Negatives about Obama.
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
Why do you ignore the point I make?
He will be President. While a portion of his job is meeting foreign dignitaries, it is not all of his job like it is for the Secretary of State. When, "He will be good meeting those people" is the only criteria, then you must ask yourself who he will appoint as SoS because that is who will be doing those meetings.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Your "Canadian Kid" criticisms aside .. how is it that you don't recognize the failure of your argument?
The PRESIDENT gets to choose his SOS .. pay attention .. who delivers the message the PRESIDENT sends him to deliver .. THUS, whether the PRESIDENT actually sits face to face with other leaders, those leaders will still get the message the PRESIDENT wanted them to get.
No one has even sligtly intimated that meeting with dignitaries is his entire job.
The crux of the argument is that he is willing to communicate and talk with them either directly or through a subordinate.
What point are you trying to make?
Pay attention.
I have said it three times on this thread alone. My point is....
We are voting for him for President, who he selects as SoS (should he win) will be the largest portion of our diplomacy, not him. This should not be the sole reason for voting for him, if it is it would be best to have him as SoS, not President.
And "nobody has slightly inimated" is total rubbish. They listed it as the sole reason they thought he was a good choice. If such is the case, President isn't where he should be.
The problem with your assetion Damo is that you assumed that you erroneously assumed that was the only criteria that qualifies him to be a good leader. Yes. Obama will have other responsibilities that will make him 1000 times better at being president than Hillary and McCain. Being able to facilitate good diplomacy is one of them. Highlighting his diplomacy ability in no way shape or form implies that that is all that he can do.
No, that was the only criteria listed approving of him in the post. Hence the question mark.
Don't be deliberately disingenuous.
Look.
I wasn't criticizing Obama, so y'all can stop protecting your hero. I was criticizing the post that only had diplomacy as the reason to vote for him. I was questioning the reasoning behind voting for him solely for that reason and seeking a more in depth answer as to why he thought Obama is the godlike figure taking position in most people's imaginations.
I wasn't criticizing Obama, so y'all can stop protecting your hero. I was criticizing the post that only had diplomacy as the reason to vote for him. I was questioning the reasoning behind voting for him solely for that reason and seeking a more in depth answer as to why he thought Obama is the godlike figure taking position in most people's imaginations.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
That kind of stupid thought must have been what was behind your decsion to vote for the disaster of George Bush. .. make that the OBVIOUS disaster of george Bush.
The glaring and total failure of your argument which unfortunately you can't see is IF HE WAS THE SOS HE WOULD BE FOLLOWING THE ORDERS OF A PRESIDENT WHO MAY NOT HAVE HIS WILLINGNESS TO TALK TO OTHER WORLD LEADERS .. THUS YOUR SUGGESTION THAT HE SHOULD BE SOS, NOT PRESIDENT IS PLAINLY STUPID.
WE ARE VOTING FOR HIM AS PRESIDENT so he can dispatch an SOS or pick up the phone and discuss world events with other leaders.
Damn .. you should be careful using CK analogies.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Where is the post that says diplomacy is the only reason to vote for him?
One more time for the slow.
I was not criticizing Obama. I was criticizing the post that listed it as the sole criteria for voting for him. If good diplomacy is his only merit then President is not what he should be.
What I was seeking was more inforamtion about why that poster wanted to vote for Obama.
Stop trying to protect the man I was not criticizing.
Well, I'll repeat it one more time....
I am not criticizing Obama, I was attempting to get more information from the poster than he provided by asking a question of him.
Thank you for participating, but you have provided no more information than I later provided when I said, "The President will select the SoS... and so forth"...
It was what he listed. I therefore asked the question. Not to criticize Obama, but to get more information.
Now that there is five posts explaining in depth what I meant in a one sentence question about the action of another that was not criticizing anybody at all, can we get back to the topic rather than your defence of somebody who was not attacked at all?
Let Chapdog answer the question.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
I don't have any problem with you criticizing Obama .. the problem is your illogic.
He shouldn't be SOS .. he should be the president .. and your illogic doesn't say anything worth saying.
*sigh*
Again, that was what my question was about, to get a deeper understanding than "Good Diplomat" as to why a totally different poster than you wanted to vote for him.
Repeating this inanity just cements that you assume rather than read a position before you post about me. You have some particular vendetta against me. Probably because I point out how disingenuous it is to take a question about something, assume a position, then start on a rant of how I am criticizing your new Idol when I mentioned nothing negative about his person.
actually you were being presumptious when you phrased you're 'question'/'assumption'
"Basically you are saying you are voting for Secretary of State then? "
If you were geniunely curious as to whether or not he had more qualities you would have said something to the effect of, "Is that his only quality?" not, "Basically you your are saying......" That's a huge leap that was unwarranted and way off the mark.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
I have no vendetta against you my brother .. but you should be careful using your CK analogies. Your first post to me on this issue was an attack. Surely you knew that I was going to bite back.
Obama isn't my idol .. was Bush yours?
I see him as the best person to vote for as president .. as you once saw Bush. Did that make him your idol?
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Correct
I phrased it to get an answer from the poster I asked the question to, regardless of whether you think I phrased it presumptiously I didn't criticize Obama in the question, the urge to jump to his defense notwithstanding.
My first post to you was an attack because your first post attacked me for criticizing somebody I hadn't criticized.
Now jumping to the defense of somebody who wasn't even criticized... Yeah, that's a sign that he is your Idol.
Note this post where I directly asked the questions that I am speaking of. After somebody sardonically asked me to elaborate on my position.
Note also, I did not criticize Obama in this post either. In fact I am "assuming" victory and asking whom he would select as SoS who would have a strong position in getting his plan for diplomacy done.