was obama the correct choice for president by the American people

I see how my opponent is not really here for debate rather for entertainment lets go on with it anyway. My opponent makes various claims "lack of reliability" can she actually say the evidence is not reliable absolutely, can she prove it? and while I will reassure my opponent that I am here for debate not criticism, but lets entertain the assumption that I was here for criticism can my opponent prove even if that criticism is irrational and how is it irrational? and can you disprove the criticism? I will quickly dismantle my opponents argument on conceding everything I did not concede and will not concede she does not offer any proof to how I conceded and instead of taking down all the arguments she just types in the word concede and quickly forgets about it has she offered any proof of the otherwise and If my opponent forgot the Resolution let me say it again WAS OBAMA THE CORRECT CHOICE FOR PRESIDENT BY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE my opponent has turned this debate into a totally different point she has implied that obama's bad decisions are accomplishments making a fire sale list for me which means basically that if I fail to address any of his supposed accomplishments with I did not do (fire sale because everything must go) [I didn't address contention 5 because my opponent misinterpreted what I had posted so I will clarify it with just simple common sense I never ever mentioned TO BE PRESIDENT I said to be runner up for president] quick refutation 1.does this actually mean anything wouldn't any presidents request waver or put in favor congress's votes' in this case the release of the funds so it isn't an accomplishment if any can accomplish this is this really an accomplishment 2.I imply nothing of the sort it is intended as a to be interpreted as a tone with a question without the question mark so her contention is an assumption which is incorrect. yes they are problems the problem is where are the terrorists going to be placed although yes it is a decision again it is also a problem I'm pretty sure that no governor would want terrorists' in their states which he probably did not consider. How does my opponent accurately know that they have no useful information the plans may have changed, but the goal remains the same. and how would you know if every prisoner at guantanamo bay is "beyond that window"? 3. I am for abortions so "no one" is inaccurate and so not supporting legal and safe abortion programs leads to unsafe abortions if you don't support them then you're going to have an unsafe abortion? and how does not supporting legal and safe abortion lead to unsafe abortions? because I don't support abortion programs so am I going to have an unsafe abortions? and if a woman that's pregnant does not support safe abortions is not going to have a safe abortion? and what lives does it save they are abortions? 4-7. If my opponent means refuting and debating then yes if my opponent means agreeing that there was a decision then not necessarily I agree that he made a decision I don't agree that it was an accomplishment or even a success since I must prove that obama is a bad president I must try to discredit him by proving that his accomplishments are in fact failures. 8. so it's okay that they lost money from the bailout that was given to them, but since their paying 5yrs ahead of time originally planned then it all fine and dandy and since it's market is booming then it must be doing good not according to your link profit still remains flat 9. how can this be tied to #1round 2 which my opponent argues that is was because of obama that is happened with that in mind how could obama be giving ford 1 billion dollars so this only helps a city not America as a whole. 10. where is the rule that says you can't use links for arguments? and my opponent doesn't address any of my refutations on #10 and how do I concede #1"overwhelmingly" c2- do you have any proof that he succeeded if not then it's safe to say he failed because if you didn't win then you must have failed. c3- http://www.rightpundits.com... although my opponent makes many statements here is a link saying otherwise and Americans support this plan because they don't even know what the health care plan says http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... obviously it is going to be a bit impossible if people are competent. c4- if diplomacy is irrelevant why did you bring it up? and how has he had a positive effect exactly and no McCain couldn't have a "positive impact" because he isn't president. So only the country's that are tied to America economically or depend on America's money is in peril which the 3 don't china,Russia, and Europe. c5-is explained in intro john McCain 1. he didn't really know Sarah palin have you ever heard of how a mother tells a 3 yr old to not touch the stove but he does anyway and he gets burned bad this is what happened to McCain. now considering if the American people new the information given in this debate and compare and contrast George bush and his cousin obama against each other I believe bush would win. and who considers McCain bushes surrogate? 2. http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org... 3.how? and why? and proof Hilary Clinton 1. a failure to asses or consider Hilary is unjust (just-giving each their do) and let me restate the resolution since you have momentarily forgotten it WAS OBAMA THE CORRECT CHOICE FOR PRESIDENT BY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE not lets debate on who would've been a better president although this is incorporated in the debate it doesn't say to what extent or limits the negative from saying who can or would've been a better president you must consider who not just the presidential nominees. contention1- I right off the bat said that the Aff. had to prove that obama was the correct choice for presidency she simply makes a list and implies that they are accomplishments Hilary 1. she has been in the white house before so she knows what to expect and knows how to handle situations that arise 2. she doesn't have any kids to worry about while in presidency because kids can cloud your judgement when you have kids you have a whole new perspective on life so you'll be clouding your judgement inadvertently although some might view this as good I am not at a position to say whether it's good or bad. 3.she had a better health care plan than obama Hilary is for government action to tackle recession, not tax cuts, freezing mortage interest rates for five years,create a pipeline for more women in leadership,reform mortage to prevent foreclosure and bankruptcy. http://www.factcheck.org... McCain is for abortions,banning Internet taxes & cell phone taxes,keeping taxes the same not raise anyone's taxes,doubling child tax exemption from 5,000 to 7,000,cutting business taxes so companies will keep jobs in U.S.,telling Americans what is happening,against torture, conclusion- My opponent makes many claims which she does not back up and instead of destroying my arguments she moves on to type concede she is not very clear bases almost all of her case on her 1st contention she doesn't say how I conceded on c10 and just restates what's already been stated. she fails address some points and completely disregards some because they don't tie in with her case EX. George bush is obama's cousin and he is also Dick Cheney's so obama has two men who are unliked by the populace as cousins what does this say about him. I should win because I provide evidence am clear have refuted all of her arguments provided alternatives and showed how they're better than obama and finally 2 questions how is Obama better than McCain? proof and how is he better than Hilary? proof