Debate: Will Obama recover from the absolute mess he has created as president of the US?
Side: One of the Worst

Holy shit! You aren't going to believe this... but I just typed up a long response (I was almost finished!), clicked one of your links, read it, clicked back and my entire argument disappeared. Dammit! I should have copied it before clicking a link... anyways, I'm going to try and make this short and simple.The projected NET impact of ObamaCare is a reduction in the deficit. (Here is a CBO projection for how much repealing ObamaCare would cost.)So, during the fist ten years, repealing Obamacare will cost us $109 billion... but the cost OF Obamacare will be around $1.3 trillion during that same period. Hmm...?We either have to remove the ability for everyone to get emergency care without proof of insurance/ability to pay, or we need to pay for that care - in this case via a requirement of insurance enforced through a tax/fee.In other words, we still have to pay? The price of Obamacare varies from person to person. If you don't want Obamacare, then tough shit. Either you pay for Obamacare or you pay the fine. So in actual dollars you are incorrect by about $200 billion (and would be more incorrect if adjusted for inflation). And in percentage growth it is not even close.Actually, no I'm not... because it's not 2012 anymore. As of October 2013, the debt was $16.75 trillion. That's an increase of about 57% since Obama took office. So, in the five years that Obama has been president, he has increased the debt more than Bush did his entire eight years.Therefore it doesn't count at all?? Many of the regulations are written and in place and the taxpayer bailouts that happened in 2008 are currently illegal. There is a ton of lobbying happening by Wall Street which is slowing the process down, but is also having a positive effect on court challenges for the regulations that are in place.It's not that it doesn't count, it's just not the astounding achievement that it's being portrayed as.Tell that to President Bush and Saddam Hussein and the more than 4,400 military personnel who were deployed under Operation Iraqi Freedom that didn't come home.Do I need to say that the war was WITH Iraq rather than IN Iraq in order for their service to mean something? No! They served their country and deserve recognition, but the War in Iraq was part of the War on Terror. The enemies were the Sunni, the Shia, the Taliban and al Qaeda. Saddam and his regime was overthrown, that's true... but the war is still going on. We remained in Iraq for as long as we did because we were watching for al Qaeda. They appeared to have moved out of Iraq, so we moved on as well... and that is part of the reason why more soldiers were sent to Afghanistan. The war isn't over.According to their campaigns McCain and Romney would not be leaving Iraq nor Afghanistan anytime soon.What's your point? I supported Obama in '08. I didn't care much for Romney either, I just knew that I didn't want Obama in office any longer.Bush closed the Osama Bin Laden unit in the CIA (Alec Station) in 2005 and said he doesn't know where he is and he just doesn't spend that much time on himHere's a quote from your NY Times article: "The efforts to find Osama bin Laden are as strong as ever," said Jennifer Millerwise Dyck, a C.I.A. spokeswoman. "This is an agile agency, and the decision was made to ensure greater reach and focus." Bin Laden watched American news. We have video of that... so, Bush may have said those things as an attempt to draw Bin Laden out of hiding. What we do know now, is that despite what Bush said, the government was still looking for Bin Laden.If things had gone wrong, you know where the blame would have went.Yep... and we also know from this list where a lot of the credit is going.Some decisions (e.g. whether to use a drone strike or Seal team, etc.) are made at the President's level.Seems like a pretty easy decision when the target in question is Bin Laden.As commander in chief, Obama had the ultimate say so in this - he decided whether and how we would get involved. Republicans and some Democrats were ardently against military intervention in Libya and against him having NATO lead the effort. But he did, and the result was Gaddafi gone with no American lives lost.That really depends on if you think Benghazi was a result of a video or not.