industrialescampeon Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 For the sake of argument assuming Palin is unexperienced completely, what makes Obama who is the presidential pick more qualified than Palin, who is the VP pick? If you aren't wearing the Obama goggles, he didn't look very qualified to lead during certain parts of his O'Reilly interview. It's ridiculous to attack a VP candidate for lack of of experience, when the other side's presidential nominee is also inexperienced. Obama may not have experience like Mccain does (whatever that means cuz he doesn't know crap about anything either), but no one can deny that the guy is smart and never has he looked retarded on national TV. Palin not only has no experience, she is also mentally challenged or has no f***ing clue of what she is talking about every time out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prinmemito Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 Absolutely incredible. All of a sudden the cons are saying about Afghanistan what we have been saying about Iraq for years. :lol Since when are you a liberal dude? I know youre an Obama supporter but that shouldnt necessarily mean youre a liberal. Regardless, I seem to understand now, and I thank all here for enlightening me. -Obama clearly has much more experience than Palin, who unlike Obama is the VP pick not the Presidential nominee. -McCain is already dead and we just don't know it yet. -Palin is a purely political pick because it attracts the conservative base, but Biden who by coincidence adds experience and policy credentials to the ticket, is not at all a political pick. Thanks guys. More experience does not mean you will be a better president. We have plenty of examples in our history of relatively inexperienced men who have been strong presidents. And we have plenty of examples in our history of very experienced men who have been terrible presidents. Of course, if someone does not have a lot of experience, you have to evaluate their other attributes. If you think that Palin and Obama are on the same level you are not allowing yourself to be objective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prinmemito Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 I will concede that Obama does appear to have much more intelligence than Palin does (but I'm basing this almost entirely on his Harvard Law Review), but Obama gives terrible interviews when forced to speak without a teleprompter. So terrible that I question his intelligence. A failure to articulate his viewpoints on the most predictable of questions when inquired candidly does not fare well for a presidential candidate being lauded for his orating abilities. To be more specific, he seems to talk almost in a form of stream of consciousness. He will start down one track and suddenly interject a "look" in a condescending way while changing direction. It's this dearth of confidence that makes him seem untrustworthy. And this isn't to say that McCain is intelligent or even that McCain appears to be equally intelligent as Obama. They are all unfit to be in the White House as far as I'm concerned. You're seeing a different Palin and Obama than most other observers. You cannot reasonably say that Obama "appears" to be more intelilgent than Palin. Palin is entirely incoherent and makes statements that seemingly have no connection to the question at hand (and not in the "spin" talk that we're usually accustomed to when politicians try to change the subject). To claim she has foreign policy experience because Alaska is next to Russia and Canada and because that Putin "flies over Alaska" on the way to the US is absolutely ridiculous. You mean to tell me that all the incoherence you think Obama speaks comes even close to that kind of statement? Please! I think Obama has issues off the cuff in terms of being clear, concise, and direct in his explanations, but his explanations themselves are more than adequate and are totally reasonable. Don't mistake a lack of clarity with a lack of understanding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountainfish Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 Fareed Zakaria sees through this: CNN: But Dan Quayle wasn't very qualified and that didn't seem to matter, did it? Zakaria: This is way beyond Dan Quayle. Quayle was a lightweight who was prone to scramble his words, or say things that sounded weird, but you almost always knew what he meant. One of his most famous miscues was to the United Negro College Fund when he said, "What a terrible thing to have lost one's mind. Or not to have a mind at all." Now he was trying to play off a famous ad that the group used to run, "A Mind is a Terrible Thing to Waste." And he screwed it up in a funny way. But read Gov. Palin's answers and it does appear that she doesn't have any understanding about the topic under discussion. http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/09/...alin/index.html I think the most interesting part of the Zakaria interview is when he mentioned the actuarial odds that McCain dies in office being one in 5. That sounds about right based on his age, demographics and medical history. I hadn't thought about it before but thats a pretty high number. It makes it difficult to ignore the Palin factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prinmemito Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 Where have I even remotely insinuated that Palin has foreign policy 'experience?' Never! That's not my point! My point is that she makes those ridiculous assertions that are just beyond anything reasonable. She's completely nonsensical at times. My point is that Obama never comes close to matching Palin's nonsensical answers and assertions. You always try to change things up when you want to avoid an argument that you can't win. I was talking about Palin's stupid answers and how Obama has never said anything that is anywhere close as stupid. Geez. Anyone who really thinks Palin is just as qualified to be president as Obama is smoking some good sh*t. There's an obvious intellectual gap there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prinmemito Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 Obama had been planning this campaign for years. It's obvious. Who the hell runs for president out of the blue? You mean to tell me there are politicians that run for president because they are "urged" to do so but in fact they do not want the most coveted political job in the United States? How dare Obama plan his campaign for years!!!! Wow! Despicable!! You're coming off very naive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 But you also must concede that Obama sounds terrible when he doesnt have prepared words right in front of his face. Almost like a kid whos asked to read his book report but he never read the book and has to make it up as they go in a painfully forced manner. That is what Obama sounds like when speaking on the fly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying_Mollusk Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 But you also must concede that Obama sounds terrible when he doesnt have prepared words right in front of his face. Almost like a kid whos asked to read his book report but he never read the book and has to make it up as they go in a painfully forced manner. That is what Obama sounds like when speaking on the fly. You're talking about the way Obama stammers? So he isn't elequant when speaking off the cuff. I think that has more to do with the fact that he doesn't want to have a gaffe that politicians tend to have that can cost him the election. The "bitter" comment almost did. At least Obama actually knows what he is talking about though. I'm still waiting for an example of an incoherent rambling non-answer to a question from Obama. This women is plain dumb and has no clue what she is talking about. Another part of Couric's interview: she was asked to name one SCOTUS opinion besides Roe v. Wade. She sat there silently. But hey, she is qualified as an insurance policy to one day name justices to that same court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying_Mollusk Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 Obama had been planning this campaign for years. It's obvious. Who the hell runs for president out of the blue? You mean to tell me there are politicians that run for president because they are "urged" to do so but in fact they do not want the most coveted political job in the United States? How dare Obama plan his campaign for years!!!! Wow! Despicable!! You're coming off very naive. LOL. McCain has been running for president for 8 years! This quote shows more about him though: "I didn't decide to run for president to start a national crusade for the political reforms I believed in or to run a campaign as if it were some grand act of patriotism. In truth, I wanted to be president because it had become my ambition to be president. . . . In truth, I'd had the ambition for a long time." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 But you also must concede that Obama sounds terrible when he doesnt have prepared words right in front of his face. Almost like a kid whos asked to read his book report but he never read the book and has to make it up as they go in a painfully forced manner. That is what Obama sounds like when speaking on the fly. You're talking about the way Obama stammers? So he isn't elequant when speaking off the cuff. I think that has more to do with the fact that he doesn't want to have a gaffe that politicians tend to have that can cost him the election. The "bitter" comment almost did. At least Obama actually knows what he is talking about though. I'm still waiting for an example of an incoherent rambling non-answer to a question from Obama. This women is plain dumb and has no clue what she is talking about. Another part of Couric's interview: she was asked to name one SCOTUS opinion besides Roe v. Wade. She sat there silently. But hey, she is qualified as an insurance policy to one day name justices to that same court. Palin is not dumb, so put that thought in your back pocket. She graduated from one of the better public universities(Idaho, shockingly, is on par with UNC and Illinois-go figure). So what if it is a journalism degree. As far as Obama knowing what he is talking about, politically, you have to wonder. He has about equal experience to Palin, and like her his only experience is at the state level(I know hes a US Senator, but hes really done nothing since he came to Washington). And his time as a state senator was nothing to write home about. Add that to the fact that Obama himself is a product of the most corrupt government in United States history, the Illinois Democratic Party, and he either changes his mind or doesnt vote at all on nearly every issue, he is not an appealing candidate. In fact, probably the least qualified major ticket presidential candidate ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying_Mollusk Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 But you also must concede that Obama sounds terrible when he doesnt have prepared words right in front of his face. Almost like a kid whos asked to read his book report but he never read the book and has to make it up as they go in a painfully forced manner. That is what Obama sounds like when speaking on the fly. You're talking about the way Obama stammers? So he isn't elequant when speaking off the cuff. I think that has more to do with the fact that he doesn't want to have a gaffe that politicians tend to have that can cost him the election. The "bitter" comment almost did. At least Obama actually knows what he is talking about though. I'm still waiting for an example of an incoherent rambling non-answer to a question from Obama. This women is plain dumb and has no clue what she is talking about. Another part of Couric's interview: she was asked to name one SCOTUS opinion besides Roe v. Wade. She sat there silently. But hey, she is qualified as an insurance policy to one day name justices to that same court. Palin is not dumb, so put that thought in your back pocket. She graduated from one of the better public universities(Idaho, shockingly, is on par with UNC and Illinois-go figure). So what if it is a journalism degree. As far as Obama knowing what he is talking about, politically, you have to wonder. He has about equal experience to Palin, and like her his only experience is at the state level(I know hes a US Senator, but hes really done nothing since he came to Washington). And his time as a state senator was nothing to write home about. Add that to the fact that Obama himself is a product of the most corrupt government in United States history, the Illinois Democratic Party, and he either changes his mind or doesnt vote at all on nearly every issue, he is not an appealing candidate. In fact, probably the least qualified major ticket presidential candidate ever. 1 example of something he has said that is as bad as what she has been saying. One. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legacyofCangelosi Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 For the sake of argument assuming Palin is unexperienced completely, what makes Obama who is the presidential pick more qualified than Palin, who is the VP pick? If you aren't wearing the Obama goggles, he didn't look very qualified to lead during certain parts of his O'Reilly interview. It's ridiculous to attack a VP candidate for lack of of experience, when the other side's presidential nominee is also inexperienced. Please find me one quote of his that is as totally retarded as her numerous quotes in these interviews. You're absolutely muddying the waters on this because of your partisan bent. Not minor errors like 57 states(which McCain, Biden, and Obama make), but total rambling non-sensiscal non-answers. Patisan bias :lol If I had partisan bias I'd be talking about Barr in this post, because that's my party, even though I don;t agree with them on everything. Your partisan bias is what is making you think those statements are retarded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying_Mollusk Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 In fact, probably the least qualified major ticket presidential candidate ever. Just how much should experience count in the country's decision for president? When Abraham Lincoln ran for President of the United States, his total political experience was limited to a single term in the U.S. Congress, and a handful of terms in the state legislature in Illinois. (for a more detailed recounting of his political experience, click here). He ran for U.S. Senate and was defeated. He was involved in failed businesses (although their failures were not his fault). He was a successful lawyer, but there was nothing in his background to suggest to the nation's electorate that he would go on to become such a towering figure in American history. http://abrahamlincolnblog.blogspot.com/200...esidential.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hotcorner Posted September 30, 2008 Author Share Posted September 30, 2008 If she's not dumb she's certainly ill-prepared for this kind of position. And we're told she's being treated unfairly?? In the face of the intimidating giants of the world like Charlie freaking Gibson and Katie Couric! Christ. As Fareed put it, it's not that she doesn't know the answers, it's that she doesn't even seem to understand the questions. Her comprehension of the bailout question was stupifying. Gee, think you might get a couple of questions on the bailout?? Makes you think she has no idea what the heck is going on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying_Mollusk Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 If she's not dumb she's certainly ill-prepared for this kind of position. And we're told she's being treated unfairly?? In the face of the intimidating giants of the world like Charlie freaking Gibson and Katie Couric! Christ. As Fareed put it, it's not that she doesn't know the answers, it's that she doesn't even seem to understand the questions. Her comprehension of the bailout question was stupifying. Gee, think you might get a couple of questions on the bailout?? Makes you think she has no idea what the heck is going on. Dumb was probably the wrong word. But yeah, she is woefully unqualified for higher level office. Obama's experience is limited, but he knows what he is talking about. Nobody is really able to undermine this, so they are critical of the way he presents his point. Btw, anyone here that has been to law school can attest to the fact that going to Harvard Law and ending up on the law journal is an enormous qualification in and of itself. The general public probably doesn't see how qualifying that is, but you have to be extremely intelligent to accomplish what Obama accomplished. This isn't just a matter of working hard. You have to understand complex legal issues that a lot of law students and lawyers don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 I am critical of all of it. What makes you think Obama knows what he is talking about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prinmemito Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 What makes you think anyone knows what they're talking about? What makes you think McCain knows what he's talking about? Stupid questions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puma Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 I stopped taking Jimmy seriously when he said Palin wasn't dumb. :lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Godfather Posted September 30, 2008 Share Posted September 30, 2008 I stopped taking Jimmy seriously when he said Palin wasn't dumb. :lol How can you call her dumb? Not smart enough to be the President of the United States? Sure. But dumb? no. That's just...umm..dumb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
industrialescampeon Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 LOL. McCain has been running for president for 8 years! This quote shows more about him though: He also showed some sincerity and sacrifice by being tortured and imprisoned in Vietnam. Obama protested genocide on his college campus. The man got shot down during the war and did his duty, which was to endure his ordeal because he wasn't really gonna denounce the war. It was unfortunate for him, but it is war, and unfortunate things happen to those who are involved in wars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FutureGM Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Anyone see the next part of this interview that just aired? It wasn't much better than the last part. You can find it on CBS.com, somewhere... Here are some key points: -Made it clear she believes homosexuality is a choice -Says she supports contraception, but either wasn't familiar with or doesn't support use of the Morning After Pill (which has lowered the number of abortions). -When asked again whether or not she believed global warming was manmade, she repeated the same answer, word for word, that Katie got from her the first time. -Reiterated her support for drilling in ANWR, even though McCain opposes it -Surprisingly she had no problem teaching evolution as accepted science in schools -After saying that she read all sorts of different media sources, when asked to name one, she drew a blank. :blink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
industrialescampeon Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 LOL. McCain has been running for president for 8 years! This quote shows more about him though: He also showed some sincerity and sacrifice by being tortured and imprisoned in Vietnam. Obama protested genocide on his college campus. The man got shot down during the war and did his duty, which was to endure his ordeal because he wasn't really gonna denounce the war. It was unfortunate for him, but it is war, and unfortunate things happen to those who are involved in wars. Where did I say it was a qualification? All I insinuated was that he demonstrated a pure act of selflessness which is a stark contrast from what I've seen from Obama since 2004. Also, if you think all soldiers would 'do their duty' in that fashion, then you are kidding yourself. Especially in an army that wasn't all volunteer. I am not insinuating that Obama doesn't love America. I am merely insinuating that he loves his own legacy more. Only such an individual would deem himself qualified for office after completing a single term in a state senate. Where did I say that YOU said it was a qualification? Point it out in my two sentence comment please. I was merely refering to his duty as a soldier, which, like you pointed out, not every soldier adheres by. McCain, thank goodness for his political career, did, otherwise we wouldn't be talking much about him would we? But now that you point it out, he does make a big deal out of it as if it should earn him anything else but a Purple Heart, namely the presidency. And that's just absurd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
industrialescampeon Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 You edited your post after the fact. Why lie about it? Huh? what fact? You are ridiculous buddy. Can't you just admit that you went on a tangent when you didn't have to? I've no need to erase stuff off an internet forum to "win" a conversation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 I am not insinuating that Obama doesn't love America. I am merely insinuating that he loves his own legacy more. Only such an individual would deem himself qualified for office after completing a single term in a state senate. He was a very mediocre state senator as well. He really did...nothing of any value. Just glad he wasnt representing my district. -Surprisingly she had no problem teaching evolution as accepted science in schools She has said that from the very beginning, so I dont know what is so surprising about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FutureGM Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 -Surprisingly she had no problem teaching evolution as accepted science in schools She has said that from the very beginning, so I dont know what is so surprising about it. It's surprising considering how conservative her other views are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.