Bombtrack
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-07-04 05:43 PM
Original message |
WHY aren't democrats talking about the do-nothing job of Texas Governor |
|
being demonsterably inferior a preparation for president+Commander in chief in modern times than 6 years on the US senate intelligence committee and six years in Washington in general?
Hello? Edwards is better qualified to be commander in chief than Bush was and that is so obvious? Instead people are at best saying he's as qualified as Bush was. How many times did Bush visit NATO leaders before he became president? How many times did he visit the middle east?
|
Worst Username Ever
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-07-04 05:46 PM
Response to Original message |
1. We have stellar candidates that |
|
won't stoop to George's level until absolutely necessary. Hasn't been needed yet... it has been George v. George lately, and George is losing. Why get in the way of that? Rest assured, when it DOES come to that, these two dems will have the gloves off. Bush is GREAT at losing the moral high-ground, as we've seen (how is he going to trash them for running a negative campaign when that is all he is doing?)
|
keta11
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-07-04 05:47 PM
Response to Original message |
2. I like this line - George Bush's only |
|
foreign policy experience before the White House was - watching the Texas Rangers play the Toronto Blue Jays.
|
zbdent
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-07-04 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
8. I thought it was crossing the border for some |
|
Mexican poontang.
Oh, and wasn't there a very brief trip to the China or something, for some "mellow yellow"?
|
library_max
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-07-04 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
10. It would have been a good line in 2000. |
|
It's irrelevant now. He's the incumbent. We can't make "unqualified" stick to him any more. That's just preaching to the choir.
|
JayS
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-07-04 05:47 PM
Response to Original message |
3. For the non-Texans, keep in mind that the Governorship of... |
|
...Texas is in large part a figurehead role. That is putting it a little strongly but it is the Lieutenant Governor that has much of the power. This is an artifact of Reconstruction that we just never got around to fixing.
|
booksenkatz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-07-04 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
Even my beloved Ann Richards readily admits that the legislature and Lite Gov are much more powerful in Texas than in many other states. The governorship is part-time and ceremonial in many respects.
|
library_max
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-07-04 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
I used to think so too, but Perry is throwing an awful lot of weight around lately - cutting education budgets, redistricting, persecuting the Comptroller, etc.
|
Beaker
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-07-04 05:58 PM
Response to Original message |
5. the LAST election was the time to make an issue out of this- |
|
and some of us tried.
at this point, the governorship portion of his resume is moot, since he's logged 4 years as POTUS.
|
kwolf68
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-07-04 06:13 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Because the debate centers on the Democrats. Dems are always having to explain or defend themselves.
Kerry had to explain his service in Vietnam and with the exception of sites like this one, very little mention of Bush's time during Vietnam.
If we are always on the defensive, then our ideals and our vision get muddle. That is why Edwards is so important. He has a laser focus on what he wants to say. Being a successful lawyer, he has to remained disciplined at all times.
I feel good about our team and feel good about the election. And that is saying a lot, because I am apathetic as shit.
|
Zen Democrat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-07-04 06:32 PM
Response to Original message |
7. I've heard that several times on CNN today already ... |
|
I was shocked to hear Edwards defended so vigorously -- that Bush had the same amount of time as governor as Edwards has had as a senator and that Edwards had better preparation in foreign affairs as a senator. And .. it was mentioned (by Lou Dobb, I think) that Edwards will be an "understudy" not Commander in Chief, and his time in the Senate shouldn't be a factor.
|
carpetbagger
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-07-04 06:42 PM
Response to Original message |
9. Politicians who win elections set their own agenda. |
|
The discussion of Edwards' relative inexperience is yet another little piece of electoral flamebait. If our candidates play it, they keep kicking the ball. Then from now until November, Bush chooses the subjects and the tenor of the campaign to maximal effect (see Dukakis, Michael).
If you just leave them alone except to occasionally point out how sad their campaign has become, they will implode. The last time we won back the White House, their attacks got increasingly bizarre and irrelevent (see Clown, Bozo and Man, Ozone).
We've got better things to talk about.
|
katieforeman
(785 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-07-04 07:31 PM
Response to Original message |
12. Bush couldn't name the leader of Pakistan |
|
when he was running. Edwards' has met the leader of Pakistan.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sat Apr 20th 2024, 04:07 AM
Response to Original message |