• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Scott Walkers lack of College Degree.

Is Scott Walkers lack of a degree an issue

  • Yes, I dont take orders from some quitter

    Votes: 13 21.0%
  • No, he has enough real world experience to do the job

    Votes: 43 69.4%
  • Somewhat, I would like to see him finish.

    Votes: 6 9.7%

  • Total voters
    62
  • Poll closed .
I wouldn't vote for the guy if he had a stack of degrees a mile high.

Of course you would, don't be silly. If he had a stack a mile high everyone would vote for him. :lol:
 
Harry Truman never got a college degree. I wonder what position of power he could have risen to if he had.

LBJ had a degree in Education. He wanted to be a teacher.

A college degree, especially a Bachelor's Degree (which I happen to have) is about as useful in your working career as those ballet lessons your wife took when she was 4 are now in her life.

In engineering a bachelor degree is pretty useful. Nowadays a masters degree is probably necessary to set you apart. Anyway, a degree is not necessary though I doubt we'll see another president without one.

George Washington was probably the best leader to ever become President.........no degree. The man showed great wisdom and judgement.
 
In engineering a bachelor degree is pretty useful. Nowadays a masters degree is probably necessary to set you apart. Anyway, a degree is not necessary though I doubt we'll see another president without one.

George Washington was probably the best leader to ever become President.........no degree. The man showed great wisdom and judgement.






Washington padded his expense account for the Revolutionary War.
 
He paid for that damn war.



Bull****.

Washington was offered a good salary but he turned it down and said that he just wanted his expenses paid. Then he padded his expense account big time. :roll:

The founding fathers get a lot of credit that they don't deserve- they fought for freedom for themselves, not for Black slaves and women.

But believe whatever you want to believe, won't cost me a penny.
 
Washington submitted a bill of $449,000 to congress

BUT

In guiding this force during year after year of humiliating defeat to the final victory, more than once paying his men out of his own pocket to keep them from going home, Washington earned the unlimited confidence of those early citizens of the United states.

https://sites.google.com/a/uconn.edu/jgw12003/the-presidency

Yes, that was hyperbole on my part, but I think most get the point. Washington did things then, that no one was do today. He led by example in every position appointed or elected to. He even freed his slaves.
 
Yes, that was hyperbole on my part, but I think most get the point. Washington did things then, that no one was do today. He led by example in every position appointed or elected to. He even freed his slaves.

Without Washington the Revolution would have failed.
 
You know, I was just talking with a fellow political junkie here about today's politics in BC and who we are not hearing from. I am deliberately on all three party lists so I get emails and calls to see from the inside...

The leftist NDP is no where to be seen, quietly letting the voters forget the 2012 election where they attacked the integrity, ability to mother, the bust line of our Premier..not to mention a blog suggesting she was a "MILF"...especially since they were handed their heads.

In the US though, they keep right on pounding. Look at the threads in here, three assailing Scott Walker and how few "Bush" references there are still seven years later. The tactic isn't working, they have lost the last three congressional elections in a row and now the "enemy" controls the dialogue through congress.

Meanwhile the cheap shots and propaganda campaigns continue unabated while the whine and whimper "unfair" as though the world will forget seven years of Bush hating.

What goes around comes around is an old saying because it's true. They got as ugly as I have ever seen politics but now expect their victims to simply let them go on attacking. Sorry, but no. Get ready for some serious blood. It won't take much to get some plants into the 'private meetings' with Hillary and tape a version of '47%'...the Republicans are stupid if they have not already recruited the people to it.

Wait for the Senate to re-open the IRS investigation....two years of "I refuse to answer on the grounds it may tend....." will not gain the Democrats any votes. How about the Armed Services Committee opening hearings on how this war is going and who be ordering who...
perhaps a hearing or fifty of Obama's unilateral and questionably legal handling of immigration, illegals and a detailed look at "amnesty", there sits a future gold mine of screw ups, mis identification, bribery and so forth.....staged a year from now.....

The fun, as they say, is just beginning. As I said the morning after the last election, the Republicans are in a perfect position. They can't do anything wrong as Obama will veto everything they throw at him and that makes for some creative laws.....They have no one individual on which to hang jack **** and one guy, one party responsible for EVERYTHING....

Hell, they blow this they don't deserve to breath in and out

It has come to the point where the democrats know they have blown it, but they cannot help themselves. They have made a habit of referring to the republicans as the party of "no", yet they have become the party of "no" themselves. As you have pointed out, if "Hussein" Obama everything the republicans throw at him, it is a continuation of one party rule. They did not learn from Obamacare devastating them in the last two congressional elections. They realize the damage, but instead of attempting to work with the republicans they are just lashing out and attempting to share the blame with goofy suggestions that obamacare was actually a republican idea. It does not seem to matter to them that obamacare did not garner a single republican vote.
 
I was a Republican most of my life, so you you would be wrong when you said I was one of the Bush haters. After he got out of office I've turned into a hater because I have learned how often he lied and how much damage those lies have done. But actually I voted for him in 2000.

Considering your comment further down about your father in law, I simply don't buy your claim that you were a republican all of your life. I think you are attempting to pull a fast one. As for alleged "Bush lies", I will offer you the same challenge that one of your leftwing soul mates chickened out on. Name even one Bush lie in your own words and attempt to back it up.


And stop with the executive orders nonsense, previous presidents have used it more than Obama.

Nice try....however it's not about the quantity of executive orders it's about abusing the process with the executive orders you do write. All previous presidents have used them, however only Obama has used them to completely bypass congress.

My own father in-law hates Obama for one reason only, he's black. He's in his 70's, an old time Republican. Racist as hell. Much of his generation is.

Again, you are attempting to pull a fast one. You evidently did not live through the segregation era. It was southern democrats who were the racists. Not republicans. And one of the most powerful democrats of that era Senator Robert Byrd was a former grand Cyclops in the KKK. And let's not forget former governor George Wallace of Alabama. If your father in law is truly racist, it's more likely that he is a lifelong democrat.
 
My situation was similar. I was voted Republican for years and then became fed up with them. I then voted Libertarian and eventually agreed to disagree with the LP on a few issues. I voted for Bush in 2000. I suppose I did so because I was sooo damned fed up with the Clintons. Early in the first year I began to suspect something wasn't right about the Bush presidency. I had the impression that he was painting by the numbers, and not doing a very good job at that. September 11 proved to me that Bush was a neocon puppet. I realized that Cheney and others running the government. The remaining Bush years confirmed my suspicions. I left the GOP and registered as an Independent and never looked back.

Just under the surface it is difficult to find much difference between the Democratic and Republican Parties. Yes, as ever, the Democrats are nutless, meek, unimaginative and have no unity. Republicans remain the party of old white men who are comprised of neocons, Tea partisans and religionists who are paranoid fascists. Most important is that both Democratic and Republican parties are owned by corporations and big money. I trust neither party.

The more I read your posts, the less convinced I become that you are an independent. Your critique of both Walker and Bush come straight out of the dnc extreme leftwinger handbook. If you were to show even an ounce of objectivity, I might buy the "independent" claim.
 
It has come to the point where the democrats know they have blown it, but they cannot help themselves. They have made a habit of referring to the republicans as the party of "no", yet they have become the party of "no" themselves. As you have pointed out, if "Hussein" Obama everything the republicans throw at him, it is a continuation of one party rule. They did not learn from Obamacare devastating them in the last two congressional elections. They realize the damage, but instead of attempting to work with the republicans they are just lashing out and attempting to share the blame with goofy suggestions that obamacare was actually a republican idea. It does not seem to matter to them that obamacare did not garner a single republican vote.

I love that one! Because of the ado over "if you like your plan..." Obama's purpose for going to Boston was overshadowed. At the time, Obamacare was under siege as millions were indeed losing their plan. He went to Boston, the home of "Romneycare" to remind everyone it was now Romney's idea, when just weeks before he had said "I actually like the term Obamacare....it's mine."

Now, as the onion layers come off and we see the emperor has no skin, the blame game gets worse, causing me, an outsider, to ask what do they really want? Do they argue to be right, or to actually try to get something done. As the war loses ground, he is using the White House artillery to create a fight over illegals.

Now, as the war grows worse he comes to congress after the fact to ask permission, but to have them tie his hands for him in a Twilight Zone game of who is now going to take the blame for the absolute mess "no boots on the ground, but some boots on the ground, let me think about it" war strategy. In the end, from my perspective there does not seem will nor attention enough to actually fight the war; arguing about everything has become their comfort zone.

I have to wonder if Obama is not suddenly realizing he is in way over his head and is defaulting to what he has proven works for him, demonizing the Republican Party.

And that makes me share with you that I have very little in common with the party, hated Bush have now, after two and a half terms of Obama come to respect them and figure right now only the GOP has the balls to move forward, as in progress as in what has been absent for seven years under "progressives..."
 
Last edited:
The more I read your posts, the less convinced I become that you are an independent. Your critique of both Walker and Bush come straight out of the dnc extreme leftwinger handbook. If you were to show even an ounce of objectivity, I might buy the "independent" claim.

Didn't we just have this discussion? Didn't you tell me that you've never read what I have posted concerning Hillary? How about Pelosi? How about Reid? You told me that you weren't interested in readying what I've said about Hillary and that you weren't going to, Mr. Objective. LOL!

Have you ever thought that maybe it's you?

It matters not to me what you think.
 
over 84%...

Huh....

This is a good sampling which shows precisely what is wrong with this country.

Take into account if Scott Walker was a Dem that number would be, oh, let's be generous and say half, so 42%...

Which is still an astounding number, signifying the depth of depravity that is the public mind.

80% -- and again I'm being generous -- of Bachelor Degree holders have the intelligence of a bologna sandwich...

They've begged, borrowed and stolen their way to achieving a piece of paper which for some reason unbeknownst to me is a publicly accepted indicator of themsis beings smaarts... Briefly memorizing and regurgitating facts and figures for brief moments of time to "demonstrate" that they've acquired knowledge on any particular subject.

Any and all employers, those crazy individuals in the "real world" who actually, by action must demonstrate their knowledge daily know full well that any new hire that's a freshly minted graduate is dumb as doo doo. Sure, sure, sure don't get me wrong you've got one or two blinkers on that ratty old stand of lights, but by and far you've got a group of know nothings who think they know something which only proves to those of us who do know, that they know nothing. (35-55 year olds are the only one's who really have a grip on things anyhow, before that they think they know everything and after that they think they've seen everything)


Now, say what you want about Scott Walker, I did detest the man a few years back, and still do think he went too far in his union busting endeavors, but what I cannot do is take away from him his accomplishments and success. Did he need a wittle piece of paper to show da world how smarts he was? No. Was it the outside affirmation of his abilities and knowledge -- a wittle piece of paper -- that led him to this place of prominence he enjoys today? No.

Does having dat itsy bitsy, piece of paper endow him or any of us with special powers of creativity, wisdom, foresight and cognition? No.

But if this poll is any indicator, at over 84% -- apparently we like to pretend it does.

Pull your heads out of your ass people.

A degree is nothing but a means to limit the greater majority, in-debt the remaining few and create societal conformities which convince each of us of our deserving place in this world.

It's BS.
 
Like Bush, whom had all kinds of degrees from fancy colleges.


I love it when someone refers to "fancy colleges".

The thing about college degrees is that not all degrees are the same. Not to dis anyone's degree but a sociology degree is a little different than a biochemistry degree.

One would just think it would bug you if after spending hours and hours on your degree to not come back at some point and grab that degree. May just be me.
 
Didn't we just have this discussion? Didn't you tell me that you've never read what I have posted concerning Hillary? How about Pelosi? How about Reid? You told me that you weren't interested in readying what I've said about Hillary and that you weren't going to, Mr. Objective. LOL!

Have you ever thought that maybe it's you?

Your problem is that your critique of Walker is as I have stated....right out of the DNC handbook. Voicing opinions against Hillary may just be your way of attempting to claim "independent" credentials. Your comments on Walker show you to be a far leftwinger. For an alleged independent, you are just not showing any objectivity. That's why I have a hard time with your "independent" claim. No offense intended.

It matters not to me what you think.

Yet what I think matters to the point where you bothered to respond. Go figure!
 
I love that one! Because of the ado over "if you like your plan..." Obama's purpose for going to Boston was overshadowed. At the time, Obamacare was under siege as millions were indeed losing their plan. He went to Boston, the home of "Romneycare" to remind everyone it was now Romney's idea, when just weeks before he had said "I actually like the term Obamacare....it's mine."

Now, as the onion layers come off and we see the emperor has no skin, the blame game gets worse, causing me, an outsider, to ask what do they really want? Do they argue to be right, or to actually try to get something done. As the war loses ground, he is using the White House artillery to create a fight over illegals.

Now, as the war grows worse he comes to congress after the fact to ask permission, but to have them tie his hands for him in a Twilight Zone game of who is now going to take the blame for the absolute mess "no boots on the ground, but some boots on the ground, let me think about it" war strategy. In the end, from my perspective there does not seem will nor attention enough to actually fight the war; arguing about everything has become their comfort zone.

I have to wonder if Obama is not suddenly realizing he is in way over his head and is defaulting to what he has proven works for him, demonizing the Republican Party.

And that makes me share with you that I have very little in common with the party, hated Bush have now, after two and a half terms of Obama come to respect them and figure right now only the GOP has the balls to move forward, as in progress as in what has been absent for seven years under "progressives..."

I am still laughing at Obama's 2010 statement: "Let them run against that." (obamacare)
 
Your problem is that your critique of Walker is as I have stated....right out of the DNC handbook. Voicing opinions against Hillary may just be your way of attempting to claim "independent" credentials. Your comments on Walker show you to be a far leftwinger. For an alleged independent, you are just not showing any objectivity. That's why I have a hard time with your "independent" claim. No offense intended.

Yet what I think matters to the point where you bothered to respond. Go figure!

OK, if that works for you run with it.
 
Scott Walker Finally Answers a Foreign Policy Question

...and manages to sound more and more like Sarah Palin while doing it. At CPAC today presumed presidential candidate Governor Scott Walker was asked how he would handle the situation with ISIS.

As if he was being interviewed before a Fox News audience Walker obviously made an effort to avoid a technical response. Following is Walker's most recent bold foreign policy statement:


For years I’ve been concerned about that threat,” Walker said, saying he received security briefings from the FBI and his adjutant general. “I want a commander-in-chief who will do anything in their power to ensure that the threat of radical Islamic terrorists do not wash up on American soil.”


“If I can take on 100,000 protestors, I can do the same across the world,” Walker added, referencing the months of protests in his state over his efforts to limit the power of public sector unions in his state.



That certainly puts ISIS on notice. Now they know that if Scott Walker becomes President he'll bust their unions, slash their taxes and decimate their educational systems. Walker did not say anything, however, about building them a new professional sports arena with ISIS tax money





 
Scott Walker Finally Answers a Foreign Policy Question

...and manages to sound more and more like Sarah Palin while doing it. At CPAC today presumed presidential candidate Governor Scott Walker was asked how he would handle the situation with ISIS.

As if he was being interviewed before a Fox News audience Walker obviously made an effort to avoid a technical response. Following is Walker's more recent bold foreign policy statement:


For years I’ve been concerned about that threat,” Walker said, saying he received security briefings from the FBI and his adjutant general. “I want a commander-in-chief who will do anything in their power to ensure that the threat of radical Islamic terrorists do not wash up on American soil.”


“If I can take on 100,000 protestors, I can do the same across the world,” Walker added, referencing the months of protests in his state over his efforts to limit the power of public sector unions in his state.



That certainly puts ISIS on notice. Now they know that if Scott Walker becomes President he'll bust their unions, slash their taxes and decimate their educational systems. Walker did not say anything, however, about building them a new professional sports arena with ISIS tax money






:applaud That's far out...RT...
 
Scott Walker Finally Answers a Foreign Policy Question

...and manages to sound more and more like Sarah Palin while doing it. At CPAC today presumed presidential candidate Governor Scott Walker was asked how he would handle the situation with ISIS.

As if he was being interviewed before a Fox News audience Walker obviously made an effort to avoid a technical response. Following is Walker's most recent bold foreign policy statement:


For years I’ve been concerned about that threat,” Walker said, saying he received security briefings from the FBI and his adjutant general. “I want a commander-in-chief who will do anything in their power to ensure that the threat of radical Islamic terrorists do not wash up on American soil.”


“If I can take on 100,000 protestors, I can do the same across the world,” Walker added, referencing the months of protests in his state over his efforts to limit the power of public sector unions in his state.



That certainly puts ISIS on notice. Now they know that if Scott Walker becomes President he'll bust their unions, slash their taxes and decimate their educational systems. Walker did not say anything, however, about building them a new professional sports arena with ISIS tax money






O yeah......that's independent.

Can we have more bold and maybe larger red text? Not getting the point you hate Walker at all...
 
Back
Top Bottom