This from George Will on the This Week t.v. program with George Stephanopolous on ABC:[referring to Hillary's claim of 35 years of experience] That means she's 60 years old and got out of Yale at age 25, that means she's counting everything she's done since she got out of law school including her years with the Rose Law firm in Little Rock, the less said about perhaps the better. Now if experience matters this much I would just put this out, the most experienced president that we've ever had was the man who was 10 years in the House of Representatives, then Minister to Russia, then 10 years in the Senate, then Secretary of State for four years and then Minister to Great Britain. He then made the mistake of getting himself elected president and was the worst president that we've ever had, James Buchanan.Although Buchanan doesn't have much on Bush. Clearly experience doesn't mean everything and besides her experience is quite over exaggerated to say the least.
Barack Obama Picks Up Key Endorsement from a Foreign Policy Expert: From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
Sen. Jay Rockefeller has thrown his support behind Obama. Rockefeller is the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. A senior Senator such as Rockefeller wouldn't put his years of foreign policy and intelligence experience behind Barack Obama if he felt that the Senator from Illinois didn't have the judgment to deal with foreign policy matters as the President of the United States. In addition, the Rockefeller endorsement helps inoculate Barack from the Super Delegates throwing the nomination to Clinton and thus ripping the party in two.
I saw on Meet the Press this A.M. that even if Hillary won Texas and Ohio on the 4th, she would have to win 70% of the elected delegates in all the remaining states to get the nomination which is highly unlikely. But don't pop the champagne corks yet folks, I wouldn't count the Clinton's out until the last nail is hammered into the coffin.
Before I wrap this post up I want to mention one more thing. The fear card that Hillary is playing via that "3 A.M. red phone call" ad is beyond the pale. She should have taken her husband's advice in 2004:
Thank-you Mr. President for the endorsement of my candidate, Senator Barack Obama!! We all know how smart Bill is so I would encourage everyone to follow this excellent advice and therefore vote for Obama. Because that is what he is implying in that video clip.
So Texas, Rhode Island, Ohio and Vermont help us push this movement over the top and vote for Barack Obama. It is time to turn the page and bring America back to greatness. Barack Obama is the leader for pushing bravely, without fear into this brave new world. We need a new kind of politician, one that inspires the next generations to take ownership in this country and the only candidate able to ignite that passion is Barack Obama. Dare to hope, dare to believe again and dare to lock arms together and push into the future. The best days for America lie ahead of us and we can all help make those better times a reality. This isn't about one person, the president but rather about we the people and that is what Obama is selling.
And finally, one piece of business. As you can see I've changed the name of the blog to, "The Political Junkie." You might want to change your links accordingly.
---End of Transmission---
11 comments:
Reagan was even worse than Buchanan. Bush is ineligible because he never legally held the office of president.
Well...there's not question that, if he's the nominee, I'll be voting for Obama. But I sure hope he doesn't get bored with the presidency they way he got bored with serving the people of Illinois. The man's a job-jumper, and there's no place to jump from when you're the President, unless of course you plan to run for 'God', but I suspect that even Obama wouldn't consider himself qualified for that job.
Libhom:
Good point on Gov. Bush.
Kvatch:
I don't think he'll get bored in the least. He's ready and I think would be a trans-formative president.
James,
I'm freakin' worried about tomorrow.
What do you think?
As for Hill's experience, wouldn't Nancy Reagan have been qualified to run for president? She was first lady in California, then first lady for the US.
The point is, Hillary may have been in on many decisions that Bill had to make during the WH years, but HE made them, and HE had to bear the consequences of those decisions, not Hillary.
Other than being a US Senator, her experience in US politics is very thin.
Obama was an Illinois state senator and then a US senator.
I believe that they are about equal for experience as elected officials.
Biting my nails...
Kvatch: The people of Illinois (I'm one of them) will be more than happy for him to leave us, if it means he's our next president!
Shaw:
Yeah it's going to be close but I've been watching all the analysts and they're saying that even if Hillary splits the votes in all of today's states that she'll still be behind in the delegate count.
And with each voting day, less and less delegates are available for her to pick up. She would have to pull a miracle i think to win this thing. That being said i could be wrong. All kinds of weird things occur in politics.
I think Obama just has to maintain and hold on. I believe that if he wins Texas tonight or at least splits with Hillary in both Texas and Ohio that the super delegates will continue jumping ship to obama.
That will take away Hillary's last card to play to try and take this election at the convention.
T&A:
I will probably pee my pants if he wins the whole shebang.
Okay. It's 7:30 on the East Coast, and they've called Vermont for Obama.
Still biting my nails...
PS. When did you change the name of your blog?
Shaw:
Yeah Vermont is a nice start, let's hope he can pick off Texas or Ohio.
Our best chance seems to be Texas.
It would be a HUGE victory if we could pull off Rhode Island.
Oh and I changed the name of the blog a few days ago. I wanted to present a really political name to the blog. I'd really appreciate it if you could change the link. :)
In college sports, there's an oft-spoken saying when asked who you're pulling for: "My alma-mater, and whoever's playing against my alma-mater's biggest rival." And, also in politics...even if I knew nothing about either Democratic candidate, I'd pull for Obama just because Rush Limbaugh is pulling for Clinton. It may be true that you can't trust what's coming out of any of the candidates' mouths, but you can learn a lot by watching their reflections off others. At this time, Obama's the right person for the job.
It's not over. Obama still leads in delegates. But I was quite disappointed. He did well in Texas, I think, taking the caucauses and just about splitting the vote, but she really thumped him in RI and Ohio.
I noticed that from the last primary to this one, the media have been especially kind to Hillary.
My theory is that they want this process drawn out--more $$$$ for them if they keep interest high in the primaries and into the conventions.
It's pretty obvious that Democrats want them both, isn't it?
She gets the older, less educated, lower income votes; he gets the younger, more educated, higher income votes. He gets the Afro-American vote; she gets the Latino vote.
How could they possibly lose as a team in November?
What do you think?
PS. Your blog name is changed on my blogroll.
Joe C:
Good point.
Shaw:
Yeah it was a tough night for us in Ohio and Rhode Island but Hillary was expected to win in R.I. And Texas was so close that it was basically a wash.
You're right that the main thing is that Obama is ahead in the delegate count. As long as he can keep that lead then he'll be the nominee.
Post a Comment