O/T: A Milestone

Page 4 of 8  


No it isn't scary, that is why there is a campaign and a vote. The qualifications set down in the Constitution date back to when it was written, and are phrased like that to prevent a royal from Europe or another "outsider" to become POTUS. You are still free to require qualifications like intelligence, not burdened by campaign donors' restrictions or allegiance to corrupt politicians.
IMNSHO, the election process has gone further and further from real political ideas that the candidate stands for. The current pandering to the perceived lowest common denominator of whatever the public wants is what irks me. That and the obligation to choose between only 2 candidates, with third, fourth etc opinions not really getting any weight whatsoever. True democracy should (IMNSHO) take into account more than that.
At least with both Veep candidates known it becomes somewhat more interesting ... It is funny how the media can't figure out what Palin is doing to the campaign.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Han wrote:

The Founders didn't trust democracy as a form of government and carefully avoided creating one. It's a pity that their carefully crafted system is being corrupted into one.
--
--
--John
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Democracy should not be confused with a proletarian dictatorship. As everyone (should) know by now, riling up the (washed or unwashed) masses is too easy.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Other than the obvious final requirement of recieving more delegate votes in the convoluted electoral college than the next candidate, yes. Fortunately, the party candidate selection process tends to weed out the obviously Unqualified. Unfortunately, it seems to have a tendancy to select the grossly Underqualified...
-MJ
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 23:58:56 -0500, Mark Johnson wrote:

"Anyone who wants to be elected, shouldn't be." Will Rogers
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Just Wondering" wrote:

Just curious, what do you see as a lack of qualification(s) for the task of president of the USA.
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Lew Hodgett wrote:

I'm curious, too. Specific disqualification(s), please.
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Hell, I'll settle for explaining how he's less qualified than the bozo we've had for seven years.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Richard Evans wrote:

Perhaps you haven't noticed, but Barak Hussein is not running against George W.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What does that have to do with anything said above? A request was made for specifics on his lack of qualifications. I simplified that to a request for specifics about him being less qualified than George Bush.
George Bush is currently in office and therefore must have been "qualified" for the position. Using him as a standard, what qualifications does Obama lack?
See how easy that is if you only pay attention?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Lew Hodgett wrote:

The President is the Chief Executive Officer of the largest enterprise on the face of the earth. Somewhere in a candidate's background there should be at least a modicum of training and experience that would give some indication the candidate has the ability to make sound executive decisions. Obama has none.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Just Wondering" wrote:

Securing the nomination of his political party is not exactly a chopped liver accomplishment.
He so far is running a campaign like no one has ever seen.
We'll just have to wait and see if he used good judgement.
There are some who fell the electoral process is too long, I don't happen to be one of them.
Too much money, Yes, too long a campaign, No.
It tests the meddle of the candates preparing the winner for the job ahead.
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Lew Hodgett wrote:

Huh? How do you see that? He's running a personality cult campaign that is shorter on specifics than most campaigns on this scale have ever been. We knew more about Palin's background, history, and accomplishments in the first 10 minutes of her introductory speech than we know about Obama's history and accomplishments since he started running over two years ago (after having served what, 143 days in the Senate?). What do you really know about Obama's history and accomplishments? He served 8 years in the Illinois legislature after getting his opponent disqualified (not defeated, disqualified). Aside from supporting infanticide, what did he accomplish there? What did he lead? What major bills did he sponsor, support, or kill (aside from the ones he voted to kill that would have stopped infanticide)? The only thing we have to judge him by is his associations from the past -- and those are downright frightening for those of us who treasure the freedoms and opportunities our country has provided to people from all walks of life. The one bill that he has sponsored in the US Senate is one that would tax the US people to provide more money to the United Nations to provide to third world countries.
What do we know about his plans? 1) He will raise taxes on "the rich", 2) He believes that anyone making over $250k falls into that category (based upon his displayed ignorance of how the economy works, he won't distinguish between small proprietorships or individuals), 3) He has promised to "cut spending on unproven missile defense systems and slow spending on future combat systems", 4) we can't eat whatever we want and use whatever energy we want in the future, and 5) He believes we can stop using fossil fuels within the next 10 years.
I guess if you believe in the politics of austerity and decline -- Obama's your guy.
Hope and change? Based upon his associations and various statements, that's all we are going to have left after he finishes raising taxes and making sure that us little people stop using fossil fuels. That is, hope we can get him out of office before he destroys the country and change in our pockets.
As an aside: Definition of somebody who truly doesn't get it: Someone who drives an SUV and works at a defense contractor with an Obama bumper sticker. (Yep, I've seen it)

--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Mark & Juanita" wrote:

<snip>
If you were part of the 38 million who heard his acceptance speach Thursday night, it would appear you may have a serious hearing defect.
Might want to have your hearing tested.
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What? That he wants to triple taxes and (unconstitutionally) double the size of government? (...wonder where the rest goes.)

Might want to have your brain tested. Don't worry, the CT scan doesn't hurt and won't show anything.
Sign: "A taxpayer voting for Barak Obama is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders."
--
Keith

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Like every candidate before him, he did have a lot to say and some ideas certainly sounded great. Unfortunately, he is running to be the President, not the King, Supreme Commander or Dictator so those ideas will be tough to get made into law.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote:

Which is exactly what the framers of the constitution had in mind.
Enacting legislation that affects everybody should be a challenging process.
What is that old saying about making laws and sausage are best done out of sight or something close.
If he is elected, achieving many of those goals will be a demonstration of his ability to lead.
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Lew Hodgett wrote:

Hillary knew this, which is why she wouldn't let anybody pin her down and get her to say "I _will_ do this". That tendency toward honesty in what she expected to accomplish is very likely what cost her the nomination--if she had made grandiose claims that she had no clue how she was going to accomplish like Obama does then she'd likely be the nominee right now.

That's nice, but I'd rather know whether he can lead before he's elected.
--
--
--John
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Neither did George Bush. Just the opposite: He had a record of failure. Yet you seem staisfied with his administration.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Richard Evans wrote:

Had a successful gig managing a baseball team, made $15 million and had two terms as a popular Texas Governor....I just wish we all could fail half that bad....Rod
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.