Obama doesn't have enough experience...but what constitutes "enough?"

D_Kaye Throttlebottom

Experimental Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2008
Posts
1,536
Media
0
Likes
2
Points
123
The whole point of the article was that people that are criticizing Obama as not having enough experience, and republicans are hoping for a terrorist attack for an advantage. So what constitutes experience? Obama's 8 years in the state senate, leading on several issues that are important to us - or the one (McCain) that is betting on a terrorist attack to flex his muslce?
 

marleyisalegend

Loved Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2007
Posts
6,126
Media
1
Likes
620
Points
333
Age
38
Location
charlotte
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
^Zoe, it's just an angle. If it weren't experience (that is only required when it's convenient to mention), this article would've been about any other aspect of Obama that a vulture could zero in on and feed off of.
 

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
The whole point of the article was that people that are criticizing Obama as not having enough experience, and republicans are hoping for a terrorist attack for an advantage. So what constitutes experience? Obama's 8 years in the state senate, leading on several issues that are important to us - or the one (McCain) that is betting on a terrorist attack to flex his muslce?

The whole point of the article was pointless. It presented an argument that Obama has experience that Obama DOES NOT have and then it takes a tangent to discuss McCain's move to support drilling and Obama's move to forego Public Financing and finally ends up talking about a reference that Charlie Black recently made that you and the article argues somehow defines the Republican stance on this issue?

They are two separate issues. Whether one believes the Republicans will take advantage of desperate times we live in or not, that doesn't change the fact that Obama has very little experience and his speeches of Hope and Change won't do diddly when lives are on the line.

First, I wanted to dispel the myth of Obama's "so called" experience. In the Illinois Senate Obama passed most of his legislation in his final year. Obama was ineffectual for 6 years! The article points out that his arrogance and unwillingness to work for votes made him an ineffectual legislator along with the fact that the Illinois legislature was Republican controlled for many of those years. When Obama's party made gains in control Obama got a "Kingmaker" in Emil Jones and set his sights much higher than the IL State Legislature. Most of the legislation Obama passed in his last year was GIVEN to him so that his Kingmaker could make Obama into a U.S. Senator. Actions speak louder than words...It does not appear that Obama cared too much about the issues... nor did he work so hard for them. The American people don't know what Obama truly believes. The only thing we can be certain of is that Barack and Michelle will work hard to get to the Presidency of the United States.

McCain and the statement made by Charlie Black...I leave it to Faceking to argue the Republican side but whether an American Voter believes the statement was more Republican fearmongering or an unfortunate choice of words to say that McCain would look so much better than Obama in a crisis (or both) it doesn't change the fact that Obama may not be the messianic answer to our prayers. I mean Hillary released the 3am ad and mopped the floor with Obama who looked at her in the debate when Tim Russert (God Bless his soul) asked a simple current events question. And of course Obama actually answered a question on terrorism in a debate with about as much clarity and assurance as a ten year old boy playing "Mr. President" behind his crayon colored Presidential Seal.

Read the article Charlie Black's statement came from: Fortune Magazine
 

marleyisalegend

Loved Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2007
Posts
6,126
Media
1
Likes
620
Points
333
Age
38
Location
charlotte
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Trinity, do you get paid by the Mccain camp or did Obama step on your Nike's back in the day? Do you do this out of boredom, or are you truly concerned that we be informed of the "truth," rather, the "truthiness."
 

Notaguru2

Experimental Member
Joined
May 20, 2008
Posts
1,519
Media
0
Likes
10
Points
123
Location
Charleston, SC
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
First, I wanted to dispel the myth of Obama's "so called" experience...

Which begs the question, how did someone so inexperienced come from nowhere and defeat a Democrat icon, front-runner, and in most minds, the presumptive nominee, Hillary Clinton? That primary shouldn't have even been close according to your rationale, Trinity. Yet, your girl lost.

Get a clue; this race isn't about experience. It's about ideals. Both Hillary and Obama carry the same burden with respect to their ideology.

The people that Obama has surrounded himself with have more game than Bush has nukes.

They said he wouldn't be a contender; he won the nomination.
They said Rev Wright would be his undoing; it hardly phased him.
They said he had no policies; the critics have been silenced.
They said Hillary supporters would not support him; they are coming in droves

For everything they said he couldn't do, he has done. How about give him chance to what he says he'll do? You don't have to have experience to keep your word.
 

marleyisalegend

Loved Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2007
Posts
6,126
Media
1
Likes
620
Points
333
Age
38
Location
charlotte
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
This is a cheap angle. Experience says nothing about your character, it only means you've been around long enough to know how to navigate through the system. I think Obama must owe Trini $50 from back in the day.
 

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
Which begs the question, how did someone so inexperienced come from nowhere and defeat a Democrat icon, front-runner, and in most minds, the presumptive nominee, Hillary Clinton? That primary shouldn't have even been close according to your rationale, Trinity. Yet, your girl lost.

Get a clue; this race isn't about experience. It's about ideals. Both Hillary and Obama carry the same burden with respect to their ideology.

The people that Obama has surrounded himself with have more game than Bush has nukes.

They said he wouldn't be a contender; he won the nomination.
They said Rev Wright would be his undoing; it hardly phased him.
They said he had no policies; the critics have been silenced.
They said Hillary supporters would not support him; they are coming in droves

For everything they said he couldn't do, he has done. How about give him chance to what he says he'll do? You don't have to have experience to keep your word.

How did Obama get to be the presumptive Nominee? Oh that's easy. Obama was selected. The DNC party leaders had a farce of a committee meeting and demonstrated how undemocratic not only our Party is, but how far the entire election process has fallen. Obama Exploited holes in our Democracy - I've posted the Primary vs. Caucus Report (html)repeatedly. The primary was so close it took Super Delegates to break the tie and Hillary Clinton still won more votes than Obama. The Mainstream Media and society played into sexism in the Primary. And the American people, after 8 years of Bush were hungry for hope and change. But we can't eat speeches, we can't live in speeches, speeches don't fill up the gas tank and we can't protect ourselves with speeches either.

Why was it so close? Because a woman and an African American was running at the same time.

I believe the best candidate for President of the United States not only has ideals...i.e. isn't just idealistic...but has experience.
 

Notaguru2

Experimental Member
Joined
May 20, 2008
Posts
1,519
Media
0
Likes
10
Points
123
Location
Charleston, SC
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
How did Obama get to be the presumptive Nominee? Oh that's easy. Obama was selected.

I'm pretty sure that was a typo; you meant, elected not selected.

The DNC party leaders had a farce of a committee meeting and demonstrated how undemocratic not only our Party is, but how far the entire election process has fallen.

The first thing people do when they lose an election is look somewhere other than themselves for the reason why they lost. At least you're that much in step.

Obama Exploited holes in our Democracy - I've posted the Primary vs. Caucus Report (html)repeatedly.

To do this, he would have had to take advantage of a flawed system. The system seemed fine for the last 30 years until Clinton lost the election. Obama spent cash where Hillary couldn't because she was underfunded. Her lack of primary resources is the enemy here, not Obama.

The primary was so close it took Super Delegates to break the tie and Hillary Clinton still won more votes than Obama.

As Hillary pointed out, this is not the first time, nor the last time Supers will determine the nominee. However, they always go with the flow. <hint>

The Mainstream Media and society played into sexism in the Primary.

And Obama is to blame because.... ? I'm no more sexist than you are racist.

And the American people, after 8 years of Bush were hungry for hope and change. But we can't eat speeches, we can't live in speeches, speeches don't fill up the gas tank and we can't protect ourselves with speeches either.

Thats why we hold politicians accountable to what they say. We have recalls and impeachments available to us if the leader of the free world runs his office counter to the people that put him/her there. Ask Bill Clinton, Gray Davis, and Richard Nixon about that...

Why was it so close? Because a woman and an African American was running at the same time.

Sex and race had nothing to do with why I voted. As I always do in every election, I voted for the best and most electable candidate.

I believe the best candidate for President of the United States not only has ideals...i.e. isn't just idealistic...but has experience.

Experience has gotten us where we are today. I don't think that Hillary's experience landing in Bosnia under rapid sniper fire is the experience we were contemplating.
 
Last edited:

marleyisalegend

Loved Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2007
Posts
6,126
Media
1
Likes
620
Points
333
Age
38
Location
charlotte
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
To bad he can't say anything intelligent without a teliprompter in front of him. If i had any more hope and change i would probily die.

Of course, the best politicians are the ones who speak intelligently. HA!

My friend, being able to deliver a solid speech is no more a sound argument against intelligence than being able to speak French makes you a good cook. The latter is only relevant if the instructions are in French, and the first is only valid if all intelligence is communicable.
 

Notaguru2

Experimental Member
Joined
May 20, 2008
Posts
1,519
Media
0
Likes
10
Points
123
Location
Charleston, SC
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Of course, the best politicians are the ones who speak intelligently. HA!

My friend, being able to deliver a solid speech is no more a sound argument against intelligence than being able to speak French makes you a good cook. The latter is only relevant if the instructions are in French, and the first is only valid if all intelligence is communicable.

You speak the truth! Look at George Bush! LOL... He's never been able to speak and he's been prez for 8 yrs! =)
 

marleyisalegend

Loved Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2007
Posts
6,126
Media
1
Likes
620
Points
333
Age
38
Location
charlotte
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
This argument is so silly it requires little intellect. I've seen autistic kids who can't speak worth a damn, but put a songbook in front of them and in five minutes they can play every song, note for note.

What about the 28 percent of high-school kids who graduate in the bottom ranks, yet go on to become stellar college students? Were they stupid and got smart, or was the system measuring intelligence faulty?? What about the 13 percent of high-school dropouts who go on to obtain their doctorate?? A feat many high-school top-ranking grads fail to achieve. Narrow your perception of intelligence and ability enough, you can argue against anyone.
 
Last edited:

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
I'm pretty sure that was a typo; you meant, elected not selected.

Not a typo.

The first thing people do when they lose an election is look somewhere other than themselves for the reason why they lost. At least you're that much in step.

First of all I didn't lose an election. And nobody is passing blame. As discussed previously Obama had just as many errors in his own campaign but his slip-ups were given a pass. Now it seems his errors aren't even to be spoken of because he is the last Democratic hope. The Democratic Party selected this unexperienced candidate and his errors in judgment and undesirable qualities will be examined by the American people.

To do this, he would have had to take advantage of a flawed system. The system seemed fine for the last 30 years until Clinton lost the election. Obama spent cash where Hillary couldn't because she was underfunded. Her lack of primary resources is the enemy here, not Obama.

Read the Primary vs. Caucus Report. This was not about money. Winning in caucuses when the candidate does not win the popular vote is about voter suppression and voter intimidation and the basic undemocratic requirements of voting in the caucus system.

Wrong. The system was flawed. The American people haven't been scrutinizing the system until faced with these issues. The DNC's arcane proportional allocation? flawed. The Caucus System? flawed. Super Delegates? flawed. How the DNC, Howard Dean and Party leaders conducted this Primary? flawed. The American people didn't understand how an election can be manipulated until 2000, they didn't understand how a candidate can be swiftboated until 2004, and until 2008 the American people did not see the major flaws in the Democratic Party nomination system. It is flawed against itself. And the Party leaders went undemocratic in the flawed process.

As Hillary pointed out, this is not the first time, nor the last time Supers will determine the nominee. However, they always go with the flow. <hint>

There should be major changes in the DNC rules and Super Delegates are one of the changes that need to be made. The Democratic Party should have had a charter that allowed for all scenarios in an election including if two candidates are practically even in the Primary for delegates. It didn't. Super Delegates did not want to decide the outcome...Nor did they decide fairly, or democratically after Obama exploited the Caucus System.

And Obama is to blame because.... ? I'm no more sexist than you are racist.

Where do you get this stuff because nobody said Obama was to blame for it. You've posted some vile comments relating to women. If you don't want to be called sexist stop posting disgusting comments relating to women.

Sex and race had nothing to do with why I voted. As I always do in every election, I voted for the best and most electable candidate.
I also voted for the best and most electable candidate in this election. Obama was undemocratically selected. While sex and race may not have been the sole drive in the primary, polls show that women were solidly behind Hillary Clinton and African Americans behind Barack Obama. It made the primary race evenly matched. The edge Obama had came almost completely from exploitation of the Caucus System where more delegates were awarded to Obama even though he did not win more votes in the State.

Experience has gotten us where we are today. I don't think that Hillary's experience landing in Bosnia under rapid sniper fire is the experience we were contemplating.

George W. Bush stole the election. It was not based on experience. Al Gore won and the Supreme Court handed the White House to Bush. Hillary's experience in Bosnia is exactly the type of experience we need. She has a vast amount of experience that Obama wishes he had. Now the sniper fire exaggeration wasn't Hillary's finest hour but Obama making the bitter comments condescending Blue Collar workers and calling American Voters prejudiced and unable review his candidacy and issues such as religion, the second amendment, race and immigration reasonably without bitterness...so not his finest hour.
 

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,256
Media
213
Likes
32,280
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
WHAT?!?!? You're going to have to cite something. You've lost your mind.
I've learned not to poke the animals in the zoo with sticks. It may be fun at first notaguru2, but is ultimately not very satisfying. They can't help what they do.
 

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
WHAT?!?!? You're going to have to cite something. You've lost your mind.

You need to question your own sanity.

http://www.lpsg.org/1540537-post19.html
Feminazis need to get over it. You're so damn disenfranchised... bullshit. You're a bunch of sorry fuckin' losers who think you're entitled. If Hillary had run her campaign from the start like she did at the end, she would've been nominated. But she didn't. She couldn't even keep her surrogate fuck husband in check. Every time Bill opened his mouth, it was gaff after gaff. Thanks to VF, we're hearing the first tidbits of yet ANOTHER affair he had with an actress (the rest of that story will be coming out too). The Clintons are nothing but baggage and the MAJORITY of the democratic party agreed.

You give women a bad name. You lose an election and all of a sudden, you're a victim. Obama didn't do ANYTHING to Hillary. Name ONE THING he did to Hillary other than deflect all the shit she tried to sling all over him for the last year. Name ONE THING. You can't.

Your anger is misplaced and you denigrate the voting block you represent.

What's that saying? "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned." You're living it.
 

Notaguru2

Experimental Member
Joined
May 20, 2008
Posts
1,519
Media
0
Likes
10
Points
123
Location
Charleston, SC
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
You need to question your own sanity.

http://www.lpsg.org/1540537-post19.html

It wasn't sexist. It was about militant feminist who think they're entitled. My language was a bit harsh, I'll apologize for that. But I wasn't saying that women can't do the job. True to their form, when they feel scorned, they burn everything in their path.

Whats sexist about the truth?
 

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,256
Media
213
Likes
32,280
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
It wasn't sexist. It was about militant feminist who think they're entitled. My language was a bit harsh, I'll apologize for that. But I wasn't saying that women can't do the job. True to their form, when they feel scorned, they burn everything in their path.

Whats sexist about the truth?
Can't put the poking stick down?????:cool: Check the "post history" of the person you're poking. NINETEEN pages of anti-Obama garbage except for 3 posts, one advocating against HRT for women, one telling us that Jesus made it OK to be circumcised, and one extolling the virtues of the perfect kiss. I find it's best to know who you are responding to.
 
Last edited:

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
It wasn't sexist. It was about militant feminist who think they're entitled. My language was a bit harsh, I'll apologize for that. But I wasn't saying that women can't do the job. True to their form, when they feel scorned, they burn everything in their path.

Whats sexist about the truth?

You are poking yourself. I don't even need to answer you, your sexist remarks speak for themselves.

also...you used a derogatory word "feminazi" - sexist. Sexism relates to more than saying a woman can't do a job. If you discriminate against me using my gender i.e. calling me names like feminazi simply because I don't support your candidate that's sexism.