Barack Obama is overall, a worst President than George W. Bush

Fundamental FailurePresident Obama is the worst president of modern times because he is endangering the economic viability of the nation. His failure relates to a fundamental challenge to democracy. In 1754 Edmund Burke, a British parliamentarian, explained it: A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.http://www.americantraditions.org...Burke's solution was to limit democracy with Constitutional strictures. We don't have those, so the problem has developed to the point where we are within about a decade of financial collapse. Voter polls demonstrate that people want more benefits and are not willing to cut anything now granted. However, polls also show that most voters believe the rich can pay for everything, so they don't have to. President Obama is leading this mentality, which is certain to end in disaster. Budget projections show deficits of around $1 trillion out twenty years. Those projections assume a rapid return to sustained substantial economic growth, but sustained growth is impossible in an environment of severe government control of business. Revenue into the government is around $2.1 trillion, and deficits $1.4, $1.3, and $1.3 trillion in fiscal years 2009-11. http://abcnews.go.com... 2009 was Bush's responsibility and included the massive TARP bailout. However, much of TARP has been repaid, so the 2009 deficit was not as bad as it seems and 2010 and 2011, which received the repayments from TARP, are worse. Deficits of well over a trillion dollars will continue. Taxing the rich cannot solve the problem. If the optimistic Obama projections were true, taxing the rich would yield $0.3 trillion, still nowhere near what is required. However, Obama projections assume that the rich will do nothing to avoid taxes. One way to avoid taxes is to move investment out of the US. The U.S. cannot tax other countries, so there is no way to stop the outflow short of outright government seizure of assets. Canada has half the corporate tax rates of the US and has benefited greatly. The CEO of Coca Cola recently said that it is easier to do business in China than the United States. Since taxing the rich offers no solution, why does Obama talk of nothing else? He is a dedicated ideologue that knows no other approach. Economic History My opponent opened with a recounting of economic policy under President Clinton. Clinton's 1993 economic initiative was textbook Leftist, passed without Republican support, and failed. The attempt at “Hillarycare” failed and alienated voters. It raised taxes and brought about the “Republican Revolution” of the 1994 elections. Republicans took both Houses of Congress and kept control through Clinton's time in office. What made Clinton's economic policy a success was his ability to abandon rigid ideology and work with Republicans. Republicans wrote all the balanced budgets and Speaker Gingrich got them through Congress. President Clinton signed free trade agreements, a very successful welfare reform bill that include work requirements for welfare recipients, and lowered taxes on capital gains. Republicans cooperated in dismantling much of the military, cutting 600,000 soldiers in one stroke to cash in on the peace dividend after the end of the Cold War. (Not all bipartisan agreements pan out.) Democrats took over Congress in 2006, but did nothing to stem overspending. They maintained control through the last election. Obama's claimed achievements My opponent cites a list, to which I respond: Obama continued Bush policies in Iraq. Good or bad, they are substantially the same. Obama continued Bush policies in Afghanistan. Good or bad, they are substantially the same. Bush was the first President to recruit Administration appointees in gay-oriented publications. Bush appointed the first openly gay ambassador. Obama gave a speech. The way for the US to win friends around the globe is to do all the dirty work and pay all the bills. That's what Obama promised. Libya is a problem for Europe, not the U.S. America needs respect, not image. Three terrorists were water boarded under Bush, with the information obtained saving American lives. Most terrorists talk without water boarding. No terrorists have been captured under Obama because he doesn't know what to do with them. Instead they are killed in the field, which is actually not more humane, and we lose the intelligence gather by questioning them. TARP, at least the half that was relevant, stopped the fall of the economy. That was passed under Bush with bipartisan support. In the past, the economy bounced back sharply. Under Obama, the economy has remained stalled. Attempts to negotiate with Iran and North Korea are total failures. Nothing has been done to slow nuclear proliferation. Obama refused to support regime change in Iran, a serious error. After a decade with no global warming, the credibility of global warming crisis is dead, and energy from wind and solar has proved an economic disaster. Obama hasn't gotten the message. Bush initiated educational reforms on a bipartisan basis, working with Senator Kennedy. Obama never works with Republicans, and education in the US is worse than ever. Obama won a Nobel peace prize based upon accomplishing absolutely nothing. The one attempt under Obama to prosecute a major international terrorist under civilian rules secured one conviction out of more than one hundred charges. Evidence collected through ordinary intelligence techniques was thrown out by the Courts. Obama promised to provide free unlimited health care to 40 million people at no cost, an outright lie that is now unraveling. “Kill Bush” signs were common in anti-Bush demonstrations. The mainstream press never covered it. Tea Party demonstration again Obama have been remarkably civil by comparison. Obama has established a new normal of sustained high unemployment and deficits. Praising a poor economy permanent on the grounds it isn't getting worse is a desperate rationalization. North Korea is not getting worse either. That's what government control does. The Tea Party rallies have been orderly, civil, and non-violent compared to anti-Bush demonstrations. Obama refused to talk to Republican Senators about health care, despite monthly requests for many months. He refuses to talk to Ryan and House Republicans over the budget, again despite continuing requests. That's not courage or leadership. The Bush Presidency The Bush presidency was dominated by the war on terror. Bush had to craft policies and build institutions to thwart major terrorist attacks. That was in two parts, taking the offense in Iraq and Afghanistan that kept terrorists preoccupied with their survival rather than planning attacks from safe havens, and by building the Department of Homeland Security to prevent attacks. The policies worked, and Obama has continued them. The Iraq and Afghanistan wars have been costing around $150-200 billion a year, a tolerable expenditure in a $12-14 trillion economy, and unavoidable in view of the alternative of granting safe havens to terrorists. The MessiahMy opponent appears to claim that Obama must be allowed to fulfill his role as Messiah. He must run over and dominate his opposition and be granted dictatorial powers to bring goodness to the world. Nonsense! Clinton succeeded for precisely opposite reasons. Clinton abandoned ideological purity in favor of policies that worked. Obama stays ideological pure, despite failure. A shot of penicillin can cure a long festering disease. We need free market capitalism to restore hope.