Quote:
|
Originally Posted by chumdawg
Your argument assumes that there are "accomplishments" a non-President can have that bode well for him as President, and at the same time that a lack of said accomplishments bodes poorly for the candidate.
I am not at all convinced that this is true. After all, Clinton did a bang-up job as governor of Arkansas, did he not?
|
The difference between Clinton and Obama is that Clinton held the position of Governor. Whether or not you feel he did a good job, at least he did SOMETHING. He was the head of the executive branch of the state government. That is an accomplishment in and of itself. He wasn't a "newbie" when he took the Oath of Office to be POTUS. Tell me what Obama has done that in your opinion qualifies him to be President. Please give me at least ONE legitimate reason to vote for him. And when I say "legitimate", I mean something not related to his party affiliation, race, religion, or ability to speak.
__________________
"In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers, and then there are those who use their careers to promote change."
-Gov. Sarah Palin, 09/03/2008
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress.. But I repeat myself."
-Mark Twain
'Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country,'
--Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .
|