Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
If Colin Powell hadn't fucked the dog by putting all his eggs in the backstabbing Bush cabal, he might have been a contender for president today.
Color is not the issue.
Get real your denial offends me
Why can't Obama be attacked? This is a primary campaign for goodness sake! Candidates attaqck each other, thqt's what they're supposed to do. Why is it anybody can throw anything at the Clintons--including charges of murder--but any mention of Obama's skimpy record is met with charges of racism? That's so racist in itself I can't fathom why people keep doing it without risking a serious backlash at the ballot.
Because you are allowed to tell any lie against the Clintons.
Never mind about having a credible argument.
If the Clintons respond, it isn't because what they are saying is true (because most of the time it is), it is because they are viscious attack dogs.
Never mind that McCain would have disastrous economic and military plans for the US. He is a straight talker. He said so himself. We must believe him. We are all sheep.
Don't you know that yet?
My point is that "inexperience" is a code word
I agree that "experience" is a code word, but unlike you I don't think it's racist,
Not experienced enough... hmmm.... isn't that what they always say when folks show up for the interview and they find out one of them is a Negro?
By 'experience' I think the "Coventional Wisdom-Main Stream Media" mean years in state-wide or national office: Governor, U.S. Senator, Vice-President or President. This standard is, after all, consistent with Edwards being too inexperienced to be VP in 2000 and with Kucinich having less "experience" than Obama, Edwards or Clinton. It's also consistent with Obama having less 'experience' than Edwards or Clinton.
If people want to argue there are other experiences that are as important as or more important than "conventional experience", or that should least be considered when evaluating a candidate, fine. Clinton is effectively trying to do the same thing by arguing that being First Lady gave her experience.
I live in Illinois, and as communications director of a state planning agency in the late 90s, I was contacted constantly by Obama's office with in depth and thorough questions. His office was in contact with our agency about as much as all the other state legislators put together. He hires brilliant people-- such as when he snapped up Tom Daschle's chief of staff upon entering the Senate. I've followed his career since then, and I've been extremely impressed at every level
I think this is a more effective argument for supporting Obama then arguing that 'experience' is a racist code word.
Vis a vis the disingenuousness of your replies-- the William Jennings Bryan administration
My remark about the Bryan administration was hardly disingenuous; he was your example. I merely pointed out that Bryan had never been elected despite his oratory. Since he was nominated 3 times for the Presidency by a major party, thus becoming the founding member of the Bryan-FDR-Nixon club, he had plenty of chances.
We would prefer candidates that didn't perform well academically? We would prefer candidates that are mediocre orators?
I can't say what we would prefer, only that I'm not looking for a President to knock my socks off in the State of the Union address. And I prefer a candidate who's an effective communicator. Given his recent Reagan and 'party of ideas' snafus, I'm not sure how effective Obama is as a communicator.
Lincoln, Eisenhower, and Teddy Roosevelt had less experience upon becoming president than Obama. Kennedy, Teddy Roosevelt, and Bill Clinton were younger.
Eisenhower was Supreme Allied Commander in Western Europe -- or whatever his title was -- for much of World War II and was also Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. Voters in Cold War America might consider this relevant experience.
Lincoln was arguably a compromise candidate at the 1860 Republican Convention. But even if not, how many Lincolns has this country had in the past 220 years?
Teddy Roosevelt became President becasue Czolgosz shot McKinley. That wasn't the plan. The plan was to kick Roosevelt upstairs into the obscurity of the Vice President's office.
Thanks to Oswald we'll never really know how Kennedy would have turned out as a President (I'm not a paid up member of the Camelot fan club). He also ran against an opponent with about the same amount of "experience" (8 years as Senator for Kennedy; 10 years as Senator and VP for Nixon) (on the other hand, Kennedy also had the support of a Chicago Mayor named Daley, hmmmm.....).
Bill Clinton was younger when elected, but he also had a lot of "conventional experience" having been elected President of Arkansas for life (or some such thing).
Mitt Romney's only political experience is four years as Governor of Massachusetts, and yet you don't hear people questioning his experience.
Puzzling indeed. Romney is the living embodiment of a resume padder and why 'experience' is overrated. See for example Romney left Mass on 212 days in '06, http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/12/24/romney_left_mass_on_212_days_in_06/
Why more emphasis hasn't been placed on this, I don't know. Perhaps the other Republicans are waiting until after Florida (or perhaps the Democratic nominee will have to point it out).
I was just taking a leisurely ramble through these posts when, to my amazement, I discovered that you had rumbled the worldwide leprechaun conspiracy. You#ve mentioned all those "sleepers" (Soviet style) that we've planted throughout the English-speaking world, although you failed to mention the Australian Prime Minister, Keating, who preceded that dull fellow Howard. I suspect that you could be one of those dreadful "male chauvinists" because you didn't mention Maureen Dowd of NYT and I've a strong feeling that Joan Walsh of Salon is touched by the magic. There's another lassie who writes in NYT that I also suspect. Her name is Gail Collins but I wouldn't be too gone on her opinions. It takes all sorts, of course.
Now on the question of Senator Obama and your hint about Irish heritage, wouldn't you know it: they're already laying claim to him in Co. Offaly, a county which badly needs a bit of glamour! Your suggestion of O'Bama is spot on. In ancient Gaelic society the "O" signified granchild of, so that the original ancestor would have been Bama. I've just realised that I must sound barmy but you are all so stressed out worrying about the South and the rest of it that I felt like giving you all a break. Naturally enough, we know about John McCain but you can keep Huckabee. Any claims he makes to Irish ancestry are totally false. Sure, isn't the man a teetotaller! I haven't the time to go into all of this and those Homeland Security crowd might not like it but I'll tell you what: Irish people have a great fondness for talk and to think that some of those chancers of Irish heritage are over there in Amerikay getting paid for it, while we do it all the time for free, is enough to make a dog strike his father. to be perfectly honest, we also have a fair share of amadans (pr. omma-dawns) over here so we kind of understand when you lot lose the head and make right eejits of yourselves. Bono is a bit of a pain and he's now over in Switzerland with Gore, pontificating about this, that and the other. I much prefer the Irish soldier (we have them too!) who was being examined by a medical officer and was giving very stupid answers to the doctor's questions. Finally, the exasperated doctor more or less gave up, demanding of the raw recruit: "Man, don't you know the Queen's English?" The dopey soldier responded in surprise "No, sir. Is she?" Ah, but was he just a clown or was he making a subversive and patiotic statement? The "Queen's English" is standard, orthodox English but the leprechauns stole it a long time ago.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
