Obama, and the Excuse That Bush Had A Similar Lack Of Experience in 2000

[JABBS]

Click here for more.

<snip>

It's true that George W. Bush had barely more experience on the national stage when he ran for president in 2000. But some would argue that give his dreadful performance, it might be good not to repeat history.

And with the country at war, and in a worldwide fight to stop Al Qaeda, the world is far different than it was pre-9/11.

[izzybeans]

1. Experience as a silverspoons kid vs. a community organizer and editor of the

Harvard Law Review

I'm weighing them in each of my hands and one of them seems overwhelming different.

[uberllama42]

2. Bush now his six years of experience in the Oval Office

And he is still not qualified to be President. This doesn't mean Obama is qualified, but it makes you question the value of experience. If a candidate is qualified, their experience might not matter. If, as in Bush's case, a candidate is criminally incompetent, no amount of experience can make him a good choice.

[Connie_Corleone]

3. It's more than just a lack of experience with Bush...

He's also an idiot.

Obama is not an idiot. He was smart enough to oppose the war in Iraq before the invasion.

[JABBS]

4. i'm not suggesting obama is an idiot

I'm saying that you hear about Bush's lack of experience as a reason to disregard Obama's lack of experience.

the fact is that Obama has limited experience with a whole host of issues.

[cali]

14. So list the whole host of issues.

Obama served 7 years in the Illinois Leg. He taught Constitutional law for something like 13 years. He's been in the Senate for 2 years. If he was elected he'd have served in the Senate for four years. He's a very talented, smart guy. How on earth can you compare his experience to bushie's? Yes, he's a little short on international affairs experience, but so was Clinton when he was elected. Obama actually has a much more rounded background than you are giving him credit for.

[fuzzyball]

15. Bush was the governor of 2nd biggest state for 2 terms

so had "executive" experience. He also signed checks on the front.
Mr Obama has never worked as an executive or for a profit making
enterprise. Sorry, he is not 10% as qualified as someone like Sen Bayh
who also has been a governor. Bayh is 10 times better candidate than
Barak Hussein Obama will be for a very long time.

[JABBS]

19. ugh

you can almost tell when it's a conservative -- they like to remind people that Obama's middle name is Hussein, as if that means anything. fearmongering, anyone? race baiting, anyone?

[fuzzyball]

30. Better get the "Hussein" thing out and front now as opposed

to in GOP commercials in October 2008. The sooner
voters get used to it, the less it will become an
issue later.

[cali]

21. On paper, Bayh is 10x better than Obama, but politics is

NOT a paper chase. It's a flesh and blood pursuit, and Bayh just doesn't have what it takes to galvanize voters. In addition, all that shit about how important life in the private sector is is just nonsense- particularly when you're talking about bush, who was a MISERABLE FAILURE in the private sector and had to be bailed out. What's more, it's widely known that TX has the weakest governorship in the country.

I've never seen a candidate with as much charisma as Obama. Everyone in the 2008 cycle, repukes and dems, pales in comparison. It's a rare thing: Clinton had it to some degree, so too did Reagan, though it didn't work for me- Obama has far more of it than Clinton and Reagan combined. And he is certainly far, far more qualified than bush was- not that we should compare the two. compare him instead to Adlai Stevenson.

[fuzzyball]

28. Interesting observations...only time will tell if Obama will be nominated

[PVnRT]

22. Yeah, nice job working the "Hussein" in there

Anyway, read about the Texas governor sometime. It's practically a ceremonial position with no real power.

"Mr Obama has never worked as an executive or for a profit making enterprise."

Straight up dumb. The federal government is not a "profit making enterprise."

[fuzzyball]

27. Are you saying Obama is ashamed of his middle name?

and HUH? Federal gov't is a profit making institution?

[caledesi]

24. Don't forget his community, on-the-ground experience after

Columbia. Lots of experience.

Say, as the rethugs did in 2000. 'Well, * is so down-to-earth; he is a guy you could have a beer with.' Well, I would LOVE to tip a few with Obama.

Another rethug point about when * was running. 'He will surround himself with experienced people.' Suddenly, we don't hear that. hmmm

[ripple]

5. Electing Obama would qualify as "repeating history"?

Not. :eyes:

And perhaps I missed it, but I didn't see the portion you snipped in the linked blog article. The article was about the hype surrounding Obama and ONE New Hampshire resident's opinion that he doesn't see much substance with Obama. I watched the Obama rally and press conference on CSPAN and somehow, I don't think that ONE MAN'S opinion is in any way indicative of the overall response of NH dems to Obama.

[JABBS]

6. And perhaps I missed it, but I didn't see the portion you snipped in the linked blog article.

Paragraph 5 in the linked article.

[ripple]

7. Thank you

I still disagree with the premise that electing Obama would be akin to "repeating history", though.

[JABBS]

9. i don't think it's necessarily repeating history

But the MSM has deemed Obama the main competition for Hillary, overlooking some better qualified candidates. Obama should have to earn votes. If he is swept into the nomination on a wave of hype, and not much more, he'll get crushed in a national election.

[ripple]

11. I agree with a lot of what you say

but keep in mind that a number of more experienced candidates have the sort of experience that we either might not want in the WH, or that we might not wish to have picked apart by the other side in an election. The IWR is a perfect example. Experience should be considered, but that alone isn't what makes a person qualified, IMO.

I agree with you about the hype. I support Obama, but I worry that it's a bit early for him to be gaining so much momentum. I believe he has good, sound views on a number of policy issues, as well as a strong and unifying vision for our party and our nation, so I'm not concerned about his qualifications, but I worry that all of the hype could backfire. Look at Dean's fall from grace (at least, in the MSM's eyes) in 2004. Obama is already under the microscope and once he announces, he's pretty much guaranteed that spot up until November 2008, provided he wins the primary. That's not an easy position for anyone to be in, let alone a politician that the media is trying to recast as a celebrity.

[PVnRT]

12. Exactly - Dick Cheney has lots of experience

Does that mean we want him elected President? Hell no.

As for Dean, though, that was media assassination, pure and simple.

[JABBS]

20. let's be clear, the point is not that obama can't be president

the point is that he has a limited national resume, and has zoomed to the top of the 2008 race not because of what he has done in the Senate, or what he has proposed on the issues, but because he's a great speaker (and, apparently, because he's handsome and has a good sense of humor).

there's enormous hype right now. even he's nervous by how much hype he's getting.

the hype will wear off. at some point, he'll have to win people over not with charisma and a nice smile, but with substance. otherwise, he'll ultimately be rejected by the electorate.

and frankly, after the madness with GWB, in part due to him having a lack of know-how and experience (not the only problem, I understand), it would be a shame if obama were swept into office primarily on hype and buzz, and then failed miserably as a president.

[ripple]

25. I think where we differ here

is that I believe he already has the substance and I strongly believe he has the intellect to make solid leadership decisions and surround himself with the best and the brightest, not just people who serve as rubber stamps for a particular ideology. This is what every good president should do, but unfortunately, it's something we haven't seen for the past 6 years..

[JABBS]

26. he has the substance and intellect

no doubt. he's a bright guy.

but his senate record to date isn't much -- in part because he was in the minority party and low man on the totem pole. but he doesn't have some great legislative record to say, "look at what i've done; look at the issues i've taken on."

it'll be imperative for him to stand out not just in terms of charm or articulation, but in terms of fresh ideas. it's one thing to be standing up for hopes and dreams, it's another thing to translate that into workable policy.

in the next year or so, he'll have a chance to be a leader on issues like the minimum wage, health care, immigration, stem cell research, etc. let's see him be a legislative superstar, to go along with the rock star image he's been given in NH and elsewhere.

Fair?

[ripple]

29. definitely fair

But legislatively, there is a hierarchy when it comes to introducing legislation, as there is with commitees. He's still the low man on the totem pole and other senators won't respond well to anything they view as political grandstanding. I think Durbin might serve as a good advisor in that arena.

With that said, I look forward to him articulating more specific proposals about national security, health care, education, the environment, etc. I don't think he's unwilling to do that, but timing is everything in a presidential election. It isn't wise to reveal one's entire hand too soon.

As far as the rock star image, I don't like it at all- for one thing, it's far too easy to fall from the top. I also realize, though, that Obama didn't create that image for himself, the media did. In my view, he's the first potential populist candidate we've had since Clinton and I'm sure the media sees that, as well. I hope it's more of a badge than a burden, but only time will tell. I do think Obama has a good amount of political savvy, so hopefully, he won't be drawn into the common traps that tend to plague a lot of candidates.

[beaconess]

8. I agree - justifying Obama's background by pointing to Bush leaves an opening for attack a mile wide

"I don't think Obama has enough experience."

"He has as much experience as George Bush did in 2000."

"Yeah - and look where THAT got us!"

No - that's the wrong argument.

The right argument is that Obama DOES have outstanding experience. Moreover, it's not one's resume that determines whether one will make a good president - otherwise Dick Cheney and Joe Lieberman would be shoo-ins. The question goes beyond resume - to one's character, judgment, intelligence, vision, ability to unite the nation, leadership.

Bush is a failure as president NOT because he didn't have enough experience - hell, he now has 6 years as President under his belt and he's STILL a disaster - but that he lacks the qualities we need in a president.

I believe Obama has all of those qualities. Some may differ. But what's on his resume is much less important to me than what is in his head and his heart and his hands.

[uberllama42]

31. Ability to unite the country?

I agree that his message is unimpeachable- it's refreshing to hear someone talk honestly about opportunity in America. But the American public does not generally vote on message. They tend to vote on image, party, or (this is where he's really in trouble) name. There are vast swaths of America who will not vote for him because of his name, and (I don't which is worse here) another group, possibly overlapping, who will not vote for him based on the color of his skin. Don't get me wrong, I think Obama is great, but America is just too ignorant to see past the MSM bullshit and judge him based on his merits.

[beaconess]

32. Unlike you, I don't think Americans are stupid

DUers haven't cornered the market on political intelligence - most Americans are pretty savvy and are just as capable as we are of figuring things out.

[uberllama42]

33. I didn't say that Americans are stupid

There is a difference between being stupid and being misinformed. In my experience, most Americans are pretty smart, but they have been carefully and continually misinformed by the MSM. They don't lack intellectual capacity, just intellectual curiosity. It's amazing how many people hear the name "Obama" and ask, "Is he a terrorist?" Not everyone is as severely and overwhelming ignorant as the people in Borat, but do you remember the poll from 2002 where 87% of fighting-age Americans couldn't locate Iraq on a map? There is still an alarming amount of racial prejudice and stubborn credulity in the American public. That worries me.

If "most Americans are pretty savvy," let's see some examples. Why has it taken our fellow-citizens so long to realize that Iraq was a mistake? Why is it now canonical wisdom that Dean's scream killed his electoral momentum? Why are there so many idiotic ad campaigns out there if people aren't falling for them?

[Norquist Nemesis]

10. Geez, to hear the media crap about this

one would think this is Obama's first time ever as an elected official.

[Vinca]

13. Then again . . .

if you look into George Bush's ear, you're likely to see the sunshine coming through the other side. Obama is light years beyond the very best of Shrub on his worst day.

[Bullet1987]

16. Bush and Obama are on the opposite end of EVERY issue...

...Obama has nothing at all in common with Bush. Bush invaded Iraq because he wanted to...not because it was dire. Bush was influenced (or decieved) by many other far-right Neocons like Wolfowitz and Perle to invade Iraq.

[JABBS]

18. no one is trying to say bush and obama are politically similar

the point is that justifying obama's candidacy purely on the idea that bush had a similar level of experience doesn't cut it.

[JABBS]

17. LOL

[caledesi]

23. Obama is NOT *. For those of you interested:

These are the rethug smear points so far on Obama (mostly of course from OxyRush, since rethugs can't think of their own).

Middle name is Hussein. BFD!

No "executive experience" - Yeah, like the President is in charge of a business, like *. He had a lot of executive experience....ran everything he touched into the ground.

He's peaked too soon. - Getting desperate.

Empty suit. - Really? Read his books; he is NO empty suit.

He's a Muslim - No, he is a Christian.

All taken from freeperville and there will be more. They won't be able to "swiftboat" Obama; he is too smart and way ahead of them...just like Clinton.

Ther rethugs love to talk about "The American Dream"...the hypocrisy. Clinton was the American Dream and so is Obama. Let's ram it down these hypocrites' throats.

edit: usual stuff