Discussion in 'Congress' started by Jon, Aug 11, 2008.
RealClearPolitics - Articles - Why Obama is in Trouble
experience is very important! thats why none of our soldiers should fight unless they have experience in live combat. and no one else should get a job unless they have experience doing exactly what the job will entail
I'd rather have a 72 year old president, who will be 76 years old at the end of his first term.
Your sarcasm is noted, busara, but your message is foolish.
Running a country is something that certainly requires experience at a lower level. If you've worked at retail store for 10 years, would you like it if the new cashier were promoted to general manager over you just because he was well-liked?
That's the same thing happening here. Many qualified politicians are overlooked because Obama forced himself to the forefront based on "likeability."
I'm not at all concerned about Obama's age. Clinton was younger, and he was a good President.
Obama's lack of experience is what bothers me, among his many other unflattering qualities.
I'm pretty sure you weren't concerned with George Bush's lack of experience when he ran in 2000, so I'll chalk this thread up to partisan concern trolling.
I supported Gore in 2000, thank you very much.
I'm not a Republican. I'm not a Democrat.
How can you say someone wasn't concerned about Bush's lack of experience when they just said Clinton was a good President? That's silly.
That's what training is for correct? What training has Obama had? A civil rights organizer, a state senator or a US senator for less than 1 term? You do realize he stated he wasn't qualified correct? That's before he changed his position and now states that experience isn't important.
I have all kinds of reasons as to why I won't vote for Obama, but experience, or lack there of, is not one of them.
It is horribly overrated in therms of holding political office. In terms of the presidency it greatly decreases the number of eligible people that can become President. Last I checked the only two legal requirements were I believe being 35 years of age and a natural born U.S. citizen. But we have arrived at a place in our voting process where, in actuality, only previously elected officials can be President (which McCain/Feingold aided in). And we have the gall to wonder, why at the end of the day we see so little real change.
IMO one of the best things we could do is elect non-carreer politicians to office. The irony is absolutely amazing to me that we complain about what an old boys club the government is or what a tight grip it has on us, or that they don't listen to us, or how they sell out for votes, yet we have thread like this complaining about the fact that essential a person must have been a politician for x amount of time to qualify for the job.
Obama has made it clear that putting a new politician in office won't change the status quo. He's just as dirty as McCain, with less than 1/3 the experience. He's just as quick to sell a vote as McCain is. He flips and flops more than McCain does. And he wants to be the candidate of "change."
Change we can believe in? The only thing changing is Obama's stance on every issue.
Separate names with a comma.