Since he has never led anything, why is Obama qualified to be President?

Be completely honest Tex, do you honestly think that John McCain is a better candidate in terms of economics? I think we should stop beating a dead horse; the man himself admitted he pretty much knows nothing about the economy. His position there is utterly indefensible, unlike the perceived notion that he is somehow an expert on national security/foreign policy.

 

The burden isn't on me chief. I've got empirical data backing long historical trends, you've got two bbs accounts and a bunch of unsupported assertions. I count at least five attempts at deflection and not a single counter argument or proof from you. You offer no support or evidence for McCain having any understanding or ability to deal with economic issues or evidence that his economic philosophy results in better lives for people who earn their living. I was foolish to be baited in the first place, and it's clear you prefer to place the burden entirely on the other side and then take refuge behind equivocations, new demands, or switching focus to other issues, rather than engage in an open, fair, rational debate.

To the other posters, don't be taken in by texxx and TJ's sophistry. The thread title itself presumes that there is a singular obligation to prove Obama is qualified. There isn't. An election isn't a referendum about a single candidates resume, it's a question of their capabilities and their proposals. On both accounts, Obama DWARFS McCain.

I'm looking forward to the debates. The Democrats will have an articulate, thoughtful, forceful speaker who will blend specific knowledge with stirring rhetoric. The Republicans will have a liver-spotted Richie Rich who doesn't understand the first thing about the economy and will show it when he fumbles with generalities. Tops at Harvard law v. bottom at the Naval Academy, it's gonna be fun to watch.

 

Any tax increase wouldn't take place until 2010 - our economy will be out of recession by then.

Obama has led the most organized and largest campaign - and it's been grassroots - in American history. That's very impressive.

Obama has more experience than Abraham Lincoln.

Obama has passed real reform legislation

Obama will cut taxes to those who struggle the most, and inject the most consumer spending - the number one component of our economy

He's a lot more honest than McCain has been. He's shown his wise judgement, by picking Biden. Where McCain has put politics first over country by picking an inexperienced woman just to get votes.

 

It's not about experience for me. I assume that both candidates are smart and have worked hard enough to run for the presidency. To me, it's about JUDGMENT.

 

It is evident that to many news agencies, because I've seen them comment on it, that Obama is waiting for McCain's statements on recent events in an attempt to make sure he is on the opposite side... or when it benefits him, says the same thing only wordier.

McCain is leading Obama in Obama's own "decisions" in this campaign. Obama did the same with Hil... wait for her stance, then decide.


I don't want a President waiting on every other nation's leader to make their stance known before he announces his, on EVERY issue.

That is a "present" vote.


I want a leader that leads, sets the pace... a POTUS that makes his stance and policy firmly known, not one that plays political observer in order to do the highest possible face saving in all situations.

I don't want a coward hiding behind a "you first" after thought speech.

I want a leader.

 

And yet, when you always wait for what would be the most POPULAR you lack true judgment.

Tell me... are judges always giving out the most popular judgments? Or is there an order to things?

 

That makes no sense. McCain changes his positions so frequently that a strategy based on his positions would be really stupid and Obama's not stupid.

Obama's doing what nobody else is doing... taking his time and thinking it through without being forced to say something due to panic. He's acting presidential. McCain is acting like a disingenuous hothead.

Obama knows he has a good chance of being the next president and if that happens, he'll be the one to deal with a lot of this mess. It's perfectly appropriate for him to weigh the pros and cons and listen to people and then come up with his position.

Here's what he said today...

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/stateupdates/gGgmXM

 

I think I disagree with what you are saying, but let's put that aside for a second. We'll pretend I do agree. I want to try and follow your logic.

So McCain should get credit for making the wrong decisions, but because made them faster it's better?

Is coming out and saying that the fundamentals of the economy are strong during a once in a century financial meltdown is happening get him bonus points because he said it faster than Obama said, "That's wrong, and then listed what was wrong with Wall STreet"?

When McCain's leadership on the financial crisis amounted to forming a commission, was that better because he said that faster than Obama who actually came out and again said what was wrong, and then addressed specific proposals to deal with the problem?

If we look at this from a purely political stand point. Is Obama's judgment on this better than McCain's, and even faster than McCain's because he was the first to adopt this strategy of waiting and seeing what your oponent does which seems to be working for him lately?

 

Hence the reality that McCain will then allow it to thrive again, not merely come out of a recession. If it barely gets out and then taxation rises, a depression will hit. It's a cycle that's happened in the past.

I'll give you this... kind of. How can this claim be made anyway? Money intake? Stadium filling? In an era where the nation has more population than ever before, and makes more income per household... this may be still a stretch. Have you ever looked at first-gen black and white camera photos of campaign conventions? Did you ever research your numbers on voter turn out per capita? This is like someone believing that "Titanic" is really the number one all-time grossing movie. It's easy to make the claim without looking at population and money adjustments.

What? Hahahahahahahahaha! Surely you don't mean "at this point," do you? That's highly incorrect. Furthermore, Lincoln would not back down from a real debate... the same kind McCain challenged Obama to, were originated by the Lincoln years.

He has signed on... but not co-authored or sponsored. Nice try. Come again when you've read the truth. Again, Obama even backed out of standing by a committee's findings he was supposed to bi-partisanly co-sponser.

So, everyone above $42,000 (recent days they said, "more like $40k) are all just making it fine and not struggling at all? Mmmmmkay. Seems to me like there's another lack of reality in your reasoning.

More honest? How? Hiding documents on his birth and past, claiming to support troops while voting against funding them while on the battle field (which also shows poor judgment). Acting as if he's already POTUS and tipping his hand that the US will be more of pushover, awaiting whatever they decide for him... all shows poor judgment... And did we forget known criminal buddies Rezko and Ayers, as well as mentors and advisors Wright, Gaines, and Johnson... And his lack of foresight to select Hil as veep? Biden is a major indicator of poor judgment, first noted by Democrats, not Republicans.


I could do this all day... but I'll allow you to think for yourselves and look up these things I've mentioned... you'll need some time to do your own research. I suggest you do more than read this bbs for your stance.

 

Look up and define "fundamentals." Then define "surface indicators" or even "symptoms."


No, I understand some of the things they say are complete disagreements, there should be some. They are politicians from opposite sides.

The thing that has been commented on recently is that Obama has begun to cherry pick, and rephrase, repackage if you will, some of McCain's best points... then is trying to pass those ideas off as his ideas.

Drilling has been a major shift in Obamaspeak, for example.


During the last month of the campaign, the waiting has been about fashioning a more populist message... about being the "new" while he is rephrasing the supposed "old."

 

Obama's opponents have all also run at this same point in history as Obama and he's run a better campaign than them.

That is correct. Obama has more executive and legislative experience than Lincoln had when he ran for the office of Presidency.\

This is incorrect. Obama was a co-sponsor of the Coburn-Obama Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act. Or was Bush also wrong when he thanked Obama as being a sponsor of the bill.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060926.html

What's funny is that your quote here has some dishonesty from the McCain side of the tracks. It was a lie from the McCain campaign. I believe you are talking about Raines and not Gaines.

http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/09/20/ex-fannie-ceo-raines-not-obama-advisor/

http://salon.glenrose.net/default.asp?view=plink&id=8573

It is pretty telling when you try and show one candidate as being dishonest when you use a lie from the candidate you support.

 

Do you want to talk about stealing campaign ideas from the opponent. Who was the candidate of change first? Obama has been from the beginning. All of a sudden McCain was about change too once his convention kicked off. But he hadn't been before.

Obama has said for a long time that he is against off-shore drilling but will accept it if it is part of a more comprehensive alternative energy package. That goes along with what he's said he would do all along, and about ways of finding common agreement with people on the opposite side of the aisle to get things done. From the very beginning this is the exact kind of change he's talked about. He would find ways to work with others in order to move forward things that could find common agreement.

 

McCain's fast judgment was to advocate forming a commission to study what went wrong. LOL

 

Yup, lets make a hasty decision, don't you think if we waited a bit before charging into Iraq we would have had a better idea on whether there were WMDs or not?


The guy graduated from Harvard and is one of the smartest dudes in congress.

Why of course a sports anchor and a low ranking POW are more qualified!


Ludicrous and completely hypocritical. Mccain supporters seem to find anything to bash Obama with, now its that HE LIKES TO THINK THINGS OVER.

For those of you that have a problem with his decision making have you forgotten his trashy VP pick? He waited on Obama to make his choice before he made his.

 

Well, at the very least, Barak Obama wasn't stupid enough to say this...

Seriously, how could anyone vote for someone who has no grasp on economics, technology, or what the average person deals with day to day? You want to open up health care to the same problems that is destroying the banking industry? And you say it on a day when another financial institution is battling to stay alive? Are you freaking r****ded, Senator McCain?

 

Actually, since Obama is once again leading in the polls -- it looks like the burden is squarely on you.

 

But see... Raines was an advisor... may not be now, but he was early on.

Ooops. The unquoted question here should be, and is, "Where you ever?"


Facts do not equal lies. But hiding behind half-truth does equal deceit.


I'd be worried that Americans that are thinking for themselves may hear these truths... if I were in your camp.