Well in looking through his resume, he appears to be all personality and no substance. Things like "refused an upgrade to first class" stick out, where there is virtually nothing devoted to anything he's actually done. He's playing it very, very shrewdly, staying out of the policy making limelight, building his personality cult - if he can get through his first term without stepping in it, at least he'll be somebody you can vote for because he hasn't done anything stupid. I remember a similar buildup and glowing personality cult around Madeline Albright...she's just so right for the job...well no she hasn't done anything but look where she came from, what she's accomplished...and look what a swell job she did.Originally Posted by milespenhall-texas-
A President that pleases everyone gets nothing done for anyone. He passes on the hard issues in the hopes someone else will take the heat. The President with the most negative press is most likely doing his job with all of us in mind. President Bush and Clinton did alot for this country hence the beat downs both received in the press. I did not like Clinton but he was hindered by his problems in the press. He would have done a better job if he was shown respect, same goes for Bush.
Kind of like a certain 2000 presidential candidate from Texas.
A state Governor? Or are you must be talking about Gore?
Gore: U.S. House Representative, 1976-84; U.S. Senator, 1984-92; and a Vice President 1993-2001.
Bush: Texas Governor 1995-2000.
While being a governor is sometimes said to be a microcosm of the Presidency, you can not say Gore lacked experience to Bush.
That aside, a term and a 1/4 is not a long political career and neither is nine years in the state Senate and a year in the U.S. Senate. Do you think Bush would have had the impact he did in 2000 if his name were Smith.
Bush's name recognition is not that dissimilar to Obamba's "cult personality."
You give Obama the same level of experience that Bush had, and it will be a different story. You could make the argument that Gore lost precisely because of his experience (i.e. Clinton and all the scandals/baggage).
"Osama bin . . . Osama . . . Obama."
[/kennedy]
I put forth no one is qualified for the Presidency of the United States.
The only true qualifiers are laid out in the Constitution. Beyond that
the 'qualifications' are whatever either side deems appropriate for
that particular election year. And don't think one election can foretell
the qualifications for the next one, they can't.
Candidate X is considered highly qualified this election because he
served in the military, was decorated, served in the Senate or
House, held a cabinet position, brought home the bacon, kissed a
lot of babies (along with a lot of derrieres), balanced a budget,
the list goes on ad nauseam. The other side decries those
qualifications as bogus. Four years later Candidate Y has half
those qualifications and is the second coming.
The Presidency is an OJT occupation regardless of education level
or other inane qualifiers. But it sure doesn't hurt to look comfortable
in front of a camera.
You could also argue Gore didn't lose, or he at least tied.You give Obama the same level of experience that Bush had, and it will be a different story. You could make the argument that Gore lost precisely because of his experience (i.e. Clinton and all the scandals/baggage).
All presidents have their scandals. The last time I checked Gore didn't control Clinton's ***** (it being the most recent scandle of the time).
There are few politicians out there with clean hands. Funny how Iran Contra didn't seem hurt Bush I. A little more serious than banging the intern I would say.
Agreed.
Last edited by nerdman; 10-24-2006 at 04:20 PM.
The entire quote is: "I think that nobody wants to play chicken with our troops on the ground." Why would FOX leave out the first four words?
Obama takes message of change to Atlanta
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...ck=1&cset=true
Barack Hussein Obama in my interpretation is a left-wing (i.e. left of the European Social Democrats), closet case pro-islamist who lacks the intelligence, integrity and common sense necessary to hold office.
He will get some points from the impoverished and ill-educated, but that's it. Though I still think he ultimately will join forces with Hillary and form a nightmare team.
Clinton opened up a 20-point lead over Obama says new American Research Group Inc.
I am not really sure how you have drawn this skeletal conclusion and maybe you could provide some meat to flesh it out a little.
He does seem to have some solid backing from a good few New England and NY hedge funds along with a couple of private equity outfits so I am guessing that he may be not so left wing as you think.
Funny, I think thats exactly what has got him his popularity in the media. Its not a negative at all.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=3YaRpx3LphIAt first, I thought I saw "Sen. Osama"
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
