Tags for This Article:

Democratic (1491)  Republican (1397)  Obama-Barack (1379)  Elections (599) 

Populum Tag Cloud
       Control Panel
Fine tune your search to access content
Articles
Diaries Products
Events All
All time
Last 6 mos
Last month
Last week
Last 24 hrs
From:
Month  Day   Year

To:
Month  Day   Year
Alphabet
Popularity
Count ON
Count OFF
This Level
Sub-levels

 

 

 

Tag(s): ; ; ;
Add to My Group
May 20, 2008 at 20:04:08

Obama's perceived inexperience is his best qualification.

by Ed Martin     Page 1 of 1 page(s)

http://www.opednews.com

Tell A Friend

In a May 20 article here on OEN, Earl Hutchinson points out that Obama's "inexperience knock" may be a bigger hazard than race. Obama is perceived to be too green, too untested, too soft to be a firm, and resolute commander in chief.

From our experience with the worst president in the history of the US, George Bush, we should have learned that the last thing we want is another firm, resolute president. George Bush has been that. Though always wrong, he is never uncertain. Firmly and resolutely going off in all the wrong directions. Firmly and resolutely saying everything he can think of that is indisputably, provably, irrevocably wrong, contrary to all the facts in evidence. The last thing we need is any more of that firmness and resoluteness about exactly the wrong thing.

Obama's inexperience at not having done and not being like George Bush is his best qualification.

Actually, Obama does have an experience that is the best qualification to be president that any candidate could have. That is his experience with the English language, being literate. That experience will allow him to read and comprehend the two short pargraphs in Article Ii, Section 2 of the Constitution that spells out exactly what, and more importantly only what, a president has the power and duty to do.

Reading those two short paragraphs, the president's job description, shows just how limited the president's job is. To give just one example of George Bush exceeding the President's powers, nowhere in the Constitution is the president given the power to make foreign policy. The president does have the power to make treaties, but only with two-thirds of the Senate approving. The president can't do it by himself. Bush's war on Iraq was not a treaty. It was an illegally assumed foreign policy, in defiance of the Constitution.

Obama's inexperience at not being like Bush and his experience with being literate makes him as qualified as anyone to be president. That allows him to be able to read his job description and comply with what it says. Given that as a criteria, there are several million people who are fully, if not more qualified to be president than George Bush. I would take any one of them in preference to the disqualifications that George Bush has brought to the presidency.

Given the disgust of the country with Bush and his Republicans, Obama can win the election by running against what he should always refer to as the Bush/McCain regime. Bush, by his malfeasance and incompetence has brought about the most important election in our history, and he must not be left out of it. Bush is just as much a part of this election as any of the candidates.

Gore allowed the Republicans to steal the 2000 election and Kerry allowed the Republicans to steal the 2004 election, and both of them walked away from it, for some inexplicable reason, satisfied with that. We can only hope that Obama won't be satisfied with having his election stolen and allowing them to get away with it this time.

It's reported that over a million new Democrats have signed up in just seven states. Multiply that by seven to factor it to 49 states and there would be about seven million new Democratic voters added to the existing rolls. We can logicaly deduce that they signed up so they can vote for a Democrat. With that many new Democrats voting, what's going to happen when the Republicans win by a bare majority, again? What's going to happen when the Republican vote counters say that all those Democrats signed up so they could vote Republican and that the Republican won by their standard 51% to 49%, even though there were twice as many Democrats as Republicans who voted?

When that happens next time, it'll be interesting to see if Obama will react any differently that Gore and Kerry did when they had their elections stolen from them. Will he tuck his tail between his legs and slink off into obscurity as they did? Or, will he raise a goddam huge ruckus and not give up until he knows that every Democratic vote has been counted, proving that he is the new president? Getting the vote properly counted and affirming that Obama won is the real test for his qualification to be president.

If he allows the next election to be stolen, too, then he by definition is not qualified to be president.

 

Ed Martin is an unindicted curmudgeon. He is not a Democrat, Republican, conservative, liberal, deist, atheist, or a member of any -ism.

Contact Author
Contact Editor
View Other Articles by Author

 

Bookmark this page: (what's this?)

NETSCAPE      DIGG THIS      NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Spurl      Tag!RawSugar      Shadows Tag!      Blink List     (More...)
Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
4 comments

The author is a very "with-it" old lady who aspires to bring a bit of truth, justice, and commom sense to a nation that has lost touch with its humanity in the search for societal "perfection".
Mary PittThe author is a very "with-it" old lady who aspires to bring a bit of truth, justice, and commom sense to a nation that has lost touch with its humanity in the search for societal "perfection".

You are SO right!

Obama is the only candidate to offer us any hope for a change.  We have been through eight years of Senator Clinton's "experience" and we absolutely KNOW what to expect from Senator McCain, neither of which is what our nation needs at this time.  It is precisely Obama's lack of experience that offers us the hope that he will mature with the observations that he has made in his interactions with ordinary people instead of having been totally encompassed by the ritualistic putting of things on the table or taking them off the table without any investigation of finding ways to accomplish progress with an open mind.

We need someone who can and will think for himself instead of being controlled by lobbyists, focus groups, or political alliances.  That is the only way we can break the grip of the billionaire corporatists.

by Mary Pitt (60 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 159 comments) on Wednesday, May 21, 2008 at 2:14:15 PM
 


Ed Martin is an unindicted curmudgeon. He is not a Democrat, Republican, conservative, liberal, deist, atheist, or a member of any -ism.
Ed MartinEd Martin is an unindicted curmudgeon. He is not a Democrat, Republican, conservative, liberal, deist, atheist, or a member of any -ism.

Electing millionaires

Thanks, Mary.  Since we seem to be stuck with no option but to elect millionaires to the presidency, Obama is the least objectionable millionaire of the bunch.

by Ed Martin (97 articles, 0 quicklinks, 30 diaries, 99 comments) on Wednesday, May 21, 2008 at 3:41:35 PM
 


Conservative prolife anti-death penalty tree hugger. Believe that less government is good government, government cannot solve anyone's personal problems, the government taking money from one group of people and giving it to another group of people is a crime, and that people should take responsibility for their own lives.
Mad JayhawkConservative prolife anti-death penalty tree hugger. Believe that less government is good government, government cannot solve anyone's personal problems, the government taking money from one group of people and giving it to another group of people is a crime, and that people should take responsibility for their own lives.

My experience

I have had 21 years of managerial experience in industry working as a planner, accountant, programmer, and administrator with excellent reviews etc. While I might not be as smart as the Senator or as charismatic I think I outweigh him on the experience bit.

I recently applied for a job the head neurosurgeon at the local hospital. They unfairly rejected my application for some reason.

I also applied for a job as a manager of the traffic engineering division with the highway department. They also unfairly rejected my application for some reason.

Not discouraged I applied for the presidency of Wal-Mart. They also unfairly rejected my application for some reason.

Finally I applied for the job of president of the local bank. They also unfairly rejected my application for some reason.

I guess I should run for President of the US according to this article.

It looks like it is the only high level job in the country where you can be seriously considered for it if you have had absolutely no practical or meaningful experience. In fact, because one of the candidates who agrees with the author's politics is totally inexperienced, being inexperienced is the best qualification for the Presidency a person can have.  Having no experience certainly impresses me.

The President of the US is a manager and has to understand and be able to get things done through other people. Look up what it takes to be an effective manager. One thing is obviously clear: you have to have experience as a manager to be an effective one. It is an old saw that good managers are made not born.

Senator Obama has had ZERO experience as a manager. That will be become abundantly clear before November to most everybody but the most thick headed amongst us.

by Mad Jayhawk (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 197 comments) on Wednesday, May 21, 2008 at 7:02:36 PM
 


Kathy is a middle aged mom living on Camano Island in Western Washington. She owns a small mortgage company and spends too much time trying to tame her garden.
camanokatKathy is a middle aged mom living on Camano Island in Western Washington. She owns a small mortgage company and spends too much time trying to tame her garden.

Experience

Obama has exactly the same experience as Abraham Lincoln. As Senator, he certainly has management experience with his own staff. If you read his books, you will see that he has management experience with his community organizing as well.

At a time when the American people are pessimistic, he offers a message of hope and change.  That may be enough to engage the populace in change as well.

I'm willing to give him a chance.

by camanokat (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 25 comments) on Wednesday, May 21, 2008 at 7:26:43 PM
 

 

4 comments

 

Tell A Friend

 


Copyright © OpEdNews, 2002-2008

 

 

 

 

Articles
Diaries Members
Products Events
Polls  
  

Articles Popularity:

Momentum Building For Bugliosi's Case Against George W. Bush For Murder
by Linda Milazzo

A Declaration of Independence from the Government of the United States
by Anonymous

Bush Fulfills His Grandfather's Dream
by David Swanson

Fortis Prediction of US Bank Meltdown a Net Hoax: The Making of an Urban Legend
by Paul Haughey

POW/MIA Families Alleged McCain Assault: Senate Ethics Committee Failed to Investigate
by elliot cohen

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN GAS REACHES 7 DOLLARS A GALLON ?
by Allen L Roland

Why were 'first responders' de-contaminated at the Pentagon?
by Len Hart

Ex Weapons Inspector: Iran Not Pursuing Nukes, But U.S. Will Attack Before '09
by Jason Leopold

Twenty-five U.S. Military Officers Challenge Official Account of 9/11
by Alan Miller

Free Energy and the Open Source Energy Movement
by jibbguy