EVERY new job has a certain "learning curve" = WE CANT AFFORD THE TIME TO BREAK IN THE NEW GUY!

[BigBearJohn]

Some thoughts about the candidates:

Our country is falling apart at the seams and can't afford to give a new guy time to "learn the ropes."
(When your house is on fire, you don't stop to teach the guy how to fight the fire, you call an
experienced firefighter to the job!)

Hillary already has been in the White House for 8 years. SHE KNOWS THE ROUTINE
She has played in the BIG LEAGUES, knows all the players and HAS WEATHERED THE STORMS OF OFFICE.
She knows the logistics and processes needed to get things done..to run the government.
She knows all the nooks and crannies.
She can hit the road running.
Obama, no matter how good he is, is new... he DOES need to learn the ropes.
Obama has limited experience in the Senate, and several years in state senate.
It doesn't mean he is not a brilliant man. He IS.
Simply put, we can't afford the time it will take to bring him up to speed.
Hillary's already there.


Let Obama be Vice President for 4 years. THEN, let him be president.

[Buzz Clik]

1. That's one point of view.

I like Obama. He'll be fine.

[Medusa]

18. She was First Lady, not President dumb ass

I guess that means we can look for Laura to run in 2012 if simply living in the White House gives you "experience" as president? Damn, I bet Nancy Reagan would have known that qualified as experience. You can bet for damn sure she would have been lining up to continue the "Reagan Legacy".

[BigBearJohn]

58. I'm not calling you names. Why must you make this personal?

[FogerRox]

35. I want a president that gets it.

I thought Edwards got it, he dropped out, now I'm supporting Obama, why you might ask ? I think Obama gets it.

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et al had tons of experience... at fuckin shit up.

You get my drift.... ?

[1776Forever]

55. Thanks I am right with you! Experience doesn't equal wisdom!

:headbang:

[FogerRox]

79. You know what I mean.. ? Bush Cheney and Rumsfeld had "TONS of experience"

at fucking shit up.

Shit... for that matter I would make a great president because I get it. And I know what the right thing to do is.

Power to the people ~ ~ ~ ! ! !! !

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

2. they said Slick Willie was too inexperience as well n/t

[apnu]

11. ... and Chimpy McDumbass too (nt)

[still_one]

14. Monica didn't think he was inexperienced, and neither did those other women /nt

[LittleClarkie]

20. Oh come on.

What does that have to do with anything.

[still_one]

34. You are right, it won't even be mentioned in 2008 /nt

[LittleClarkie]

36. Just as I objected to Kerry and Kennedy being bashed for endorsing Obama

I think that was a cheap shot at the former president, and I don't think you said it because it'll be brought up in 2008.

I think you brought it up as a cheap shot.

I'm sick of cheap shots, on both sides.

And I'm going to call them out when I see them. On both sides.

[still_one]

66. You are right it was a cheap shot /nt

[JohnBreauxDemocrat]

77. "slick willie"?

Beyond the pale.

[madeline_con]

3. Poo of the highest order.

:puke:

[Proud2BAmurkin]

4. Not at this time of CRISIS. Absolutely

[mckeown1128]

67. Be scared...vote hillary...

be scared....vote Hillary
be scared....vote Hillary
be scared....vote Hillary
be scared....vote Hillary
be scared....vote Hillary
be scared....vote Hillary
be scared....vote Hillary
be scared....vote Hillary
be scared....vote Hillary
be scared....vote Hillary
be scared....vote Hillary
be scared....vote Hillary

[woolldog]

5. Sounds like an argument

in favor of dynastic succession. Scary how easily people can be led down this path. Makes me afraid for our democracy.

[Cha]

6. hilary has so much expericence she

didn't even know that the bushites were leading them around by their collective nose.

hilary and bill are all about them and all that experience hasn't taught them a gawd damn thing about the value of human life.

[bowens43]

7. The experience that Hillary has is exactly what we don't need.

Hillary is unelectable. Even if by some miracle or some vote manipulation she managed to get into the white house, her presidency would be a complete and utter waste. She is so hated that Nothing would ever get done. She does know the nooks and crannies because thats where she makes her back room deals, We don't need 4 more years of bush/clinton style politics.

[FogerRox]

39. Right on bowens43. People vote for a candidate that they think "GETS IT.

I'm sure all the Hillary supporters think she "gets it". Fine. But the experience frame is real weak, in fact its crap.

[jgraz]

8. You'd think she'd have known not to vote for the illegal war

:shrug:

[maddiejoan]

21. That's the point

She didn't vote for an 'illegal' War.

It was an illegal war BECAUSE Bush broke trust with the intent of the IWR.

When you say Hillary voted for an illegal War --you are in effect saying Bush is not guilty of being a War Criminal.

[Joe the Revelator]

23. You do understand how foolish you sound defending the IWR, right?

I just want to make sure that you know you're spinning,and that you know that nobody with a brain bys it.

[maddiejoan]

29. No

I actually don't.

But then I actually understand what the IWR was.

[Joe the Revelator]

30. No, you understand the spin you want to use to save Hillary's vote

The vote was indefensible, yet you keep trying. I admire your moxie.

[maddiejoan]

32. I don't defend the vote.

I think it was a horrible vote.

That said --I understand the vote.

[Joe the Revelator]

38. Do you buy into the spin that Hillary didn't really think that Bush was going to take the country to

war on the back of that vote? Don't you think she probably should have read the damn thing before voting on it?

[maddiejoan]

45. This is what you don't get.

Bush was going in NO MATTER WHAT. He didn't need IWR to get his War on.

The IWR was an attempt to try and make sure the inspectors stayed in and we had a stronger international backing.

Bush pulled the inspectors. Bush went to War. The IWR didn't mean shit, and Bush proved he wasn't above staging an illegal preemptive War.

[Joe the Revelator]

48. Thats a staggering bit of spin

Seriously Maddie, you're a smart woman, you should no better then to defend an enabler. If Hillary has showed some leadership and got the party to vote against the IWR, Bush would have had a MUCH harder time going into Iraq. I'll admit it wouldn't have been impossible for him not to declare a police action against the will of congress, but to act like Clinton's vote didn't help Bush go to war with a mandate from congress is just dishonest.

[maddiejoan]

54. I suggest you do some reading

as to why Senators like Clinton and Kerry voted up IWR at the same time stressing why it wasn't a vote for preemptive War.

[FogerRox]

43. Right, folks gotta remember that many DEMs voted against the war

126 in the house, I forget the senate count. At least Edwards said he screwed up on that vote.

[jgraz]

33. You understand how the IWR can be spun. That's different

[jgraz]

25. No, I'm saying Hillary is also guilty of being a war criminal

She knew what she was voting for and she did it anyway. Being ready on day one only works if you have a conscience and proper judgment.

[nonconformist]

50. Is that all you've got?

John Edwards, who I also supported, did too. As did John Kerry, who I supported in the GE in 2004.

There's no such thing as a flawless, perfect candidate.

[jgraz]

59. What else do I need?

A million dead Iraqis not good enough for you?

At least Edwards had the good sense to apologize for his vote.

[nonconformist]

60. Oh, so if you APOLOGIZE for killing a million Iraqis, it makes it ok? nt

[jgraz]

61. Nope, but it means you're less likely to do it again

On the other hand, if you vote for a genocidal war, refuse apologize your vote, then vote for an amendment that can be used authorization for another war, you are either an idiot or a craven warmonger.

You pick.

[nonconformist]

63. Well, she has said that she wouldn't have voted for it, if she would have known.

But yes, saying your sorry is good... but that doesn't really change anything now, does it? Years later, I'm much more interested in how they intend to get us out of this mess.

Hillary is between a rock and a hard place with an apology at this point. If she says it now, she will be mocked and ridiculed for "only saying it to appease voters". If she doesn't, she's viciously attacked by people who were actually big supporters of OTHER senators that also voted for the IWR.

[jgraz]

64. Apologizing might have changed one thing

It might have changed who ends up being nominated for the Democrats. At this point, I don't see how Hillary pulls it out.

[nonconformist]

68. I don't think so, not at all.

If you won't vote for her only because of the non-apology for that vote, you wouldn't have voted for her anyway.

[jgraz]

70. Obama and Clinton are very close in terms of policy

One big reason not to vote for Clinton is that her IWR vote makes her less able to stand up to McCain's warmongering. You just know the MSM will spin it as an "I was for it before I was against it" flip-flop.

Obama has no such baggage on the biggest foreign policy issue in the campaign.

[nonconformist]

72. I really don't think that it will work again.

People are really fed up with the war. They know by now most of congress voted for the IWR. Most people just want a solution at this point. Clinton offers one. McCain wants to keep us there for 100 years.

It's a no-brainer.

[billyoc]

9. We've had a stuttering redneck idiot savant for 8 years.

What's the rush? :shrug:

[apnu]

13. He's not a redneck

still, funny tho.

[jgraz]

27. Sorry, which was the "savant" part?

I must have missed it.

[billyoc]

53. Actually I have no idea what that word means.

Sorry about that.

Nice sig. :hi:

[jgraz]

56. It's the opposite of idiot

It's usually applied to autistic children who have some surprising abilities (e.g. Rain Man).

[billyoc]

76. Oh, Christ, I'm doomed.

:scared:

[elixir]

10. DING DING DING!

[still_one]

12. Problem is I don't like how she voted on the war with her experience

john mccain also has a lot of experience, and I don't like the way he voted either

[MannyGoldstein]

15. Great! Ready To Start An Insane War On Day One!

It might take Obama nine friggin' years to start an insane war, kill one million people, and spend $2-$3 trillion.

Excellent point. I'm voting for Clinton.

[MannyGoldstein]

16. Great! Ready To Start An Insane War On Day One!

It might take Obama nine friggin' years to start an insane war, kill one million people, and spend $2-$3 trillion.

Excellent point. I'm voting for Clinton.

[McCamy Taylor]

17. Jimmy Carter WON in 1976 by telling everyone he was a DC outsider with no experience.

This is the easy to use response to this argument.

We are even in the same kind of situation. Corrupt administration, everyone wants a change. All Obama has to do is pick someone will military or foreign policy credentials to cover the War situation and he is set.

[Thrill]

19. This is a stupid argument

Whoever the president is they are only as good as the people they surround themselves with. Obama will be more than fine with great Democrats around him.

[HeraldSquare212]

22. She was in the White House, and still made the wrong decision on Iraq.

Apparently, she learned nothing.

[faithfulcitizen]

28. Exactly, and I'd bet her good friend Wes Clark even informed her what a bad idea is was.

political expedience is ugly.

[OzarkDem]

24. I'm all for turning back the clock

and re-instituting Big Dog's policies again. If he and Hillary work as a team, as they say they will, they can turn things around.

As Bartcop sez, it took the Republicans a long time to kill the Clinton economy. It won't take too long to revive it.

[K Gardner]

26. Didn't she also order all that china and gifts and such before she left the last time? So she has

plenty of "stuff" to fill the WH !

[scheming daemons]

31. Hillary's 8 years in the White House is NOT Presidential experience...

...any more than my 17 years with my surgeon wife qualifies me to operate on people.


The White House janitorial staff has been there longer than Hillary was... that doesn't make them qualified to be President.


What a silly freaking argument.


Obama has EXACTLY the same Presidential experience as Hillary does.... NONE.

[FogerRox]

37. The Experience frame is weak. People are supporting a candidate because

they think their candidate "gets it".

Weak, very weak OP.

[Samantha]

40. Hillary's running on a vastly-inflated resume and no one calls her

on it. She says she has 35 years of experience, what type of "experience." For 15 years, she was a partner in a law firm. For 8 years, she was First Lady. That alone totals 23 years. Those were 23 years of not being in an elective office. Those years she served as First Lady gave her "Exposure" to the routine, not "Experience."

She is a second-term Senator. Her first-term as Senator of New York was her first elective office. Barack Obama is in his first term as a Senator. He's been there about 4 years; she's been there about 6. There's no substantive difference in that. Prior to his taking his Senate seat, he served in the Illinois State Legislature for a number of years. Granted that's not experience on a national level, but it is Experience in serving as an elected official. During those terms, he actually participated in the Legislative Experience, voting on legislation, sponsoring legislation.

Her claim of "Experience" during her years as First Lady is another vastly inflated part of her Resume. She infers she was the same as Bill's VP by calling that "Experience." If that is true, what was Al Gore doing all that time? Speaking of Al Gore, Bill Clinton offered Gore a co-presidency to run with him in 1992. He gave him total control over 8 spheres of interest, which is why Gore joined the ticket after publicly saying he would not run. So if Al Gore was Bill Clinton's co-president, how can Hillary co-op that Experience tag without demeaning Al Gore's contribution. One might think this is a small thing, but it is not. In Washington, during the Impeachment debacle, many said Al Gore was actually running the Presidency because Bill Clinton was too depressed to do so. I never heard once Hillary was running the Presidency because Bill Clinton was too depressed to do so ....

Hillary's campaign also asks women to vote for her because she IS a woman. That's insulting to me as a woman. Why would they not expect women to decide for whom to cast their vote on the issues as opposed to gender? It's just pretty corny.

I don't think one can legitimately make the case Hillary is much more qualified than Barack to do the job on Day 1. But I do like reading your threads.:)

[LittleClarkie]

46. She can legitimately claim the work she did on issues like health care as experience

But she also failed in that endeavor. It is said that after a while she reverted to a more traditional First Lady role, though.

She has some experience. Not 35 years, though.

She's a lawyer. So is Obama.

You're right, they're fairly comparable.

He's gotten himself elected to more offices though I suppose.

She, only the one near as I can tell. Just the Senate.

[Samantha]

74. That's my only point - they are relatively even in that category

but I give him the slight edge because of the elective office thing.

Sam

[guruoo]

81. Hillary 's been involved in political activism in one form or another since 1969

I count that as experience.

[miceelf]

82. jeez

The experience frame really annoys me. She would not have been in the white house at all, if she wasn't married to Bill Clinton. But if someone mentions this, well, it's sexist to note that. But she wants people to look at her resume, including who she was married to.

Judge her based on the policies SHE tried to enact. Judge her based on her Senate votes. But her having been first lady doesn't mean anything one way or the other.

Take out the first lady thing, and she's pretty much as experienced as Obama, with somewhat less legislative experience.

[Berry Cool]

41. Well, under that logic, by golly, why are we electing a new president at all this year?

Wouldn't it be safer to just amend the Constitution to keep the guy in there who's already in there?

I mean...

He doesn't need to be "taught the ropes." (He's been hanging himself with them for a long time.)
He's already has been in the White House for 8 years. HE KNOWS THE ROUTINE. (Shut up and listen to Dick Cheney.)
He has played in the BIG LEAGUES, knows all the players and HAS WEATHERED THE STORMS OF OFFICE. (Big leagues? Heck, he even owned a baseball team once.)
He knows the logistics and processes needed to get things done..to run the government. (Into the ground.)
He knows all the nooks and crannies. (Of Dick Cheney's brain.)
He can hit the road running. (Into Iran.)
A newly elected president, no matter how good she or he is, is new... she or he DOES need to learn the ropes.
Both Clinton and Obama have limited experience.
It doesn't mean they are not brilliant people. They ARE.
Simply put, we can't afford the time it will take to bring one of them up to speed.
George's already there. He doesn't even have to take time to move in!
Why not let him put out the house on fire? After all, he's the arsonist!

[FogerRox]

44. Slammin comeback Berry Bush, good on ya...

[blitzen]

42. Let's just keep Bush, then....He has the requisite experience!

[Stephanie]

47. She knows where they keep the china

She wasn't actually president, you know.

[nonconformist]

49. AGREE. We don't need another president learning on the job...

that's worked out fabulously, you might note.

[Berry Cool]

69. Well, we could try the "learning on the job" thing again with one actually capable of learning.

It might work out better, whichever one we pick.

[milkyway]

51. Hillary hasn't been president before either. If she has then why does she keep talking about change?

[HeraldSquare212]

52. She keeps referencing Gordon Brown and the attacks that occurred right after he became PM

but to my recollection he got good marks for his response.

[jenmito]

57. So Laura Bush is more qualified than Obama? How 'bout Bush? It's not about living in the WH...`

it's about having the judgement to make the right decisions when you're in there.

[AP]

62. I'd rather break in a new guy who isn't going to put Larry Summers or Robert Rubin in a position

of power, than go with someone whose family has that experience in her background.

[Colobo]

65. Bah! Gobama!

[JohnBreauxDemocrat]

71. I said the same thing about Jack Kennedy -- I was right...riding around in open-topped car

in Dallas..what a shame.

[zulchzulu]

73. Rumsfeld and Cheney proved just how great it is to have "experience"

As for Hillary, she had no security clearances, no access to classified information, no access to presidential daily briefings and no access to White House staff meetings where national security was involved.

America wants a LEADER, not someone who steals her husband's resumé and starts out her years 35 years ago when she was still in college.

Hillary's touting experience in the White House is the same as the janitor in a hospital saying he's as experienced as a brain surgeon.

[alcibiades_mystery]

75. WE CANT AFFORD THE TIME TO BREAK IN THE NEW GUY!

Yes we can.

[Skwmom]

78. Is Clinton through her learning curve? Voting for free trade that ships

jobs overseas, voting for the Iraq War, ...... That really is one heck of a learning curve. Hey, wait a minute, she still pushes for free trade so I guess she has really learned NOTHING at all.

[jgraz]

83. And she still votes for war.

Sheesh -- I've seen goldfish that learn faster.

[Hippo_Tron]

80. Lincoln was inexperienced too, he did fine

And I've got news for you, Hillary will need to learn the ropes as well. There is nothing that prepares you to be president other than actually being president.

[RamboLiberal]

84. Hey I thought we put the grown ups in charge 8 years ago

Except for the windshield cowboy the Bush Admin had experience up the wazoo. That sure worked out well! :sarcasm:

[otohara]

85. Jeb Bush

he should have run, he knows what goes on in that big White House. He wouldn't need no training either.