Originally posted by Q5echo
...or people that have acually managed something, anything:o
Such as a governor? Mayor? Romney-esque businessman?
Are we to assume that all Senators were born Senators?
Q5echo
quote:
Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov
Are we to assume that all Senators were born Senators?
no. we're to assume that barack Obama is as "uniquely unqualified" as any other 2 1/2 year Senator that hasn't willfully stood his ground on anything, claims to heal people with the power of bi-partisanedship but has done nothing to support said claim and bases his/her entire political philosophy on soaring intangibles. right?
i mean forget the fact that he's never managed anything other than maybe his front office.
pkcRAISTLIN
quote:
Originally posted by Q5echo
"uniquely unqualified"
Well, after 8 years and near-infinite examples, I would say the current POTUS is wholly unqualified for the role.
Q5echo
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
Well, after 8 years and near-infinite examples, I would say the current POTUS is wholly unqualified for the role.
right, we've all been fed "the sky is falling", but we're looking to the next 4.
Lebezniatnikov
quote:
Originally posted by Q5echo
no. we're to assume that barack Obama is as "uniquely unqualified" as any other 2 1/2 year Senator that hasn't willfully stood his ground on anything, claims to heal people with the power of bi-partisanedship but has done nothing to support said claim and bases his/her entire political philosophy on soaring intangibles. right?
i mean forget the fact that he's never managed anything other than maybe his front office.
Why are we talking about Barack Obama? You said all Senators.
pkcRAISTLIN
quote:
Originally posted by Q5echo
right, we've all been fed "the sky is falling",
I never said the sky was falling. All I was saying is that george bush made me feel proud of john howard (a politician whom I despise) in how he conducted himself in front of the cameras.
quote:
Originally posted by Q5echo
but we're looking to the next 4.
yeah, you and the rest of the globe ;)
Q5echo
quote:
Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov
Why are we talking about Barack Obama? You said all Senators.
i think Senators make lousy choices, yes. thats not to say a Senator couldn't ever be an effective POTUS but among these three?
i guess of the three choices we have, based on what we've already discussed, i think you'd have to agree that Obama is comparitively lacking...unless your a die-hard supporter of the intangible:D
Lebezniatnikov
quote:
Originally posted by Q5echo
i think Senators make lousy choices, yes. thats not to say a Senator couldn't ever be an effective POTUS but among these three?
i guess of the three choices we have, based on what we've already discussed, i think you'd have to agree that Obama is comparitively lacking.
That depends entirely on what your notion of relevant experience is. As I've said before, there's never existed a single person who is truly qualified to be President of the United States. To paraphrase Susan Rice, no one person can ever be prepared to deal with the wide array of challenges and issues a President faces on a daily basis. So we look for specific qualifications, which vary widely based on personal preference.
If military experience is a qualification, John McCain surely must be close to an ideal candidate. If a history of political activism is important, Hillary Clinton isn't too shabby. And if you want commitment to a community, I'd argue you can't do too badly by Barack Obama.
You talk about his professional experiences being hollow, but to me it is one of his greatest assets. He has shown a commitment to improving the lives of the people from the beginning of his career, something I think that is lost upon John McCain and Hillary. I think if you asked them why they ran for office for the first time, you would get very different answers. Clinton and McCain would likely say something about serving God and country. Barack Obama would say to improve the lives of the people. Does that make him unpatriotic to imply that American lives need improving? No, I think that makes him qualified to be President.
Q5echo
i suppose we'll find out soon enough
jerZ07002
quote:
Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov
That depends entirely on what your notion of relevant experience is. As I've said before, there's never existed a single person who is truly qualified to be President of the United States. To paraphrase Susan Rice, no one person can ever be prepared to deal with the wide array of challenges and issues a President faces on a daily basis. So we look for specific qualifications, which vary widely based on personal preference.
If military experience is a qualification, John McCain surely must be close to an ideal candidate. If a history of political activism is important, Hillary Clinton isn't too shabby. And if you want commitment to a community, I'd argue you can't do too badly by Barack Obama.
You talk about his professional experiences being hollow, but to me it is one of his greatest assets. He has shown a commitment to improving the lives of the people from the beginning of his career, something I think that is lost upon John McCain and Hillary. I think if you asked them why they ran for office for the first time, you would get very different answers. Clinton and McCain would likely say something about serving God and country. Barack Obama would say to improve the lives of the people. Does that make him unpatriotic to imply that American lives need improving? No, I think that makes him qualified to be President.
mike bloomberg for president!!!
Clovis
Summary:
Vote for McCain if you think Bush & Co did a great job
