Is there any record of any meaningful action for which he has had responsibility. I mean, really. I'm just asking: has he left a single significant footprint anywhere?
I acknowledge that he is very bright, an outstanding communicator, and as Joe pointed out, he's bright, clean and nice-looking. What more could we ask!
But, we have no idea what he will do in his moment of crisis, which most certainly come. There is nothing I see in the record to guide us. Hillary, we know, would be measured and resilient. McCain, we know, would be tough and stubborn. But what do we know about Obama?
His record of accomplishment, as best I can tell, is based on his speaking ability, which is a tremendous asset. Reagan was a terrific communicator, and he used that strength to great advantage. But a president's success eventually comes down to decisions: when to act; when to wait; when to push; when to give. Can those who support Obama help me understand what it is they see that gives them confidence (a more stringent requirement than hope) that he will be effective under pressure?
Thanks!
Hags
9 comments:
President Reagan had a large track record as well before he was elected President. Your question is the one I asked a while back with an attached You Tube video of Barry saying that he was not interested in running for national office due to his inexperience. This was in 2004 just after he was elected to the US Senate. My question to Rich, that was never answered, was what has Barry Hussein Obama done since he made this statement in 2004 that now makes him qualified to be the President of the United States of America? Still waiting for the answer.
Great post, Hags.
I'm an Obama supporter, though I share your concerns with respect to experience. I take comfort in the fact that the Democrats have a deep bench to populate the posts in Treasury, OMB, Council of Economic Advisors and State. I think BHO will be a quick study, as Clinton was. I look forward to having a policy wonk back in the WH.
The Democrats will have a monopoly on power. I don't expect them to blow it as they did in the '70s. I fully expect a return to fiscal sanity. I think the responsibility of power will scale back most new spending initiatives. When Rubin, Buffett and Bernanke take Obama to school, he will listen.
I just wish I was as certain of an Obama victory as you are. There's still a lot of time...
I'm not sure being the Governor of Arkansas qualifies someone to run the country either, but it will boil down to whether he can be quick on his feet and diminish any agenda he may have in order to best serve the people.
I fully expect a return to fiscal sanity. I think the responsibility of power will scale back most new spending initiatives. When Rubin, Buffett and Bernanke take Obama to school, he will listen.
When you write obviously contradictory statements such as this which causes one to ponder what you are smoking. Do you actually read what you write?
Do you bot realize that you cannot trust a party which has to face fiscal sanity not to start new spending initiatives which are not the responsibility of government and not only do not work but cause harm.
Heavens!
Okay, let's all take a deep breath and relax. If it's any consolation, the President really doesn't have that much power anyway, unless you're worried about Supreme Court Justices. Otherwise he looks presidential and shakes hands with a smile.
Unless he's a democrat, then he shakes your hand and lifts 35% from your wallet.
Why would I take a deep breath. Whacking by Bro in Law via a post is one of the most enjoyable things I do, other than clubbing baby seals. 0;) (Angel winking)
There was nothing contradictory in my remarks. It is you, Pride of Lebanon, that cannot reconcile his views with reality. I know it hurts right now to be a Bushie. Think good thoughts. Put yourself in a safe place...
So, if I am following along correctly and listening attentively, the responses from Obama's supporters are that (a) there is nothing in his past to give us comfort about his decision making under real pressure and (b) it doesn't matter because the president really doesn't do much.
Wow!!!
My response regarding experience would be to look at Lincoln. He did pretty well for a man of little prior experience. Please understand, I don't think Barry is ever going to be known as Honest Obama (can you say Rezko?) based on his record of keeping his word during this election cycle, but past performance is not necessarily indicative of future performance.
But the president really doesn't have to do much ?!?!?!!!
That's a joke , right? Defend the borders, invade (when prudent), pack the Supreme Court, oh, and lead. No fair saying the president doesn't matter.
We're having fun now!
Hags
Lincoln wouldn't have been known as Honest Abe if he had to withstand 21st Century scrutiny.
I wish Obama's proxies hadn't mentioned Lincoln's experience to rebut the criticism about his. It obviously isn't relevant.
If the only issue were experience, Obama loses. Of course, there are many more things to consider. If a balanced temperament were the only criteria, "No Drama" Obama would win hands down.
I support Democratic policies. In the spirit of brevity, I'll simply suggest that the Clinton era offered far more success than the Bush era. The adults were in charge in the '90's. The incompetence of the past eight years is surreal. It's not just Bush the man. It has been the foolish priorities and policies of today's GOP.
Gawd, I miss the party of Eisenhower + Nixon.
Post a Comment