Tuesday, January 4, 2011

Do you think Obama has control over "real change" while in office?

Extra55 says:

The only "change" he effected was the race of the President of the US. Prior to him, the genetic homeland of every US. President could be contained within a 500 mile radius of London, England--I'm not forgetting about the handful of Dutch descended presidents.The Change was all about getting elected at any cost. What kind of job has he done? I hear reports of how badly he's doing but it seems no one can provide reasons for judging so and the game is that if you don't know-you're too stupid to waste time on explaining why-and for that reason they reserve specific instances of his misperformance-beacuse they don't really have anything. That's an old trick but it's not very good.Health care in the US badly needs reform and it appears he's taken the longest step in getting there.

InsomniacSeven says:

Usually the president's party is in opposition to the party controlling congress. Considering that Obama and his party were both lined up when he went into office, he certainly had more opportunity for "real change" than most presidents have been given and yet the democratic party seems quite content to demonize any Republican president who didn't carry out his promises, but "poor" Obama who has allegedly been stopped by Republicans -- how could anyone blame HIM for not doing better? That's just plan old democratic spin.