The Obama Administration

I will begin by refuting my opponent's round two arguments, before moving on to his rebuttals. My opponent began by talking about how the economy has not improved since Obama took office. This however, is not true. I showed this in my round 2 argument, when I said "[Obama] passed the stimulus, which greatly improved the economy and created 3.7 million new private-sector jobs. " To add more to why I know President Obama has helped the economy, I want to create another list that talks specifically about his economic success: 1. Ended the 2008 Recession 2. 2010 tax cuts 3. Barack Obama, so far, has created 116,087,000 private sector jobs If you wish for more proof, look at some of the sources I sited at the bottom. Next, my opponent spoke of how Obama has not completed the US-Mexico border fence. This is true, however it would be an expensive undertaking. Yes, indeed illegal immigrants cost us even more, however as Con said, "it'd make up for this cost in just 10 years. " 10 years is a long time when talking about economics. 10 years is simply too long, so this particular task is not a good idea. Obama has done the right thing in his choice to not finish the border fence yet. However, I will say that it should be expanded a little bit. There is nothing wrong with spending a little bit of money each year instead of all at once. After that, my opponent spoke of foreign policy. He spoke of how Democrats have applauded Obama's reaction to Russia and the Crimea, and also of how he was warned by Mitt Romney. The fact that Romney warned him of this is not germane and simply does not pertain. Next, Con spoke of Obama's reaction to Iran not returning the drone to the U. S. . Indeed, this may be a problem, however the drone did crash on Iranian territory. One can argue that Iran is not obligated to return it because, as General Hossein Salami, "deputy commander of Iran's military said, "No nation welcomes other countries' spy drones in its territory, and no one sends back the spying equipment and its information back to the country of origin. "" In Con's fourth point, he talked about the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). He talks about how people fear it is becoming much like Canada's health care system. Quite frankly, I do not see many similarities between the two and do not see how it is becoming like it. [I]t could still be argued that the ACA is unbeneficial because it causes the US[sic] Government to have more say in the lives of citizens. " This is true, it does have more say in the lives of citizens - It wants to makes them better. The system is forcing citizens to have health care. I do not see what is wrong with that. FInally, my opponent ends round 2 by talking about Obama's policy on marijuana and how he supports the legalization of it. Then, he said "[that it is] a problem because children can be affected by second-hand marijuana smoke" and that it is "not desirable because of marijuana's effects on the teenage brain. " I believe I am going to have to concur with my opponent on this point, for I do not support the legalization of marijuana either. Now, I shall move on to my opponent's rebuttals. In his rebuttals, he went through my list and gave me some feedback. Some of it is valid, however other parts of it are questionable. I will go through his rebuttals and refute them. 1. Indeed, Obamacare is a controversial piece of legislation, however it continues to be the greatest health care system in 50 years. Looking at the facts my opponent laid out, he says that "Obamacare will reduce the earnings of its 300,000 members by up to $5 an hour by requiring them to buy healthcare. " This may be true, however it seems my opponent does not see the benefit of requiring all people to have health care. When every one has health insurance, less people die from certain diseases. When less people die from certain diseases, more taxes are paid, creating a better economy. 2. "The Stimulus Bill cost us several trillion dollars. " First of all, it actually cost us $831 billion. Secondly, it created 116,087,000 private sector jobs, which is a good thing. 3. Hmm. It seems my opponent had nothing to say about Wall Street reform, which means he has conceded that point. 4. Con refuted my point about ending the Iraq war by using information from Fox News. Fox News is unreliable and is mostly right wing, which means they are going to say everything they can to make Obama look bad. Secondly, I want to talk about what my opponent meant when he said "there have been consequences to our withdrawal. " It seems my opponent prefers a war against Iraq than the consequences that come with the peace we gain from not being at war. 5. It seems my opponent has the same opinion of the Afghanistan-U. S. war as he does of the Iraq-U. S. war. My response it the same as it was in point 4. 6. "Obama actually had little to do with the raid. " This is true to some extent, however he was in control of the process. In fact, my opponent seems to have ignored the key points in the third source he gave. It included proof that Obama was watching the raid while it was going on, not calling it off. I hope my opponent decides to concede this point, for his argument is invalid. 7. I received no response on this point, so I believe by opponent concedes. 8. He did not respond to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", so I believe he concedes also. 9. When it comes to Mubarak stepping down, I believe I will have to concur also, for it did indeed result in chaos. However, Con asked for evidence as to how the Obama Administration was responsible for the fall of Mukarak's regime. Here is the proof: Moreover Suzanne Mubarak revealed in her recently published memoirs that on 1 February, 2011 in a telephone conversation with the USA President Barack Obama, Mubarak asked for written guarantees of safe passage for himself and his family. These, she wrote, were granted by a special envoy from America. 10. My opponent's next rebuttal bothered me. He was refuting my point about Obama reversing Bush torture policies. In Con's explanation, he seems to support the inhumane treatment of human beings. I apologize if I seem to be harsh in that statement, but I am just baffled at the fact that he supports this. 11. The next statement also bothered me. My opponent spoke of how it seems reasonable for women to be paid less in certain jobs. I see his reasoning, however I will not cease to support equal pay for women. This country is not free because of this, and Obama seems to be trying to give women the freedom they deserve. It is a noble move on his part and I respect him for it. 12. My opponent gave a quote and a few articles in order to refute this statement. These quotes and articles, however, do not explain his reasoning. 13. "Green energy is already failing Denmark. " We are the United States of America, not Denmark. I fail to see how Denmark's leaders and government's ability to handle green energy pertains to that of the USA. 14. Looking at Con's articles on this point, it seems that the problems are not very problematic. 15. So. .. Does this mean Con does not support children being on their parent's health care while they have a chance to stabilize financially. It sounds like a great thing to me. 16. No, that is not the reasoning. You see, it is referring to cars polluting the air with carbon dioxide. If I had known that that was not obvious, I would have elaborated. 17. There is nothing unethical about stem cell research. Besides, my opponent supports Bush torture policies. 18. I think the Sudanese wished to rebel and Obama only helped them. I see no issue with it. 19. My opponent concedes credit card reform. 20. My opponent also concedes shifting military and diplomatic priorities to Asia. 21. Finally, my opponent concedes shifting fuel efficiency standards. I believe I have proved my point greatly. I believe I have done a greater job when it comes to stating my arguments, for I have written more. I also believe I have done a greater job in refuting Con's arguments that he has, for I have also written more. Again, I apologize if I sounded harsh on the torture policies, but I am just baffled about it. I have enjoyed this debate and wish to say one more thing: Vote Pro. 1. . http://www.politifact.com... 2. . http://useconomy.about.com... 3. . http://mollysmiddleamerica.blogspot.com... 4. . http://www.realclearpolitics.com... 5. . http://usnews.nbcnews.com... 6. . http://www.theblaze.com... 7. . http://www.cnn.com... 8. . http://www.city-journal.org... 9. . http://www.politifact.com... 10. . http://www.usatoday.com... 11. . http://www.cbsnews.com... 12. . http://english.ahram.org.eg...