A look at the recent Presidential polls

In many ways, George Bush's experience was much thinner than Obama's. People like to cite the role of "chief executive," but TX is notorious for having among the weakest executive positions in the union. His daily agenda there actually included a nap & a game of Nintendo.

He was a drunk for 20 years prior to that, and failed in several major business ventures, despite help from wealthy friends of his father & other connections.
 
Onceler said:
In many ways, George Bush's experience was much thinner than Obama's. People like to cite the role of "chief executive," but TX is notorious for having among the weakest executive positions in the union. His daily agenda there actually included a nap & a game of Nintendo.

He was a drunk for 20 years prior to that, and failed in several major business ventures, despite help from wealthy friends of his father & other connections.
Click to expand...

Bush's last failed business: the US.
 
Onceler said:
In many ways, George Bush's experience was much thinner than Obama's. People like to cite the role of "chief executive," but TX is notorious for having among the weakest executive positions in the union. His daily agenda there actually included a nap & a game of Nintendo.

He was a drunk for 20 years prior to that, and failed in several major business ventures, despite help from wealthy friends of his father & other connections.
Click to expand...

You can make excuses all you want (and I am sure you will), but the fact remains that Bush was a governor, a governor his state loved, and wasn't a new kid on the block (so to speak) with some fancy rhetoric and a pocket full of dreams.
 
Has Rass. ever NOT given the edge to the Republicans? Just wondering. Seems like it's the most commonly cited source by Willie.
 
gonzojournals said:
You can make excuses all you want (and I am sure you will), but the fact remains that Bush was a governor, a governor his state loved, and wasn't a new kid on the block (so to speak) with some fancy rhetoric and a pocket full of dreams.
Click to expand...

I'm not making excuses.

I'm citing facts about the nature of the governorship in TX, and the extent of Bush's experience.

Deal with it.
 
Onceler said:
I'm not making excuses.

I'm citing facts about the nature of the governorship in TX, and the extent of Bush's experience.

Deal with it.
Click to expand...

Citing facts? You are stating opinion-- citing facts would involved (Oh, I dunno) citations.

You don't have a source, you are just desperately trying to puff up Obama's experience by pulling shit out of your ass about the experience of others (GW Bush, by the way, is a shitty president, so even if what you say is true, it doesn't really do anything but say that Obama will be at least as good as shit).
 
Here. I'll "cite" something, that anyone who reads anything about politics already knows.

"In terms of formal powers, the Texas governor is among the weakest in the nation. The plural executive structure and weak removal powers limit the governor’s ability to influence the executive branch. Informal powers, particularly the ability to persuade and access to the media, are crucial sources of gubernatorial influence. Legislative bargaining is also critical to gubernatorial success. The diffused power structure of government and a weak governor allow more influence by powerful business interests in Texas politics. "

http://www.worthpublishers.com/Texas_IM/txchap6.html
 
Onceler said:
Here. I'll "cite" something, that anyone who reads anything about politics already knows.

"In terms of formal powers, the Texas governor is among the weakest in the nation. The plural executive structure and weak removal powers limit the governor’s ability to influence the executive branch. Informal powers, particularly the ability to persuade and access to the media, are crucial sources of gubernatorial influence. Legislative bargaining is also critical to gubernatorial success. The diffused power structure of government and a weak governor allow more influence by powerful business interests in Texas politics. "

http://www.worthpublishers.com/Texas_IM/txchap6.html
Click to expand...


Elitism and assumption =/= a good debator.
 
Onceler said:
I've gone over the Obama quote on Iraq a few times, on a few different threads, with WRL. He knows that this is a dishonest, somewhat out-of-context representation of Obama's position, which has been solidly anti-war and anti-invasion since 2002. The "agreement" he references with Bush has nothing to do with the decision to invade or the conduct of the war for much of the time leading up to that quote. The "iffy" nature that he portrays about not knowing how he would have voted is part of a broader conversation with Tim Russert on his Senate colleagues, in which he passes on the opportunity to roast them for their vote yet again.

WRL has, and will continue to, portray this in the most dishonest way possible, for nothing but partisan reasons. If you know WRL's postings on this & the other board, you understand that this is what he does. This is what a lot of posters do, but it's important to call him & others on it when they do. It's a total misrepresentation of Obama's position to try to portray him as some sort of serial waffler on Iraq & the invasion.
Click to expand...


Now I expected better from you, don't call me a liar...

When asked in 2004 about how Obama would have voted to go into Iraq, now that he was a Senator...

"“I’m not privy to Senate intelligence reports,’ Mr. Obama said. ‘What would I have done? I don’t know."


A few day's later he said...

“On Iraq, on paper, there’s not as much difference, I think, between the Bush administration and a Kerry administration as there would have been a year ago. […] There’s not much of a difference between my position and George Bush’s position at this stage.”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top