So far, the Obama presidency has NOT been beneficial to the United States.

I will at this time address my opponent's points. My Opponent: "My opponent has made a claim saying that the national debt is Obamas fault. First of all some of this increase is artificial. The Bush administration had used "accounting gimmicks" to make the debt appear less then is actually was. http://blog.buzzflash.com...... Obama's administration advocates transparency so the now, money was previously still being spent unreported shows on the national debt." The Bush presidency is irrelevant. What Bush did does not effect what Obama can do. My opponent makes it seem like Obama is a man of the people advocating for 100% transparent government, he is not. Before the passage of the Economic Stimulus plan in February, Obama said that the American people would be able to get on the White House wesbsite and track every single cent. If you visit www.whitehouse.gov you will find this to be not true. My Opponent: "Second let's talk about two very big expenses that have occurred under Obama. The Bailout and the Stimulus. The Bailout cost $700 billion and the Stimulus bill $800 billion." The Bailouts: 1) By giving these failing corporations more money we are delaying the inevitable. These corporations needed bailout money because they were not profitable. When this recession ends these bailed-out corporations will be at a disadvantage and will continue to lag. Why? Because once they actually start making money they have to start paying back debts they owe to the government. Because of this they will fail and jobs will be lost. 2) What have corporations done with the bailout money? They have spent it on bonuses and corporate getaways. This is a perfect example of why to not give big business taxpayer money. Here are a few examples: A) AIG sending executives on a quail hunting trip. B) Banks using bail-out money to buy other banks Since when should taxpayers have to pay to send executives on hunting trips? The Stimulus: This is how the stimulus worked. A bill was introduced into Congress, congressmen and women from all over the country were allowed to put provisions the bill that would stimulate economies in their districts. Like the construction of a new school, or an education program, or something else. Not a bad idea, except there was two problems. 1) It was way too expensive, it shouldn't have been a spending free for all, the President should have set a spending limit of between 300 and 500 billion dollars. 2) There was no oversight. This bill was 647 pages long. The Congressional Budget and Oversight Office should have investigated allegations of fraud before the bill was even passed. However, due to the vagueness of the bill such provisions, like one provision only saying "27 Million in Massachusetts for Bridge Construction", you have no reason to suspect fraud. When you 647 pages of this, fraud and bad politics are going to get in the way. So, whose shoulders does it fall on? Well, Obama was the one who introduced the bill, so...the burden to see that the bill wasn't taken advantage of fell on the administration. http://www.rules.house.gov... 3) Why Spend that much money. Tax cuts would be more proficient... My Opponent's points I will not attack My Opponent: "(A) Let's first consider the fact that he is the first African-American president to be elected. This is a momumuntail moment for all of America. If signifies that we have broken free of a lot some the race issues that have plagued us in time past." Ta-da!!! Obama is great for America because he is black? America hasn't been a racist country since the 1960s, Obama wasn't elected because he was black, but rather because he was a SENSIBLE candidate. There are as many racists now after the election than there were before the election, maybe more. My Opponent: "He has restored faith in America abroad. People around the world celebrated his election and welcomed him when he wanted to engage in diplomatic talks. Let's compare that to Bush who most of the world disliked. Heck, Obama has even got Cuba to open up. The world more talkative and people admire America again. Now tell me hat Obama hasn't helped the American image abroad." This begs the question: why is Obama liked so much by the world community? Because he is believed to be weak. I'd much rather have a president who stuck up for my country than one who "Was popular amongst world leaders". He has in no way taken tough-enough stands against Iran, North Korea, or Russia. My Opponent: "Obama has also advocated transparency in which he received A+ from the Brennan Center for justice." Then why isn't the economic stimulus bill on the White House Website as he promised? The Brennan Center for Justice is affiliated with New York University School of Law, its not in the know about what goes on in Washington. If the Office of Congressional Budget and oversight gives him an A you might what to re-post that argument. My Opponent: "Obama has also set a timetable for leaving the Iraq war." 1) First my opponent has stated no reason for why we should leave the Iraq War, he needs to provide one. 2) What is a timetable. A plan. A timetable is a plan. He may not carry out these plans. Just like that plan of putting the spending on the white house website...good plans don't amount to much unless followed by decisive action. My Opponent: "Obama has also set forth a plan for alternative energy and cut carbon admissions." Once again a plan. I rest my case.