The Intellectual Professor in Chief.

Experience does not always mean experience in the position in question.
More often, it refers to experience that affords you TRANSFERABLE skills from a previous position to the position in question.

One who ran a large business has transferrable skills to POTUS

One who ran a state as Governor has trnasferrable skills to POTUS

One who was a community organizer and never had to make payroll; one who was an academic and never understood the problems of applying ideology to decision making that affects others....such is NOT one with transferrable skills.

That's called denial right there.

Denial? Nope. Not denial.

As a hiring authority, and yes, I am......there is truth to what I say.

We do not seek someone unless they have proven transferrable skills. Ideally, one in the industry in question....but ALWAYS one with trnasferrable skills.....PROVEN trnasferrable skills.

Exactly what experience does our POTUS have as it pertains to smart, non ideological decision making for the benefit of others and within budget?

What experience does he have as it pertains to his responsibilities as CIC? Exactly what experience does he have where he can apply such experience to make decisions on behalf of his soldiers?

What experience does he have as it pertains to economic forecasting?

WHat experience does he have as it pertains to bip[artisanship? (He voted 95% partry lines and 5% present during his abbreviated tenure as a freshman senator)

So exactly what trnasferrable skills did he briong to the table?

Can you name one?

Point is moot, he has 1 year, 3 upcoming, as president under his belt. That is more experience as president than anyone in either party can get as president.
 
Why is being an intellectual a negative with the conservative right?

Probably because they are jealous that they are dumbfucks. Or they are so dumb they can't see how dumb they are. Just look at these stupid attacks.

obama, like any human being, is going to mispronounce something and misspeak on occasion. Bush was mocked because he did it nearly every time he spoke. They will just keep this stupid 57 states nonsense going. yeah, Obama doesn't know there are 50 states. man these people are stupid.
 
New republican motto: Stupid is the new smart.

New Democrat Motto: "I've done nothing, therefore I am qualified for everything"

all some of you basher are good at is repeating legitimate criticism of you and throwing them back. Can't even make up original points of criticism. Nobody take you seriously when you post such petty and incredibly stupid attacks and name calling of Obama
 
That's called denial right there.

Denial? Nope. Not denial.

As a hiring authority, and yes, I am......there is truth to what I say.

We do not seek someone unless they have proven transferrable skills. Ideally, one in the industry in question....but ALWAYS one with trnasferrable skills.....PROVEN trnasferrable skills.

Exactly what experience does our POTUS have as it pertains to smart, non ideological decision making for the benefit of others and within budget?

What experience does he have as it pertains to his responsibilities as CIC? Exactly what experience does he have where he can apply such experience to make decisions on behalf of his soldiers?

What experience does he have as it pertains to economic forecasting?

WHat experience does he have as it pertains to bip[artisanship? (He voted 95% partry lines and 5% present during his abbreviated tenure as a freshman senator)

So exactly what trnasferrable skills did he briong to the table?

Can you name one?

Point is moot, he has 1 year, 3 upcoming, as president under his belt. That is more experience as president than anyone in either party can get as president.

They can't even come up with anything else, lets keep focusing on experience. He's president who the fuck cares. And they say what are his accompishments? He's President of the United States, how much bigger of an accomplishment can you get?
 
That's called denial right there.

Denial? Nope. Not denial.

As a hiring authority, and yes, I am......there is truth to what I say.

We do not seek someone unless they have proven transferrable skills. Ideally, one in the industry in question....but ALWAYS one with trnasferrable skills.....PROVEN trnasferrable skills.

Exactly what experience does our POTUS have as it pertains to smart, non ideological decision making for the benefit of others and within budget?

What experience does he have as it pertains to his responsibilities as CIC? Exactly what experience does he have where he can apply such experience to make decisions on behalf of his soldiers?

What experience does he have as it pertains to economic forecasting?

WHat experience does he have as it pertains to bip[artisanship? (He voted 95% partry lines and 5% present during his abbreviated tenure as a freshman senator)

So exactly what trnasferrable skills did he briong to the table?

Can you name one?

Point is moot, he has 1 year, 3 upcoming, as president under his belt. That is more experience as president than anyone in either party can get as president.

Point is not moot.
His experience as President has been met with one failure after another. I do not blame him...I blame Pelosi and Reid...but toi date, the only concrete accomplishment that I can come up with is....well....I cant come upo with one.

Sure, we have the "cloudy" jobs saved thing...and the "cloudy" took us from the brink of another great depression thing...and the cloudy the rest of the world like us better thing...and of course the "cloudy" GITMO will close one day thing....not to mention the "cloudy" closest we have ever been to healthcare reform thing.

But as for concrete.....nada....and what does that say?

It says that experience that has afforded you trsansferrable skills is required to be an effective President.

ANd if the only experience you have in the field is that without proven success...then your excperience is deemed moot in the eyes of the evaluator.

Any other questions?
 
Last edited:
Why is being an intellectual a negative with the conservative right?

It's not a negative, unless you're in a leadership position. Experience is the key here and Obama doesn't have any.

Experience doesn't count for much if you don't have the smarts to learn from it....


experience as being president isn't the number one important thing anyway since presidents surround themselves with experience generals, experienced cabinet members, and many other experts in particular fields. People act like the president works all by himself and must know everything. Stupid, hence why their are cabinet member and thousands of people working in the White House
 
Here we go "he's done nothing". I guess these people think if they say something or believe really hard enough and repeat it over and over again, it will come true.
 
Denial? Nope. Not denial.

As a hiring authority, and yes, I am......there is truth to what I say.

We do not seek someone unless they have proven transferrable skills. Ideally, one in the industry in question....but ALWAYS one with trnasferrable skills.....PROVEN trnasferrable skills.

Exactly what experience does our POTUS have as it pertains to smart, non ideological decision making for the benefit of others and within budget?

What experience does he have as it pertains to his responsibilities as CIC? Exactly what experience does he have where he can apply such experience to make decisions on behalf of his soldiers?

What experience does he have as it pertains to economic forecasting?

WHat experience does he have as it pertains to bip[artisanship? (He voted 95% partry lines and 5% present during his abbreviated tenure as a freshman senator)

So exactly what trnasferrable skills did he briong to the table?

Can you name one?

Point is moot, he has 1 year, 3 upcoming, as president under his belt. That is more experience as president than anyone in either party can get as president.

Point is not moot.
His experience as President has been met with one failure after another. I do not blame him...I blame Pelosi and Reid...but toi date, the only concrete accomplishment that I can come up with is....well....I cant come upo with one.

Sure, we have the "cloudy" jobs saced thing...and the "cloudy" took us from the brink of another great depression thing...and the cloudy the rest of the world like us better thing...and of course the "cloudy" GITMO will close one day thing....not to mention the "cloudy" closest we have ever been to healthcare reform thing.

But as for concrete.....nada....and what does that say?

It says that experience that has afforded you trsansferrable skills is required to be an effective President.

ANd if the only experience you have in the field is that without proven success...then your excperience is deemed moot in the eyes of the evaluator.

Any other questions?


Maybe after three more years you'll see that you were wrong.
 
Denial? Nope. Not denial.

As a hiring authority, and yes, I am......there is truth to what I say.

We do not seek someone unless they have proven transferrable skills. Ideally, one in the industry in question....but ALWAYS one with trnasferrable skills.....PROVEN trnasferrable skills.

Exactly what experience does our POTUS have as it pertains to smart, non ideological decision making for the benefit of others and within budget?

What experience does he have as it pertains to his responsibilities as CIC? Exactly what experience does he have where he can apply such experience to make decisions on behalf of his soldiers?

What experience does he have as it pertains to economic forecasting?

WHat experience does he have as it pertains to bip[artisanship? (He voted 95% partry lines and 5% present during his abbreviated tenure as a freshman senator)

So exactly what trnasferrable skills did he briong to the table?

Can you name one?

Point is moot, he has 1 year, 3 upcoming, as president under his belt. That is more experience as president than anyone in either party can get as president.

They can't even come up with anything else, lets keep focusing on experience. He's president who the fuck cares. And they say what are his accompishments? He's President of the United States, how much bigger of an accomplishment can you get?

There's you problem...or at least one of the many you have.

A president's "accomplishments" are those that he has done for the people....not for himself. Becoming president is an accomplishemnt for his memoirs...not for your future.

You are quite misguided.
 
Last edited:
Point is moot, he has 1 year, 3 upcoming, as president under his belt. That is more experience as president than anyone in either party can get as president.

Point is not moot.
His experience as President has been met with one failure after another. I do not blame him...I blame Pelosi and Reid...but toi date, the only concrete accomplishment that I can come up with is....well....I cant come upo with one.

Sure, we have the "cloudy" jobs saced thing...and the "cloudy" took us from the brink of another great depression thing...and the cloudy the rest of the world like us better thing...and of course the "cloudy" GITMO will close one day thing....not to mention the "cloudy" closest we have ever been to healthcare reform thing.

But as for concrete.....nada....and what does that say?

It says that experience that has afforded you trsansferrable skills is required to be an effective President.

ANd if the only experience you have in the field is that without proven success...then your excperience is deemed moot in the eyes of the evaluator.

Any other questions?


Maybe after three more years you'll see that you were wrong.

Maybe....but my 25 years in the hiring feild has proven otherwise.

Lack of experience that affords you transferrable skills will almost always end up as a failure.

But we will see.
 
Here we go "he's done nothing". I guess these people think if they say something or believe really hard enough and repeat it over and over again, it will come true.

OK DOc...fair enough.

So here....list his accomplishments.

Not the "will do" and "saved jobs" and "brink of depression" stuff.

Give me a list of accomplishjments that history will NOT be able to apply to someone or something else.

Go ahead....I would like to see what you come up with.
 
Why is being an intellectual a negative with the conservative right?

It's not a negative, unless you're in a leadership position. Experience is the key here and Obama doesn't have any.

Experience isn't the key. If that was the case, Dubya would have had a successful presidency. He was a two term governor of Texas afterall. So, how do you explain that?
 
Point is moot, he has 1 year, 3 upcoming, as president under his belt. That is more experience as president than anyone in either party can get as president.

They can't even come up with anything else, lets keep focusing on experience. He's president who the fuck cares. And they say what are his accompishments? He's President of the United States, how much bigger of an accomplishment can you get?

There's you problem...or at least one of the many you have.

A president's "accomplishments" are those that he has done for the people....not for himself. Becoming president is an accomplishemnt for his memoirs...not for your future.

You are quite misguided.


you are delusional and :eusa_liar:

It's been one year, and you guys are thinking all you have to do is snap your fingers and the shitty economy will suddenly be fixed. it takes time. I think he's made some good accomplishments.

Instead of just stating your legitimate criticism of his accomplishments, you guys childishly just claim "he's done nothing". That's simply not true.

But I don't think many of you obama bashers know what a legitimate argument and criticism is, all we hear are the stupid political mudslinging bullshit that plagues politics
 
Conservatism has long loved to demean intelligence and education. It's a good trick to get the uneducated and stupid out there to embrace conservatism and vote against their interests. Make them feel that stupid is 'in'. Stupid is 'cool'.
 
Why is being an intellectual a negative with the conservative right?

It's not a negative, unless you're in a leadership position. Experience is the key here and Obama doesn't have any.

Experience isn't the key. If that was the case, Dubya would have had a successful presidency. He was a two term governor of Texas afterall. So, how do you explain that?

Experience is ALWAYS the right way to go....but yes, sometimes it fails.
Why?
Becuase experience, once in a while, breeds arrogance...and once arrogance comes into play, your lessons from experience take a back seat.

Lack of experience can only AT BEST bring out the diamond in the rough.....one that has never been tested or proven...but luckily was the right call.

Was this the time in our history to "gamble" ?
 

Forum List

Back
Top