Dems are bound and determined to screw this election up.

[ginchinchili]

It will be interesting to see the Democrats' reaction after victory once again slips from their grasp like trying to handle a wet fish on steroids. All Bush had to do to get the Republicans to follow him was to repeat the word terrorists. For the Dems, the word is change, but both words are just tools used to manipulate the public so that these men can fulfill their ambitions. Beyond that, the words are meaningless. Neither man has the experience necessary to make a good president. We are currently at war. Obama has zero foreign policy experience and zero military experience. Why is simple math so difficult for Democrats?

[Xipe Totec]

1. So, your point is that a man with zero foreign policy, and zero military experience is unelectable?

'cause I'm thinking several recent examples debunk that notion.

[no name no slogan]

2. Need help? We may have to send out to NASA to calculate this one (nt)

[Xipe Totec]

3. As a matter of fact, I am a rocket scientist

you were saying?

[no name no slogan]

4. Well, never mind me. You've got it covered!

Tell me if you know of any social workers who need help on how to use their computers. :D

[Xipe Totec]

5. I'm just saying neither Bush, nor Clinton had

foreign policy or military experience, and they both got elected.

Twice.

One of them learned on the job, the other one never learned.

So the argument, as stated in the OP, is bogus.

Whether it is a good idea to elect somebody w/o foreign policy or military experience, that's a different matter.

As for helping social workers with their computers, I'm always willing and able :hi:

(PS: Chimpie's AWOL stint in the National Guard, hardly qualifies as military experience).

[no name no slogan]

6. EXACTLY. As Fred Durst would say, I'm in agree-ance with you.

Clinton didn't have it, Reagan didn't have it, Ford didn't have it. Carter didn't have it (but he was in the peacetime Navy). Kennedy barely had it, but that was because he was busy getting torpedoed in WWII.

Foreign policy experience (pre-presidency) has never been an indicator for a successful presidency.

[Xipe Totec]

7. Ah, got cha! We ARE in violent agreement!

:hi:

[ginchinchili]

9. The US wasn't at war, rocket scientist.

We were not at war when either of those men were elected president.

[Xipe Totec]

10. We're at war?

News to me.

PS: Maybe Mississippi is at war and nobody told me? :shrug:

[ErnestoG]

31. We're not at war now either, technically

Unless you can provide a Congressional Declaration that states otherwise.

[ginchinchili]

8. Care to name them?

Those who we elected president w/o any foreign policy or military experience at a time of war?

[Xipe Totec]

11. When did Congress declare war?

On whom?

Are they still around?

Oh, and, PS:

FDR

for a more complete list:

Presidents with no military experience

John Adams
Thomas Jefferson
John Quincy Adams
Martin Van Buren
Grover Cleveland
William Taft
Woodrow Wilson
Warren Harding
Calvin Coolidge
Herbert Hoover
Franklin Roosevelt
Bill Clinton

[OzarkDem]

12. Its pretty much done already

They took the corporate money and thought they could still control the game, but my guess is they're starting to realize its not under their control anymore. They have to ride it out and see where they end up. So do we.

[Xipe Totec]

14. Point 1.- I'm an Edwards supporter

or was, till he dropped out.

Point 2.- Edwards didn't have any foreign policy or military experience either.

[OzarkDem]

17. Policy experience doesn't count in this race now

just willingness to do as your told in exchange for financial support.

Obama will lose the GE because he has a lot of baggage and no experience running in a national campaign against GOP candidates and their dirty tricksters, a hostile news media and a lot of corporate money.

There are very few candidates who can pull that off.

[Xipe Totec]

18. Wrong again

Neither GWB, nor BC, nor JFK for that matter, had experience running a national campaign before they were elected.

Where, pray tell, are you getting your facts from? :shrug:

[OzarkDem]

19. Its a different world

Corporate America has already invested nearly half a billion in this election. They're calling the shots.

[Xipe Totec]

20. You keep changing your point

If you have a point, make it.

Clearly, and distinctly.

If you're just whining because your favorite candidate lost, say so.

Then I will leave you to mourn in peace.

[OzarkDem]

21. We're having two different discussions here

you seem to think Obama has a chance in the GE. I'm saying its not up to him whether he wins or loses, its up to the folks with all the money who control the news media and have invested nearly half a billion in the Dem primaries so far.

Obama's choices are either cut a deal with them or let them destroy his campaign and reputation. There are very few candidates who can go up against the corporate America-media powerhouse and win.

[Xipe Totec]

22. Don't assume everyone around you is naive

Read The Irony of Democracy: An Uncommon Introduction to American Politics

then you will be where I was 35 years ago.

[OzarkDem]

23. Enlighten me

[Xipe Totec]

24. Read it

I don't have time to be your mentor.

[OzarkDem]

25. I'm not asking you to

Just make your case.

[Xipe Totec]

27. We live in a plutocracy

that's as succinct as I can make my point.

[OzarkDem]

29. I agree

and its a plutocracy whose leaders have become highly organized and more effective at bending our government and political and electoral systems to serve its needs. And that is a system that neither Obama or the Democratic Party can't beat. The only way they can win is to give themselves over to its control.

[Xipe Totec]

30. The best we can do is bias the trajectory

Edwards was too obvious and overt.

That's why he's out of the race.

[OzarkDem]

32. I dunno

I think its hard to be a "stealth" candidate these days, promising the corporations one thing then reverting to a Dem agenda once in office. All the boundaries between corporate influence and the WH have been removed during the Bush years.

A candidate could only do it if they weren't planning to run for re-election. Even then, the pressure the news media could bring to bear against that administration would be unbearable. Recall the Clinton years and the new faux scandals cropping up every other week. Bill Clinton did a great job of dealing with the pressure while still getting his agenda through Congress. I don't think Obama is in that league.

[SayitAintSo]

13. Snatching defeat again from the jaws of victory... eh ? n/t

[cali]

15. LOL!

people who think they know what will come to pass with absolute assurance, are full of crap. You appear pretty ignorant. Oh, and yes, Obama does have some fp experience; he's been in the U.S Senate for three years.

Arrogant and ignorant. what a combo you have going for you.

[CreekDog]

16. Do go on about Hillary's experience as a Navy Seal and the non-Senate

dealings with Foreign leaders on war/peace issues.

Do tell.

[AtomicKitten]

26. And Hillary f*cked up the most important decision as a Senator - the IWR.

Good judgment trumps "experience." Her's is the kind of "experience" Americans can do without.

[Arugula Latte]

28. Nominating Hillary is the way we'll blow it.

She is poison; she will bring out the Repuke voters in droves.

[Skwmom]

33. Clinton's foreign policy experience led her to vote for the worst

debacle in U.S. History (she didn't even bother to read the intelligence report). And what military experience does Clinton have? Why doesn't she encourage her daughter to join the military if she's such a war hawk?