's in the health care bill, it's because you were too lazy to find out.

(Allow me to stop to say that I hope you know, Duane, that when I say "you" in that last sentence, I'm not directing that at you personally. We have our different views, but I will never dispute your knowledge of the issues, as it is head and shoulders above most people.)

Secondly, the "do it or else" thing was at least somewhat dulled by the elimination of the public option. Like most bills, the original text and provisions will still go through massive changes as time wears on. The "Obamacare" that we end up with is going to be far different than that which was originally proposed.

I base the "didn't know what was in it" statement on this. When the 3rd most powerful person in the Democratic party doesn't know what is in her own parties health care bill then it is safe to assume that nobody else did either.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...0gxYOv6_cDBD-g

I agree, the Obamacare that we have today will be somewhere between but a fragment of itself in 10 years.

[pghin08]

I base the "didn't know what was in it" statement on this. When the 3rd most powerful person in the Democratic party doesn't know what is in her own parties health care bill then it is safe to assume that nobody else did either.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...0gxYOv6_cDBD-g

I agree, the Obamacare that we have today will be somewhere between but a fragment of itself in 10 years.

You're assuming that Nancy Pelosi has the ability to read.

[duane1969]

You're assuming that Nancy Pelosi has the ability to read.

LOL

I don't give her credit for much but I would think she should have at least had a cursory knowledge of the bill before she voted on it. Sadly it seems that most had no idea what they were voting for or against.