Resolved: Obama's performance in the White House has not been successful

Before I proceed, I would like to note that my opponent is using biased sources such as Thinkprogess. org, Barackobama. com, and Renewableenergyworld. com. Just by this, I should receive the source points as my opponent's arguments are heavily loaded with biased sources. Also, I would like to state that my opponent, instead of presenting one logical, coherent argument, has simply listed off statistics which are often misleading. Many of my opponent's sources are also misleading and do not say anything about the case at hand. Energy PolicyHere, my opponent is simply straw manning my arguments and is not introducing new arguments. He states that Obama put in place a $50 billion energy stimulus bill aimed at increasing green energy growth. However, this bill did not produce any positive returns. As my opponent forfeits the point of it being effective towards green energy companies, it is worth noting that the bill did not have one positive return. (1)The stimulus has only been a loss to the Obama Administration. It falsely propped up temporary jobs, as stimulus usually do, before removing the artificial demand, causing the companies to fail. My opponent's source states that some of these loans started under Bush. This is false. Solyndra, which the article is focusing on, was given $500 million in 2009 in Obama's term. It then went bankrupt. (2) While it may be possible that this stimulus will create 5 million jobs within the coming decades, this is merely speculation with no facts attached to it. As mentioned in the previous round, Obama's campaign promise of 5 million green jobs has miserably failed. The Administration has created less than half a million green jobs out of the five million promised. (3) Rebuttal: Energy Accomplishments First of all, 12% green energy jobs was not a Obama promise. My opponent has failed to provide that. Also, judging by his link, the facts are not in Obama's favor. 10.33% of energy production was made by the green sector in 2009, compared to 11.95% in 2011. This is just over a 1% change, which is very pathetic for Obama's investment into green energy. These "accomplishments" would have been done without him. (4)I'm not going to rebut all of my opponent's points individually as that would take too much space. However, I will do a general rebuttal on my opponent's misleading statistics. While it may be true that there is more drilling going on under Obama, it is false to assume that is a result of his regulatory policies. In fact, the drilling was not a result of his policies, but has flourished despite his policies. Most of this drilling was left over from the Clinton and Bush Era. This is in no way an accomplishment of Obama. (5) Also, I would like to point out that the source that my opponent listen in no way states that Obama has "prevented up to 11,000 premature deaths, 4,700 heart attacks, and 130,000 cases of asthma each year. "Again, these are all misleading statistics. Rebuttal: Keystone First of all, Obama has only accepted the second half of the pipeline. This is useless as the pipeline need two halves to be complete (.5 + .5=1). This is completely redundant. In fact, the pipeline is unlikely to have any environmental ramifications. This is simply environmentalist hyperbole. (7)My opponent has forgot the fact that Keystone would create 20 000 jobs and has not rebutted this. Obama has both directly and indirectly influenced the price of gas via performing actions to limit onshore and offshore oil extraction; blocking the Keystone XL Pipeline; refusal to build new refineries; refusal to permit new nuclear power plants; and refusal to limit burden on refineries to boost production. (6)Secretary Chu clearly stated that he wanted to raise gas prices to Europe levels. (8)Obama's anti-oil policies reflect this worldview. There are multiple ways to force oil to come back to the US such as incentives or protectionism, none of which has Obama appliedEnergy ConclusionObama has failed his promise of 5 million energy jobs. He has raised gas prices 100%. He rejected the Keystone pipeline which was to create 20k jobs. He is implementing anti-gas policies. He has wasted government investments. JobsThe claim that Obama prevented a second Great Depression is completely false. My opponent's sources link to nothing of the kind and as always, are highly misleading and used in wrong context. Obama did not prevent nor inherit the circumstances leading to a Great Depression. Economists were not predicating a depression. (9)In January 2009, the Congressional Budget Office predicted that, absent any stimulus, the recession would end in "the second half of 2009. " The recession officially ended in June 2009, suggesting that the stimulus did not have anything to do with it. (9)This is exacerbated by the fact this graph (9): We can clearly see that the Stimulus did nothing to make the economy better and in fact made it a little worse. All of my opponent's "statistics" about the stimulus making the economy better are false. As stated in Round 1, the Stimulus had negative impacts on the economy. Putting all of this into historical context in previous recessions, we can clearly see how Obama has failed at managing it: 221k jobs monthly gained after the recession of 1975. 285k jobs monthly gained after the recession of 1982. 89k jobs monthly gained after mild recession of 1991. 41k jobs monthly gained after 2009 recession. (10) This shows how Obama has not managed to create growth after a recession. Relative to previous recessions, Obama has only mustered about half of the job creating power (which would have likely come naturally) after the recesssion, a clear failure of the administration. Again, I bring upon this graph (11): This talk from my opponent that some sectors have specific job growth is completely irrelevant as the entire economy is current suffering as outlined in my case in Round 1. Jobs ConclusionThe unemployment rate is higher than when Obama has stepped into office. The stimulus made the economy worse and did not fulfill its promises. The discouragement rate among Americans is high. (14)Note: I urge readers to visit my opponent's source # 25 about how the US would have had "20% unemployment. " The sources says nothing of the kind and is again, misleading. Foreign Policy The sanctions against Iran are horrendous foreign policy and likely to cause retaliation. (12) Obama has weakened relationships with our only ally in the Middle East, Israel, by pursuing an anti-Israel type policy. The concept of intervening in foreign countries, such as Libya, when there is nothing to directly gain shows the fact that Obama clearly does not think in the US' best interest. There is no reason for why intervention was necessary in Libya in the first place. My opponent's last point of "strengthened our alliances with other nations," is laughable at best since it is so broad. His source does not give specific examples of Obama "strengthening" alliances with other nations. START TreatyLike usual, my opponent's source does not state anything about the START Treaty. I already presented this point last round. The START Treaty reduces US arsenal but not Russian arsenal, effectively crippling the US but not Russia. (13)Foreign Policy ConclusionOn foreign policy, Obama has decreased positive relations with Israel, the United State's only ally in the Middle East. As well, he has imposed crippling sanctions on Iran that will surely soon lead to retaliation by the Iran government and perhaps a war. Obama also intervened in foreign affair places from which the US had nothing positive to gain, thus compromising its interests. The START Treaty only crippled the US, but its foreign adversary, Russia, was not crippled. Sources . http://www.debate.org...