What actually constitutes presidential material? For the last 230 years, America's definition of presidential material has been old white males. I think it's time for a change in more ways than one. It would have been nice to see a female president, but I was not very excited about the Clinton brand of politics being back in the White House. The timing was just right for Obama.
I wouldn't want someone green in politics handling this country anymore than I would want a med intern giving me surgery. If the country was stable, then it wouldn't matter, but this country is in dire straights and experience in politics (particularly foreign policy) is necessary.
It takes more than a few uplifting speeches to make someone worthy enough to be president, and I am really dismayed by how Obama supporters don't actually know anything about him other than they like to listen to him. If you don't believe me, ask Germany. Hitler gave great speeches, too.
Experience is over-rated. Have you forgotten that Bush was the governor of a large state for 6 years and a businessman before that? Look where the economy is now. Cheney had tons of foreign policy experience and so did Rumsfeld. Look where their foreign policy experience has taken us. Rice is the only level-headed one in the bunch. You said our country was in dire straights. How did we get there? Lack of experience or bad judgment? I believe it was the latter.
The Hitler comment is silly. Are you suggesting that the masses are following someone who will take us down the path of Hitler?
I'll tell you what is scary. This country elected Bush twice; a person who puts more pride in his religion than his intelligence. Hell, he admitted God tells him what to do. And if we elect McCain/Palin in 2008, our nation is slowly moving toward a theocracy. Just watch the Republican convention.
I am saying that the masses are willing to follow a demagogue and you haven't said anything to prove me wrong. If you don't agree with my blog then start your own. You will not sway me.
Yes, experience is over-rated. I gave valid examples of why that is sometimes the case. If you choose to overlook the examples that prove my case, that is your prerogative.
I don't disagree with you that "masses are willing to follow a demagogue," but I do question your choice of examples. Ronald Reagan would have been a better example of how the masses fall for charismatic leaders, not Hitler. Like I asked before, are you suggesting that Obama will take us down the path of Hitler?
S, I'm not trying to sway you or prove you wrong. We can certainly agree to disagree, and there is certainly no need to get defensive. If you don't like people to share opinions or even disagree with you, then perhaps you should disable the comment feature or block me from posting. Otherwise, don't be surprised if someone disagrees with you.
I am suggesting that the masses will follow anyone that sounds good whether they are right for a country or not, and Hitler is an excellent example of that.
And if you don't want people to get defensive, perhaps you should refrain from calling their comments "silly."
8 comments:
What actually constitutes presidential material? For the last 230 years, America's definition of presidential material has been old white males. I think it's time for a change in more ways than one. It would have been nice to see a female president, but I was not very excited about the Clinton brand of politics being back in the White House. The timing was just right for Obama.
I wouldn't want someone green in politics handling this country anymore than I would want a med intern giving me surgery. If the country was stable, then it wouldn't matter, but this country is in dire straights and experience in politics (particularly foreign policy) is necessary.
It takes more than a few uplifting speeches to make someone worthy enough to be president, and I am really dismayed by how Obama supporters don't actually know anything about him other than they like to listen to him. If you don't believe me, ask Germany. Hitler gave great speeches, too.
Experience is over-rated. Have you forgotten that Bush was the governor of a large state for 6 years and a businessman before that? Look where the economy is now. Cheney had tons of foreign policy experience and so did Rumsfeld. Look where their foreign policy experience has taken us. Rice is the only level-headed one in the bunch. You said our country was in dire straights. How did we get there? Lack of experience or bad judgment? I believe it was the latter.
The Hitler comment is silly. Are you suggesting that the masses are following someone who will take us down the path of Hitler?
I'll tell you what is scary. This country elected Bush twice; a person who puts more pride in his religion than his intelligence. Hell, he admitted God tells him what to do. And if we elect McCain/Palin in 2008, our nation is slowly moving toward a theocracy. Just watch the Republican convention.
"Experience is overrated?" Are you serious?
I am saying that the masses are willing to follow a demagogue and you haven't said anything to prove me wrong. If you don't agree with my blog then start your own. You will not sway me.
Yes, experience is over-rated. I gave valid examples of why that is sometimes the case. If you choose to overlook the examples that prove my case, that is your prerogative.
I don't disagree with you that "masses are willing to follow a demagogue," but I do question your choice of examples. Ronald Reagan would have been a better example of how the masses fall for charismatic leaders, not Hitler. Like I asked before, are you suggesting that Obama will take us down the path of Hitler?
S, I'm not trying to sway you or prove you wrong. We can certainly agree to disagree, and there is certainly no need to get defensive. If you don't like people to share opinions or even disagree with you, then perhaps you should disable the comment feature or block me from posting. Otherwise, don't be surprised if someone disagrees with you.
I am suggesting that the masses will follow anyone that sounds good whether they are right for a country or not, and Hitler is an excellent example of that.
And if you don't want people to get defensive, perhaps you should refrain from calling their comments "silly."
Your example was silly...and it still is.
If you're offended, that's your choice.
My example was spot on and the fact that you can't give a response beyond an insult just shows that you can't disprove it.
Good night and goodbye Thomas. Have fun following demagogues...the rest of us will look for substance.
Post a Comment