"Shame on you, Barack Obama"

[texas*princess]

I say "Go McCain".

I'm over the Dems acting like children.

Yea, Obama is inspiring when he talks, but I don't really think he has any kind of experience to back any of it up as a President. Maybe in a few years... And Hillary... I don't know about her...she just seems sketchy.

I'm not even a Republican either.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by texas*princess

I say "Go McCain".

I'm over the Dems acting like children.

Yea, Obama is inspiring when he talks, but I don't really think he has any kind of experience to back any of it up as a President. Maybe in a few years... And Hillary... I don't know about her...she just seems sketchy.

I'm not even a Republican either.

http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...=83575&page=13

[texas*princess]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...=83575&page=13

He has been in the Junior Senate for 2 years. Seriously? In a time like we are in right now (we've got a "war" in Iraq... we still have people looking for Osama... the economy is a mess and we are several trillion $$'s in national debt) I would prefer someone who has more than 2 year's worth of experience... but that's just me.

And I do find it hilarious that when any news channel talks to people outside of Obama rallies, they are all psyched up but when asked, none of them can tell reporters why they support him or any of this accomplishments. They must really just like the words "change" and "hope" a lot.

He is very well spoken and does a good job of getting people excited, but it takes waaaaay more than that to run a country. But that's just IMHO. If you think differently, rock on with your bad self

[DGTess]

Originally Posted by texas*princess

<snip>
And I do find it hilarious that when any news channel talks to people outside of Obama rallies, they are all psyched up but when asked, none of them can tell reporters why they support him or any of this accomplishments. They must really just like the words "change" and "hope" a lot.
<snip>

Well, his endorsers sure know </sarcasm>

Washington Post, 2/20/08
Quote

"He's definitely confusing to everyone who really hates America for hating Muslims, because [with] a name like Obama and [his being] a black man, they're probably going to go, 'Oh, wait a minute -- what?' . . . He definitely has convinced people that he stands for change and for hope, and I can't wait to see what he stands for."
-- Susan Sarandon, announcing her support of Barack Obama on "Tavis Smiley" last week, now that favorite John Edwards has dropped out. (Reminder: Barack Obama is not Muslim.)

[GeekyPenguin]

Originally Posted by texas*princess

He has been in the Junior Senate for 2 years. Seriously? In a time like we are in right now (we've got a "war" in Iraq... we still have people looking for Osama... the economy is a mess and we are several trillion $$'s in national debt) I would prefer someone who has more than 2 year's worth of experience... but that's just me.

Um, I think he's been in the regular Senate, it's not like there's a junior Senate equivalent to junior Panhell.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by GeekyPenguin

Um, I think he's been in the regular Senate, it's not like there's a junior Senate equivalent to junior Panhell.

But couldn't we write a great SNL skit based on this premise?

[GeekyPenguin]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

But couldn't we write a great SNL skit based on this premise?

For sure. Teddy Kennedy as John Kerry's "big" shows a lot of potential.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by texas*princess

He has been in the Junior Senate for 2 years. Seriously? In a time like we are in right now (we've got a "war" in Iraq... we still have people looking for Osama... the economy is a mess and we are several trillion $$'s in national debt) I would prefer someone who has more than 2 year's worth of experience... but that's just me.

And I do find it hilarious that when any news channel talks to people outside of Obama rallies, they are all psyched up but when asked, none of them can tell reporters why they support him or any of this accomplishments. They must really just like the words "change" and "hope" a lot.

He is very well spoken and does a good job of getting people excited, but it takes waaaaay more than that to run a country. But that's just IMHO. If you think differently, rock on with your bad self

He has about as much experience as Abe Lincoln. He's been a community organizer, a civil rights lawyer, a state legislator and a US Senator. He's not 23 and fresh out of college.

I know which one of his supporters you're referring to, but if you watched the debate he laid out his accomplishments, you can see them on public websites, and see this site: http://www.usaspending.gov/. Obama was one of the two major sponsors of the legislation to create a public, searchable database of where our money goes. If you don't know his accomplishments it's because you haven't listened for them.

And finally, I don't think anyone's voting because they think that "getting people excited" is enough to run the country, but that in addition to his experience and skills he has the ability to excite people and inspire them.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

He has about as much experience as Abe Lincoln. He's been a community organizer, a civil rights lawyer, a state legislator and a US Senator. He's not 23 and fresh out of college.

But he's been a US Senator for a relatively short period of time, and I don't usually think that community organizer, civil rights lawyer, state legislator, 1/2 a Senate term, President of the US is the usual progression. And isn't Lincoln kind of the exception, rather than the rule? Aren't most serious candidates either long term US Senators or Representatives or Governors, in which position we assume they have experience with the executive branch?

On the other hand, Hillary's own experience isn't all that much deeper if we judge her strictly for positions she was elected to or selected for on her own merits. I only mean experience that we'd think for the Presidency; I think she's an accomplished lawyer in her own right and I'm not trying to diminish that.

(I say this knowing I would have voted for Fred Thompson and he's have the same "experience" weakness using this standard.)

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

But he's been a US Senator for a relatively short period of time, and I don't usually think that community organizer, civil rights lawyer, state legislator, 1/2 a Senate term, President of the US is the usual progression. And isn't Lincoln kind of the exception, rather than the rule? Aren't most serious candidates either long term US Senators or Representatives or Governors, in which position we assume they have experience with the executive branch?

On the other hand, Hillary's own experience isn't all that much deeper if we judge her strictly for positions she was elected to or selected for on her own merits. I only mean experience that we'd think for the Presidency; I think she's an accomplished lawyer in her own right and I'm not trying to diminish that.

(I say this knowing I would have voted for Fred Thompson and he's have the same "experience" weakness using this standard.)

Well, some of the most "experienced" presidents have been the worst. Nixon ran on experience for example. He has a decent amount of state legislative experience, he's familiar to politics without being an "insider" which appeals to me. And Senators don't usually do well in national elections because so many of the Senate votes are "bad" no matter which way you vote.

Honestly the fact that he's not stuck in the Washington politics is more appealing to me. I think he and Clinton have similar levels of experience and I like him better. Thus making that choice relatively easy for me.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Honestly the fact that he's not stuck in the Washington politics is more appealing to me. I think he and Clinton have similar levels of experience and I like him better. Thus making that choice relatively easy for me.

I think it's sometimes easier to run with no record because you're untainted, but consider the Jimmy Carter era. He's regarded as a man of great character today, but it's hard to make a case that his Presidency was good time for the USA. I think Obama would be better than Jimmy, but I'm still finding Obama a little insubstantial and not having been inside DC forever can have some drawbacks.

I prefer Obama to Clinton too, but McCain to both of them, I think.

[Velocity_14]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

But he's been a US Senator for a relatively short period of time, and I don't usually think that community organizer, civil rights lawyer, state legislator, 1/2 a Senate term, President of the US is the usual progression. And isn't Lincoln kind of the exception, rather than the rule? Aren't most serious candidates either long term US Senators or Representatives or Governors, in which position we assume they have experience with the executive branch?

On the other hand, Hillary's own experience isn't all that much deeper if we judge her strictly for positions she was elected to or selected for on her own merits. I only mean experience that we'd think for the Presidency; I think she's an accomplished lawyer in her own right and I'm not trying to diminish that.

(I say this knowing I would have voted for Fred Thompson and he's have the same "experience" weakness using this standard.)

I am not agreeing or disagreeing with you. Reading your post made me think about this because I have heard this before.

"Experience" is very objective depending on who you talk to. And even because you have "experience," it still does not make you the better candidate.

I wonder if George W. was considered an "experienced" candidate prior to his first election. Well, that was all shot to hell huh...so whether Obama is the SENATOR (D) of Illinois or the governer and Hillary is a former first-lady and Senator of New York....at the end of the day...it doesn't seem that "experience" really matters judging on what we as a country has "experienced" for almost eight years with the same President.

McCain...I would just hope that if he is elected he would live through his term...he is too old to me...that probably shouldn't matter very much but...hey...oh well...

This is just my opinion on this concern of "experience." Oh well, time to go to the library...

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by Velocity_14

I wonder if George W. was considered an "experienced" candidate prior to his first election. Well, that was all shot to hell huh...so whether Obama is the SENATOR (D) of Illinois or the governer and Hillary is a former first-lady and Senator of New York....at the end of the day...it doesn't seem that "experience" really matters judging on what we as a country has "experienced" for almost eight years with the same President.

George W. was considered George Sr.'s son, JEBBY JEB Bush's brother, a Yale graduate, and Skull and Bones member. He knew the "Conservative Right and Republican ideals" and took it from there. The "nation of prayer" emphasis got him a lot of support from those who were not initially impressed with his political and social platforms.

If Obama had a lackluster political experience but came from a line of politicians or had some other networks that his criticizers appreciated, law degree and Harvard Law Review are not enough networks, they'd be able to give him more of the benefit of doubt.

[tnxbutterfly]

Originally Posted by texas*princess

I say "Go McCain".

I'm over the Dems acting like children.

Yea, Obama is inspiring when he talks, but I don't really think he has any kind of experience to back any of it up as a President. Maybe in a few years... And Hillary... I don't know about her...she just seems sketchy.

I'm not even a Republican either.

I was watching the debate the other night and Hilary just looked very smuged to me. That really just bugged the crap out of me. And I really haven't caught the Obama fever yet (turning in my black card right now)

GO McCain. I'm not Republican either

[Ten/Four]

Originally Posted by tnxbutterfly

I was watching the debate the other night and Hilary just looked very smuged to me. That really just bugged the crap out of me. And I really haven't caught the Obama fever yet (turning in my black card right now)

I have the same issue with Clinton. I know the campaign changes daily, but during the debates she acts all nice and then the next day comes with another charge. This has been happening ever since her "crying I found my voice" moment in New Hampshire. If she has that 35 years of experience she claims, shouldn't she already have a voice?

I'm just tired of it on both sides.