Stinger

And since you can't defend the man you attack us, how typical.

Oh it worked quite well and I'm still waiting for you to tell us what experience he has to bring to the table?

Not me.

I didn't Hillary did, I just commented on it. If you don't think she is going to go after him you are grossly mistaken.

Actually I commented that his campaign did a great job of countering her.

Here's the real clue, if you think using invective against others here makes Obama a more attractive candidate you won't get very far, try telling us why he should be elected, what he brings to the table, why he is a better candidate for the office than the others. So far you have failed miserably to do so.

And yes when a person makes up or to say the least, misrepresents his background, I begin to question whether they can be trusted. There is no need for him to do so why do it.

__________________
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." Marcus Aurelius
Proud member of the Gang of Five, the gang that is always right!
No Personal Attacks, if you can't debate the issue go elsewhere.

Stinger

Which is impossible, he was born long before the marches in Selma. If he is going to make such emotional appeals at least be truthful about it.

That's not what he said and you don't speak for him. He was at a specific place to honor a specific event which occurred at that specific place and claimed that that specific event which they were honoring at that specific place had to do with his parents coming together to have him. It was BS.

Obviously you are unable to maintain you position on it's own merits. Stick to the issue not the personal attacks.

disneydude

I have openly and freely commented several times that I don't know who I will support in the election. There is still a lot that I need to know about all of the candidates running before I would pretend to be able to jump out and say that one is uniquely qualified over the others. The race is still early and there is WAY too much to learn to make that kind of a claim (despite the fact that some do).

The only points that I have raised about Obama is in reply to the criticisms that you and others have raised. Primarily....lack of experience. The reality is....there have been many people....including your hero GWB that did not have really any experience when they were elected to the office of President.
So....when people such as yourself raise lack of experience as an issue....it seems to me that "lack of experience" is a criticism that you apply sometimes and are willing to overlook in others....depending upon how it fits your personal opinion.

During the 2000 election....I had a lot of issues with GWB....but I never said....oh....."lack of experience".....despite the fact that he had no national or international experience....and only had experience governing a state.

Simply said....I don't think that is a valid criticism of Obama. If you have criticism of his stance on the issues...I think that would be a more valid argument....but when you engage in selective criticism only in certain cases.....your arguments wither from lack of consistency.

__________________
Sarah Palin/Jeb Bush 2012
"Bringin' Bush back to the Whitehouse"

jallman

I believe he was saying that the heart of the issue is that you are being blinded by your blood thirst.

But then, you always have seen it easier to cry foul rather than defend yourself.

__________________
http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/d...amaSigcopy.jpg

Stinger

As far as their experience we know what each brings, and Obama is on the bottom of that totem pole.

Pointing out the obvious is not necessarily criticisms.

Bush certainly trumps Obama, he was the only Texas governor to ever be relected, he ran that executive office and he did have experience with his business and even the Rangers (dealing with government and leading an organization). Bush trumped Gore on that issue and that is who he ran against. Obama is not running against Bush he is running against Hillary and Edwards right now. Neither of which bring much leadership experience with them. If he does win the nomination they he will be running against either Guiliani, who makes Obama look like a little boy when it comes to accomplishment and leadership. Romeny has gubernatorial experience which he brings to the party. Thompson doesn't have much executive experience but has a stellar legal and legislative record. Gingrich brings his intellect and legislative experience including being the leader of the House.

Obama does not stack up well against any of them. So he better start coming up with some firm policy positions to run on, platitudes usually don't make it.

I think you are desperately trying to avoid the subject when it comes to Obama with such silly dismissals.

He was a re-elected governor, you'd be hard pressed to.

As governor of Texas he did have experience with a foriegn government and as much national experience as Clinton ever had. Obama has nothing.


Which is usually a big plus for Presidential candidates, much more so than being in Congress. They do a lot of the same things in thier executive functions.

of course you don't. It is something he is glaringly lacking in.

Well when he starts to state them..................until then he is just running on who he is as a person. And your trying to say that is off base for discussion if folly.

And when you start making bogus claims you expose how lacking your arguments really are.

Stinger

Why should I have to defend myself when personal attacks are suppose to be offbase here and the topic is Obama not me. I will say to you as I did the others, stick to the issues and not personal attacks, attack me does not add to the merit of your argument. And it is quite childish.

jallman

You are promoting what seem to be bogus claims. When you continue to perpetuate those claims after they have been addressed, the problem becomes you and not Obama. Okay, okay...sorry sorry. Let's not make personal attacks here...the problem becomes your evident blood thirst and not Obama.

Stinger

Prove they are bogus then. Stick to the issue. What is bogus about anything I posted and be specific and back up your rebuttle with something other than ad hominems.

jallman

Oh dear God, here we go again. Why is it that every time a flaw is pointed out in your logic or reasoning then it becomes an issue of poor stinger is the object of ad homs and personal attacks. You're such a victim it makes me wanna cry.

Stinger

Why when you are losing an argument you post such bogus statements. I asked you to specifically rebut what I stated and back it up.

Obviously you can't so you engage in the personal. Oh well.

A perfect example of what I am saying. When you can't debate the issue on it's merits here you go....................

Why do you think that passes for political discourse, that which we are suppose to be engaged in.

If you can't discuss the issue, don't bother.