Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama's biggest problem is that he lacks sufficient qualifications to be POTUS.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ginchinchili Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:53 PM
Original message
Obama's biggest problem is that he lacks sufficient qualifications to be POTUS.
But this deficiency is obviously not his only problem. Among other things, I find him to be untrustworthy. He claims to be a kind revolutionary agent of change, however, if he really was he would have a history bearing this out. How much different is the state of Illinois since his tenure there as a state legislator? How much change has he brought to the US Senate? What I see is the record of a very safe and ambitious politician. Too many of the tough votes that came up in the Illinois legislature were avoided by Obama, that is he avoided a "yea" or a "nay". Consider how he didn't feel it was important enough to show up for the Senate vote on whether or not to label Iran's elite military division a terrorist organization, then has the gall to criticize Hillary for doing so. Hillary shouldn't have voted as she did, but at least she voted and was willing to take the flack from doing so. Barack Obama is not presidential material.

And one last point. His supporters better drop this tagging people as racist any time they express their displeasure with the man. You'll only succeed at destroying his chances in this race and in future presidential races. I'm sure this ambitious man won't ever stop trying to be president. I used to think I could vote for him after he's had more experience, but now I see too much I don't like about the man and don't see myself ever voting for him. And it has nothing to do with his race.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
thevoiceofreason Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. I don't think you are racist.
Idiotic, yes. racist, no.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TML Donating Member (749 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I second that
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PetraPooh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #1
20. Well said, and succinct, what more could be asked for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roguevalley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #1
75. agreed. What a pile this is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eileen_d Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:55 PM
Response to Original message
2. I just want to say
the lack Wright-hysteria in this post is a breath of fresh air.

Carry on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jlake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:57 PM
Response to Original message
4. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quixote1818 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:58 PM
Response to Original message
5. I rarely see Obama supporters calling anyone Racist but I do see Hillary supporters
suggesting Obama is constantly screaming racism which is flat out false.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginchinchili Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. I've experienced it first hand.
And if you knew me, my life and history, you'd know how ridiculous that really is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrreowwr_kittty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. I bet you have black friends, don't you? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginchinchili Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #13
38. What difference would that make?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quixote1818 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #9
19. I have experienced being called sexist once or twice on DU
Once for suggesting Obama should pick a Woman for his VP. Though I know those who do this are not the norm for Hillary supporters.

Hillary's campaign is actively trying to label Obama as the "Black" candidate, and the best way to do this is to suggest he is like Sharpton and is constantly screaming racism. The fact is Obama wants to stay as far away from that label as possible. He probably wishes his staff workers had left the Ferraro's nutty racist sounding statement alone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #5
24. Where were you when Obama supporters started accusing Bill and Hill of racism
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 10:15 PM by Auntie Bush
during the SC primaries? That rock you were under must have been pretty heavy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quixote1818 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #24
33. They were accusing them of Race bating, which is a fact
I don't think many Obama supporters think they are racist but the Clinton campaign is clearly trying to bate the Obama campaign into screaming racism so he can be labeled the "Black" candidate. Obama is trying not to take the bate though I suppose a few of his supporters have fallen for the tactic.

Imagine if the Clinton campaign hadn't done any of that? Think how civil things would be right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginchinchili Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #33
42. But Obama labels himself the "black" candidate.
What bothers me is that he brings it up when it works for him and criticizes others for mentioning it when that works for him. And the truth is that he's half black and half white, but he usually leaves that out and simply refers to himself as an African American because that works better for him. And God forbid should anyone point that out. The truth is that most white folks don't care what is race is, but it's a colossal advantage for him within the black community. And then his supporters pretend that's not true. It's crazy. I don't believe in dressing up the truth so that it's unrecognizable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 11:02 PM
Response to Reply #42
65. Wow....it did not take long IMO for your to out yourself....
...there is always a tell. Soooooo....are you gonna add that he would not be where he is except for being black?

Just curious........ :puke:

Welcome to my IGNORE list.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JAbuchan08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #42
70. I don't think he has much choice about that
and he hasn't actually labeled himself the black candidate, he wants to be the unity candidate and it just so happens that being half black and half white is a very physical manifestation of this identity.
It doesn't hurt that he has a part asian half-sister, that he grew up in Hawaii AND Kansas, and worked in the south side of Chicago. I am not ashamed to say that the symbolism and significance of Barack's candidacy moves me alot more than Hillary's status as a privileged/victimized white woman.
I'm sorry, but I think that Obama breaks a lot more barriers by demolishing old identity politics rather than reinforcing them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #42
88. He certainly does NOT. He's identifies as a black man
but he's been trying to run a campaign that is not based on his race. The Clinton camp has tried there best to define him as a minority fringe candidate who can't attract white votes. And he speaks of his mother and grandparents in practically every speech.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #33
44. You gotta be kidding me!
Clinton was proud to be considered the first black president.

In case you didn't come up for air long enough...The Clintons wouldn't have turned all their black supporters against them. Obama and his supporters had everything to gain and Clinton was the loser. He lost almost all the black support after Obama's camp said he was making racist comments insinuating he was racist. They deliberately started this whole damn race debate and that makes me very angry and it's going to be really, really hard to ever forgive him. However, I would vote for him for the sake of the party. I don't bite my nose off to spite my face. That's more than most/many Obama supporters can say. Pats self on back.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #44
89. bullshite. The Clintons had a lot to gain, and it was Obama who had
everything to lose. When they saw that they were going to lose SC because of the black vote the Clintons chose race baiting. They made every effort to define Obama's win in SC as proof that he was a minority fringe candidate. And what they had to gain if they'd succeeded was a massive shift of the white vote to Hilly. It didn't work in most state but that was their game plan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #89
91. Gee, I gave you more credit than that!
Take the Obama blinders off~

The fairy land and MLK comment weren't racist and they never would have said anything to lose the very vote they have worked all their lives to accomplish. Obama's camp started that rumor making it seem racist like they do with everything anyone says in a way of criticism of St. Obama. His camp had everything to gain and he's been working on that ever since. If you can't see this...you're not paying attention. Haven't you noticed the red phone ad was racist too. What...no black faces? What an insult! He's not driving Miss Daisey etc. etc. etc. They even found something racist about her claiming to have more experience...make me sick!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Drachasor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:36 PM
Response to Reply #24
41. "Experience" as Hillary and McCain use it, basically has no correlation to being a good President
Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy, Franklin Roosevelt, and many other good and great Presidents had little experience. Hoover and Buchanan both had lots of experience, but were horrible Presidents. There are candidates that run the gamut of all possibilities, spread out randomly throughout the experience/good presidency gamut.

Judgment, integrity, platform, and how well they run an organization are better factors. I think Obama has the better record in these areas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginchinchili Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #41
57. I think you should expand on your definition of experience.
Those men had a lot of formative experience. Someone who did not is currently our president. If you like the results, support Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JAbuchan08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #57
71. Yeah, a well spoken constitutional scholar and community activist
has the equivalent life experience of a college frat-boy drunk and business failure. Really? and I suppose Georgie gives a good speech. REALLY?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SOS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #57
76. W is your only "experience" example?
Abraham Lincoln: Two years in the House - Civil War
Woodrow Wilson: Two years Governor of NJ - WW I
FDR - Two years NY State Senator, one term Governor of NY - WW 2

Nixon, however, had six years in the House and Senate, eight years as VP, was the 1960 Presidential candidate and was elected to two terms as President.

Based on this spurious "experience" argument, Nixon should have been a much better President than Lincoln, Wilson and FDR.
But he wasn't.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bellasgrams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #5
58. Q-He has called out both Cointons with racist charges and it was.
not true. He lies and weasels around all the time. I have lost all respect for him. There is not way he can win the GE and you know it. Dems nor Repbs will vote for him now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quixote1818 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 11:52 PM
Response to Reply #58
68. Do you have a link for that? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BumRushDaShow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
6. Like a broken record...
Or is it like that movie "Groundhog's Day" where things keep repeating over and over.

I'm afraid that repetition isn't knowledge.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginchinchili Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #6
17. Sorry, but Illinois is pretty much the same state as it was pre-Obama.
We need something more, and someone who knows how to do it. Foreign policy needs an overhaul. Obama has zero foreign policy experience. And you're asking us to vote for a candidate who has no foreign policy experience at a time when our foreign policy is in crisis? To do so you'd either have to not care about our country or simply lack the ability to think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BumRushDaShow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #17
28. Excuse me?
How can you say that Obama has "zero" foreign policy experience when he grew up in a foreign country? He certainly wasn't serving tea and cookies like a certain candidate I know who uses that as her experience. Clinton cannot base her experience on her tagging along with her husband but that is what she and her supporters have done. No one will report what she has done for her constituents in NY. Interesting how this little vetting doesn't appear anywhere and there have been complaints.

Your and others' broken record specious argument also completely glosses over the fact that the President is not a dictator... They appoint a cabinet who does the day to day operations of the gov't and serves the President in an advisory role. We are not electing a Secretary of State, we are electing a President of the United States..... whose job is to do what?

Uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States

Not just the parts that Clinton supporters deem important. The WHOLE thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginchinchili Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #28
43. Um...he was a little boy at the time.
I don't think that counts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
avrdream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #6
35. Did you notice that little asterik way at the bottom of your graph?
These bills were proposed during his last term........

Once the powers that be decided they wanted to make a U.S. Senator out of BO, they attached his name to all these bills. If you haven't read the article titled, "Obama and Me" yet, you should, because it details what really happened in the Illinois Senate. I am not from there but what you just posted certainly backs this up.

Here's the link: http://www.dallasobserver.com/2008-02-28/news/obama-and... /

Just sayin you may want to watch what you use in his defense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #35
39. oh snap!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #39
74. ...
tickle!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoFerret Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
7. Good points
<<How much different is the state of Illinois since his tenure there as a state legislator? How much change has he brought to the US Senate? What I see is the record of a very safe and ambitious politician
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laugle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
8. Excellent analysis!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:00 PM
Response to Original message
10. Ahem
From the US Constitution, Article 1, Section1

No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.


He's qualified.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginchinchili Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #10
21. That may sound cute, but to a serious thinker that is nonsense.
An educated public must demand certain qualifications from a would-be president. Not just that they were born here and breathing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #10
30. So am I.
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginchinchili Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #30
46. I've been reading your posts for some time now...
and I think you've got me sold.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:03 PM
Response to Original message
11. Perhaps He Could Be More Experienced. But The Alternative Is *Far Worse*.
I'd rather have someone who might be an awful president than one who I know will be awful.

For chrissakes, the woman voted to attack Iraq after blowing off reading the NIE. Unbelievable. She should be fired, not elevated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:04 PM
Response to Original message
12. Article 2 says...
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

That's it. Both Barack and Hillary are relatively low on the simple experience math, and McCain beats them on simple numbers. So try a different argument.

And most of your post could be rewritten by someone from the other side switching he/she etc. except for the present thing which has largely been laid to rest months ago.

Clinton's biggest problem is that she lacks sufficient qualifications to be POTUS.

But this deficiency is obviously not her only problem. Among other things, I find her to be untrustworthy. She claims to be a kind revolutionary agent of change, however, if she really was she would have a history bearing this out. How much different is the state of New York since her tenure there as a Senator? How much change has she brought to the US Senate? What I see is the record of a very safe and ambitious politician.

Consider the Senate vote on whether or not to label Iran's elite military division a terrorist organization. Hillary shouldn't have voted as she did. Barack should have felt it was important enough to show up, but at least he didn't vote for it. Hillary Clinton is not presidential material.

And one last point. Her supporters better drop this tagging people as sexist any time they express their displeasure with the woman. You'll only succeed at destroying her chances in this race and in future presidential races. I'm sure this ambitious woman won't ever stop trying to be president. I used to think I could vote for her after she's had more experience, but now I see too much I don't like about the woman and don't see myself ever voting for her. And it has nothing to do with her sex.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginchinchili Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #12
34. I really wouldn't argue the point because I mostly agree, however...
she does have more experience that Obama. After that they're about the same, as far as I'm concerned. They're both more interested in themselves than they are our country. I'm furious at Democrats in general for doing this to us. I still can't get over it. Two extremely flawed candidates at a time when the Democrats couldn't afford to take such chances. My God, polls show McCain leading both of them when it shouldn't even be close, not even close. All I can do is sit back and watch, the same way I did when we were gearing up to invade Iraq, and the same way I did when John Kerry was selected in 2004. The outcomes were easy to see way before they took place.

Americans just can't properly analyze their world anymore. Democrats, in general, believe that just because Bush was a disaster that our right leaning electorate has suddenly swung way to the left. Not very logical thinking. And to make matters worse, I'm seeing a growing trend toward stifling reasonable debate, just like Bush and his supporters had done. With Bush those speaking out against him were unpatriotic. With Obama, we're racists, and I can only believe it's going to get worse, and I deeply resent it. Supposing Obama does get the nomination but loses the general election. Will there be rioting in the streets? I wonder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #34
66. similar to me
he has more total elected experience and more community organizing; she is older and has more of a sense of the executive branch via living there.

I had people really jump on me the other day for saying they were more in it for their own ambitions than the country, so good luck with the flames.

I'm starting to think that expecting logical thinking from others had caused more frustration and confusion in my life than anything else...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earthlover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:05 PM
Response to Original message
14. Your are not a racist. As far as I know
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnnyLib2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:06 PM
Response to Original message
15. Politically precocious, IMO.
He obviously has advanced abilities. It's the lack of plain old experience
and learning-by-doing which troubles me.

An example outside the arena of politics:
Sometimes precocious children are advanced one grade ahead of classmates. It's a tough call, with risks either way. If the advancement takes place, you have to wait for results..... quite a remarkable situation for the presidency.

Recommended
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
4dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:06 PM
Response to Original message
16. GOP sound bites
Someone needs to quit using the GOP talking points here..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginchinchili Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #16
36. Hmmm...so you're saying that we shouldn't be allowed to analyze the candidates?
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 10:29 PM by ginchinchili
Bush was very active in stifling descent. Are you saying you approve of his tactics? Or is it just that the truth bothers you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izzybeans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:06 PM
Response to Original message
18. You might try looking up his record in the Illinois Senate.
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 10:07 PM by izzybeans
And then understand he decided to run for president because of what has been considered "the glacial pace of change" in the Senate, that place where politicians go to sell their souls.


And by the way, what are the formal qualifications anyway?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SunsetDreams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:10 PM
Response to Original message
22. I don't agree..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgQ4qdKCNqY

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph... March 15th

In Illinois, a vote of present means that you like some aspects of the bill but there is some that need to be modified. It is a signal to negotiate aspects of a bill. In it's current presentation, you can't vote nay or yea.

I find him very trustworthy.

I'm not going to speak about his record, but you can look it up at the Library of Congress.

Barack Obama is Presidential Material.

I think in your last statement, you should have said some of his supporters. Just like some of Hillary's supporters throw out the sexism card. NOT ALL supporters of both sides do it, so please don't make an inclusive statement.

You say you won't vote for Obama? I say if he loses, I will vote for Hillary. Why? Because we don't need another 4 years of Bush. This country is too important! Supreme Court anyone?

This notion of a Democrat not voting for the nominee whoever that may be, should really think about where you want this country to go.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JimGinPA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:10 PM
Response to Original message
23. Of The Three Candidates He Is By Far The Most Qualified...
Nothing in the OP dispels that in the least.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheDoorbellRang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:12 PM
Response to Original message
25. It's true. We Illinoians expected to rise to international superpower status
thru Obama, and we sadly have not seen that come to pass. :cry:

All we have gotten are some ethics reform legislation that has made our state a shining example to all. And, oh yeah, a new Dem congressman in Hastert's old district for the first time since Watergate, with some hefty help from Obama.

We were so saddened by Obama here in Illinois that only 65% of us voted for him instead of Hillary.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:13 PM
Response to Original message
26. You didn't say anything racist
until you got to the part about being unfairly tagged a racist, which you put in there for no apparent reason.

Illinois politics is quite a bit different in the manner in which campaign funds are raised. It is also quite a bit different for those who are on death row and received fair interrogations. Our planet is quite a bit different, with the Lugar-Obama non proliferation legislation.

It's too bad all you can do is repeat talking points that have been debunked several times a day. Those talking points will not change the fact that Hillary enabled Bush to launch an illegal war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earthside Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:14 PM
Response to Original message
27. Hillary's biggest problem is that she lacks sufficient qualifications to be POTUS.
Being married to a president doesn't automatically make her qualified to be president.

When it comes to the presidency, "Experience by Marriage" is a losing slogan.

Besides, she is clearly untrustworthy. Where did those Rose Law firm files REALLY come from when they suddenly showed up in a White House closet in 1996? How did she turn $1000 in cattle futures into $100,000 in just a couple of months? What did she really say to that federal grand jury? How close is Hillary to Abdul Rehman Jinnah?

Many questions with no answers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dave29 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:16 PM
Response to Original message
29. I believe the only qualification is that you are a U.S. citizen and are at least 40.
That about sums it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rzemanfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. I thought it was thirty-five. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dave29 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #32
61. you are correct.
!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rzemanfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:19 PM
Response to Original message
31. Please tell me who the last President was who did have
"sufficient qualifications?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nedsdag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:31 PM
Response to Original message
37. Say what?
I won't tag you as "racist," but I will tag you as ignorant.

This is a free country and last I checked, Obama is qualified to be president. He was born here and he's over the age of 35, so he meets the requirements.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gristy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:32 PM
Response to Original message
40. Here's a guy with terrific experience
Navy lieutenant commander in the Pacific
Congressman 4 yrs
Senator 2 yrs
Vice President 8 yrs
He went on to serve as POTUS for 5 years
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #40
45. Are you talking about Kennedy? He was NEVER VP! Just saying!
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 10:43 PM by saracat
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gristy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #45
47. No, not Kennedy
Guess again!! :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #47
64. Clever. The Navy Lieutenent threw me. I forgot Nixon was one!
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 11:02 PM by saracat
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starbucks Anarchist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #45
50. He's referring to Nixon.
Kennedy was not POTUS for five years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnnyLib2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:45 PM
Response to Reply #40
48. Who?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starbucks Anarchist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #48
52. Nixon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnnyLib2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #52
55. OK. I get the point about that.
:blush:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freida5 Donating Member (649 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:45 PM
Response to Original message
49. Excellent post
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AZBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:46 PM
Response to Original message
51. Pray tell us about Clinton's fantastic experience?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LordJFT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:47 PM
Response to Original message
53. how sour are those grapes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginchinchili Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #53
54. Ask me again when McCain is being sworn in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LordJFT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #54
59. oh yeah i forgot, the candidate with the 50% unfavorability rating is more electable
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SOS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #54
79. Speaking of McCain, let's all vote based on "experience"!
McCain - 26 years in the Senate
Clinton - 7 years in the Senate
Obama - 3 years in the Senate.

Based on experience, McCain is the clear choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Johnny__Motown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:50 PM
Response to Original message
56. Opinions offered as facts.. again... nice try but those of us with the ability to think reject this
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:54 PM
Response to Original message
60. The "qualifications" to be president:
You must be a natural-born citizen of the United States
You must be at least thirty-five years old
You must have been resident in the United States for at least fourteen years

That's it. So Obama has "sufficient qualifications" to be president.

You may want a president with particular experience or particular views -- I get that. But its not an issue of "qualifications."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dave29 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #60
62. could you point me to where in the constitution they discuss the "threshold"
to being qualified?

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #60
78. Thank you. I was just going to post the same.
Yeesh!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginnyinWI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:57 PM
Response to Original message
63. you know what I like about Obama?
I like his ideas. I like the way he thinks about problems facing this country. And I like the way he's able to communicate them to people. And people respond.
I find him to be a very creative thinker who is both imaginative and pragmatic. The way he's running his campaign is an exhibits his ability to problem-solve. He's been hit over and over and over and still finds his way through, still ends up on the high ground too.

I really look forward to what he will do for us as President. He's going to be such a refreshing change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 11:24 PM
Response to Original message
67. You would be shocked at the percentage of even Democrats who think he is unqualified
Unfortunately few polls include a question about experience so I haven't seen one lately but the couple that did ask about it produced alarming results...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
69. I believe he is likely the next President of the United States.
While current polling shows Sen. Clinton the likely winner in the Pennsylvania primary, I believe North Carolina and Indiana favor Obama, which will eclipse PA's headline and make his nomination far more certain.

I don't see the nomination contest in sexist or racist frames. But I do believe one candidate has the inside track among increasingly larger and already-influential Democratic party leaders and organization chairs in counties coast-to-coast, and that candidate is not Sen. Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FogerRox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
72. "qualifications to be POTUS." One must be at least 35yrs of age.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
73. I don't think Hillary is any more qualified than Barack.
Being First Lady isn't a qualification and from recent reports she's been puffing everything from bringing peace to Ireland to creating SCHIP (talk about trustworthiness). Maybe if she released her First Lady papers we might believe she did more than select china, plan state dinners and decorate large Christmas trees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VotesForWomen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 01:52 PM
Response to Original message
77. correct; he's got plenty of probems. definitely not ready for prime time. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Forkboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 03:05 PM
Response to Original message
80. This was one of the first arguments against Obama last Spring.
And it still hasn't gained any traction. Doesn't your head hurt from banging it against the wall so often?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cottonseed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
81. Biden for VP!
Honestly, who can really say what the qualifications for President should be? There are none except for age and place of birth. There's a ton of people out there, that if I could just pick one out and install as President, that I'd rather have running, but that's not my choice. My choice is between these 2 candidates, the people that they will bring to the White House and party, and their general "story". I'm partial to Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cooolandrew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 03:14 PM
Response to Original message
82. I know he should of married Bill Clinont if only he had thought o fthat. whatever.
Edited on Sun Mar-16-08 03:15 PM by cooolandrew
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
windowseat Donating Member (2 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
83. All candidates are ambitious
Anybody who runs for President can, accurately, be accused of being "ambitious". Who has this country ever elected that didn't want the job? I can't ever recall reading that we had a draft for the office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bunnies Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
84. Please post a link to the prerequisites for being President.
Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
85. Sorry, but the unqualified angle seems bogus.
Presidents of the past have had less.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cooolandrew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
86. Hillaryis a war hawk that is how she voted that way. Barack spoke against the war..
when the coutnry was in rage and it was not poular to say that. That is leadership and foresight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cooolandrew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
87. Hillary is a war hawk that is how she voted that way. Barack spoke against the war..
Edited on Sun Mar-16-08 03:20 PM by cooolandrew
when the country was in rage and it was not popular to say that. That is leadership and foresight. War means no money for healthcare or anything other, that is why she stands for no change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PerfectSage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
90. So what are the qualifications of a good Potus?
Do you know?

What are the characteristics of "revolutionary agent of change"? Do you know? decentralized grassroots organization vs centralized decisionmaking and authority?

What are the characteristics of of good leadership? Do you know?

What are the characteristics of predicting Presidential performance? Do you know?

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20040521.html

Obama is active/positive. Your whole arguement goes down the crapper. lol


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Aug 01st 2014, 06:51 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC