I don't really expect you to respond, but I thought I'd deal with your complaints, one by one (except for the first one, as that's probably just a genuine disagreement).
-Economics: I largely feel it is completely disingenuous to bring up economics, for the most part, because other than helping drive the creation of the budget and approving the budget, the White House is not directly responsible for the economy. However, since Obama so vocally ran on promises to right the ship and is quick to take credit whenever there are successes, it at least deserves mentioning that problems have only grown. The debt has never been so high. Never.
Obama's policies, and policies enacted under Obama, have added
very little to our deficit. Most of the increase in the deficit that has occurred during his watch is a result of previous policies (mostly Bush), and a decrease in tax revenues due to the economic troubles he inherited, and a horrible tax code. Also, debt is not the end all be all of an economy - for instance, the downgrading of our credit rating was due to our political system, it didn't have as much to do with our theoretical possibility to repay our debt.
Then there's "Obamacare," which at worst doesn't increase our debt one bit, but which get's attacked for being some massive spending bill.
Unemployment rate, non-farm, overall, was up 27% as of this time last year from when he took office (not sure what the overall rates are as of today).
That, for the most part, occurred in the first 6 months of his Presidency, before his policies could possibly have an effect.
You can say it hasn't grown quickly enough, but you cannot say that things are worse becuase of him.
-Government has grown by leaps and bounds with a record number of federal employees (not including military) topping 3 million. Which means, more debt.
This is just flat out
false.
Three years into his presidency, he has exceeded Reagan in one area: reductions in government jobs.
-Bailouts: Ugh. Does this even need explanation?
The banks, I'll mostly agree with you. I will just say, though, that Obama did make sure that bailouts were more in the taxpayers favors, working to protect taxpayers more than Bush did. The auto-bailout? That was Bush, who bypassed a congress who didn't want to bail out the industry. Obama simply renegotiated the terms.
-Military has been further reduced, making the U.S. weaker and more vulnerable, and an unprecedented amount of government land that was once military bases has been sold off, making it impossible to reopen those bases if we ever needed to expand again.
You complain about the debt, and then you complain about extremely modest changes to our spending - which still has us spending an increasing amount of money on the military. A lot of the rest of it is simply a transition away from the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars (which need to end, and our present there really does only harm America), and is changing focus to the Pacific, and possible rising issues with China (imagine that, planning for the future...).
ALso, remember... there's eminent domain. If we
need to build military bases, we
will build military bases, and it doesn't mater who owns the land. And also, if our military is too big, and we had too much and, wouldn't selling some of it off be the rather intelligent thing to do?
-Foreign policy is a mess because of a general attitude and policy of appeasement.
Negotiating is not appeasement, and there's really nothing Obama has done that can be considered appeasement. He's been fairly strong-fisted (angering quite a few liberals in the process, in fact), he's just made it clear he's willing to negotiate, and is geniune about wanting peace.
-Lies, lies, and more lies when addressing the American people.
You can ignore the rest of the post, but what lies are he telling the American people?
So really, most of what you say just doesn't seem to be factually correct. I follow "conservative" and "liberal" news sources