Thread: No track record + no experience + "change"= POTUS!

It amazes me how people can be so romantic and throw all logic and reason out the door. The entire Obama campaign is like a cheap romance novel and America is eating it up. The guy has NO TRACK RECORD (besides very shady real estate dealings), no real experience at running anything, and his entire platform is a "where's the beef" catch phrase. This couldn't possibly win over Americans, right? We are smarter than this, right?

How long before we simply let Simon, Randy, and Paula pick our candidates and we can simply vote for them from home on our telephones? I weep for our future.

Originally Posted by Libre

How long before we simply let Simon, Randy, and Paula pick our candidates and we can simply vote for them from home on our telephones? I weep for our future.

I will say 8 years

Originally Posted by Libre

The guy has NO TRACK RECORD (besides very shady real estate dealings), no real experience at running anything, and his entire platform is a "where's the beef" catch phrase.

Actually, you'd be wrong on all three counts, there. (No offense).

First of all, Obama already has more foreign policy experience, than either Bushie or Clinton before him. Obama's been working with Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN) on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Then, Obama does in fact have quite a track record in the State of Illinois - that's how come the People there, elected him to be a Senator in the first place! And then thirdly, hope is not a platitude. If you doubt that, I can cite you chapter and verse (only if you ask, though).

Nah, don't believe the hype on this guy. There's plenty of substance there, trust me. He's no slouch, that guy. He's a Harvard trained Constitutional lawyer, and he got elected a US Senator in one of the toughest areas in the whole country, and, he is one of those rare politicians who actually walks the walk. He takes no money from lobbyists, PAC's, or 527's - only from you and me. Go to his campaign website if you doubt that, and I mean, go to Hillary's and note that she "doesn't care" where the money comes from, yes?

Nah, I'm pretty sure, Obama's the real deal. I suppose we'll find out here, during the course of the election- before this is over, I'm sure we'll know everything there is to know about the candidates.

Not sure what you are talking about honestly.

No track record compared to what? Of course his 'track record' is good enough to be President.

Most people would agree that Lincoln was one of our greatest presidents. He had only served two years in the U.S. House of Representatives before he became president.

Our current President (who's no Lincoln) had never held any post in the federal government before being elected President.

Being President isn't about having spent a long time in Washington. It's about having the ability to make tough decisions to guide our country toward long-term prosperity.

I've heard this logic used from many Obama detractors. I've heard them state that Obama never says what he is going to do, he just says he is for change. Now surely you don't really believe he has made it this far and his campaign managers have not told him he needs details?

Libre' you are smart enough to research the issues important to you. I suggest you do so on all candidates so you can find the one that best embodies how you feel.

I know you are passionate libertarian and I can see where you might have a problem finding a voice this day and age.

Originally Posted by Thumpernovember

Not sure what you are talking about honestly.

No track record compared to what? Of course his 'track record' is good enough to be President.

Most people would agree that Lincoln was one of our greatest presidents. He had only served two years in the U.S. House of Representatives before he became president.

Our current President (who's no Lincoln) had never held any post in the federal government before being elected President.

Being President isn't about having spent a long time in Washington. It's about having the ability to make tough decisions to guide our country toward long-term prosperity.

I've heard this logic used from many Obama detractors. I've heard them state that Obama never says what he is going to do, he just says he is for change. Now surely you don't really believe he has made it this far and his campaign managers have not told him he needs details?

Libre' you are smart enough to research the issues important to you. I suggest you do so on all candidates so you can find the one that best embodies how you feel.

I know you are passionate libertarian and I can see where you might have a problem finding a voice this day and age.

Show me his track record then. This is what I know, he didn't vote against the Iraq war, he missed voting on 37.7% of all the bills while in the senate.

He also missed voting on an Iran resolution, that he then attacked Clinton for supporting. Where is his ability to make tough decisions?

Originally Posted by Buddha86

Show me his track record then. This is what I know, he didn't vote against the Iraq war, he missed voting on 37.7% of all the bills while in the senate.

It's not my job to educate you. You are able to research the candidates at your own choosing. Go to his website, look it up, don't look to others for answers.

Originally Posted by Thumpernovember

Not sure what you are talking about honestly.

No track record compared to what? Of course his 'track record' is good enough to be President.

Most people would agree that Lincoln was one of our greatest presidents. He had only served two years in the U.S. House of Representatives before he became president.

Our current President (who's no Lincoln) had never held any post in the federal government before being elected President.

Lincoln got us into an unneccessary war which was our bloddiest conflict in history even to this date! 1,100,000 lives lost (say that out loud), the suspension of habeas corpus (which set the precedent for Bush to do the same), the suspension of the power of the judicial branch and the expansion of the executive branch (again, both things that have been used as precedent to continually rob us of our civil liberties). I consider Lincoln one of our worst presidents.

Being President isn't about having spent a long time in Washington. It's about having the ability to make tough decisions to guide our country toward long-term prosperity.

What specifically leads you to believe that Obama is the man to get the things you mention done?

I've heard this logic used from many Obama detractors. I've heard them state that Obama never says what he is going to do, he just says he is for change. Now surely you don't really believe he has made it this far and his campaign managers have not told him he needs details?

So what are these details? All I hear him talk about is how much money he is going to spend when the country is already $70,000,000,000,000 (yes, trillion) in debt? That's absolute irresponsibility considering every American family is already saddled with roughly $700K in debt.

Libre' you are smart enough to research the issues important to you. I suggest you do so on all candidates so you can find the one that best embodies how you feel.

I am just trying to find out what the specifics are that are driving people towards Obama besides "feel-good" politics.

I know you are passionate libertarian and I can see where you might have a problem finding a voice this day and age.

It certainly is hard finding that voice, but I am also a student of history as well and history tells me our founding fathers met with the same type of opposition from a similarly proportionate majority. That at least gives me the strength to carry on the fight. Being a student of history, I see patterns which have repeated themselves ad nauseum and have always resulted in an empire's downfall. I see those same patterns in America today.

Originally Posted by Buddha86

Show me his track record then. This is what I know, he didn't vote against the Iraq war, he missed voting on 37.7% of all the bills while in the senate.

This is an interesting piece - I just had this discussion with one of my friends here locally. And, I notice from your sig, you seem to be a Ron Paul fan, yes? Well, so am I - Ron Paul's been my man during this election so far, but you know..... now we got the front-runners, right?

Well, so, here's the question: what do you (as a Ron Paul fan), see in a vote that says "I abstain"?

'Cause, if you're one of these Republican wing-nuts, you probably see a gutless coward who doesn't want to stand up for his principles (or worse yet, probably, "has none", right? ) -

On the other hand, if you are basing your "logic" and your "thought process" around this thing, in the contract (the Constitution), then, you will "see" such a vote, differently. Because, according to the Contract, if the issue that's being voted on, falls outside of the scope of federal authority as it's defined in Article I Section 8, then, the only correct vote, is "I abstain". (Or, equivalently, just "don't show up", right?)

So, hm.... let's start makin' an effort to "get real" with some of this information, 'kay? So, here, for instance, is Obama's Wiki-page.

Barack Obama - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And then, here is the "political positions" summary:

Political positions of Barack Obama - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, you can see about his "track record" in the first one there, and, you can determine whether you feel there's any "substance" to his political positions, in the second one. What do you think?

Libre, he looks really cool in a bathing suit. I am voting for him because Hulk Hogan and Obama girl support him.

On another subject....

I just found a good article by CBS News that summarizes much of the work done by Barack Obama in the Illinois Senate. Looks pretty daggone good to me. Shows a concern for workers, civil rights, health care, and other bread-and-butter issues.
The article reports:
Obama’s state senate votes on some key issues:
BUDGET & TAXES
Voted to raise the minimum wage in Illinois from $5.15 an hour to $6.50 an hour over two years. (2003)
Helped pass a 5 percent earned-income tax credit for low-income working families in 2000; made the credit permanent in 2003.
Voted to end $300 million worth of tax breaks for businesses. (2004)
Voted against making permanent the repeal of the state’s 5 percent sales tax on gasoline. (2000)
HEALTH CARE
Voted for having Illinois endorse embryonic stem cell research. (2004)
Successfully sponsored the Health Care Justice Act, a study of ways to implement a universal health care system statewide. (2004)
Voted against restrictions on public funding of abortion. (2000)
Successfully co-sponsored a prescription drug discount buying club program for seniors and the disabled. (2003)
CRIME & GUN CONTROL
Voted against letting people argue self-defense in court if charged with violating local weapons bans by using a gun in their home. (2004)
Voted to let retired police and military police carry concealed weapons. (2004)
Successfully sponsored requirement that law enforcement videotape interrogations of suspects in some serious crimes. (2003)
Successfully sponsored law enforcement study of the race of people pulled over for traffic tickets. (2003)
Helped pass an overhaul of the state’s troubled death penalty system. (2003)
Unsuccessfully sponsored measure to expunge some criminal records and create an employment grant program for ex-criminals. (2002)
Unsuccessfully sponsored limit of one handgun purchase per month. (2000)
Voted against making gang members eligible for the death penalty if they kill someone to help their gang. (2001)
MISCELLANEOUS
Unsuccessfully co-sponsored ban on discrimination based on sexual orientation. The measure became law after Obama was elected to the U.S. Senate. (2003)
Successfully sponsored move to shield Illinois workers from federal rules that threatened overtime pay for some employees.
Successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform called the Gift Ban Act. (1998)
Voted against giving tax credits to parents who send their children to private school. (1999)
Read more.