No surprises here, just another reminder of Obama’s insincerity…
Barack in November 2004:
“I am a believer in knowing what you are doing when you apply for a job…If I were to seriously consider running on a national ticket, I would essentially have to start now, before having served a day in the Senate. Now, there’s some people who might be comfortable doing that, but I’m not one of those people.”
Of course you aren’t one of those people, Barack, we would never confuse you with them.
The sum of Obama’s guiding principles: Whatever it takes to advance his personal standing.
H/T Jenn
August 5th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
this needs to be worked into every mccain ad from now to november… sure things change, but if 1 day of experience isn’t good enough, is 143 really that much better?
What a complete idiot and a hopeful blessing from the libs this election cycle.
August 5th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Let’s see:
November 2004 to August 2008- 3 years, 9 months
Most of that time spent, by the way, organizing staff, raising money, and gazing at himself in the mirror.
Very little of it actually focused on LEGISLATIVE WORK…
That’s right, Barack, experienced candidates do their job and do it well before thinking of running for President.
August 5th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
There’s no doubt, this is the flip flop election. And every candidate is guilty of this sin.
August 5th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Forget he is a liberal, what about the safet of the country? One mistake can damage a nation.
August 5th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
#2, can you tell me how many sessions did Obama attended, because he has been campaigning for almos 2 years now.
August 5th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
From the time Obama was sworn in as a U.S. Senator, to the time he announced he was forming a Presidential exploratory committee, he logged 143 days of experience in the Senate.
August 5th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Aaawww he was sweet back then. And sincere. What happened in four short years?
August 5th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
#7:
He became a Senator.
August 5th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Being a U.S. Senator is a part time job?
Anyway, it is totally fair to criticize Obama for lack of “experience”. And it is totally fair to bring up this statement from 2004.
But you have to reconcile that criticism with any support you had for Bush back in 2000, as Bush didn’t exactly have a stellar resume and history of accomplishment.
Nixon and LBJ were VERY experienced too, but good presidents they were not.
It is hard to do, and you really don’t know for sure what you are getting when you vote for someone for president. I voted for Zell Miller back in 2000. Needless to say, I didn’t exactly get what I expected.
And for those looking for information rather than talking points, here is some info about Obama’s legislative work:
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2006/10/barack_obama.html
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/02/obama-actually.html
August 5th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
[...] HT: race42008. [...]
August 5th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
This clip, aside from putting his insincerity on stark display, reminds me what a lousy speaker he can be when speaking extemporaneously. That response limped out of his lips haltingly and sloooooowly. Almost Bush-like. He gave the impression of being strangely slow on his feet. He’s great with a teleprompter, but I’ve always thought he was unusually clumsy off the cuff when he’s not prepped to the gills in a debate situation.
August 5th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
GREAT TV AD FOR JOHN MCCAIN!
August 5th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
Of course, here would be the response:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0YnnsguziE
One candidate speculating he’ll be too old, another too inexperienced.
August 5th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
“Anyway, it is totally fair to criticize Obama for lack of “experience”. And it is totally fair to bring up this statement from 2004.
But you have to reconcile that criticism with any support you had for Bush back in 2000, as Bush didn’t exactly have a stellar resume and history of accomplishment.
Nixon and LBJ were VERY experienced too, but good presidents they were not.”
You do have very experienced presidents that turn out to be bad presidents– like Nixon and LBJ. But you also have very inexperienced ones that turn out to be very bad presidents– Carter (even worse in my opinion than Nixon and LBJ) and Bush II (in the eyes of many) come to mind. You also have experienced presidents that turn out very well– Reagan, Ike, FDR, even JFK (who had over 10 years of Congressional experience).
Though at least Carter and Bush II had executive experince as governors. Obama doesn’t even have anything close to that. Bush was governor for 4 1/2 years before lanching his pres. campaign. Obama began running for President two years (and only 143 days of work) after becoming a Senator. Bush II also got some accomplishments as Gov of TX (school vouchers, criminal justice reform). 2000 is also a lot different from 2008– more problems now than there were then that require experienced leadership to right the course.
But there’s more to Obama’s weakness than his inexperience… it’s his bad judgment, hard-core leftist tendencies and proposals, his flip-flops, arrogance, and shady connections and dealings.
August 5th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Bush was a successful Governor who was reelect with more than 60%. There’s a lot of differences between Bush and Obama. On the other hand, is up to history to judge if Bush is a bad President.
August 5th, 2008 at 9:17 pm
Nixon being a bad president is a matter of opinion.
Had it not been for Watergate, Nixon’s accomplishments would have rated him as one of our greatest presidents.
August 5th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
> “Had it not been for Watergate, Nixon’s accomplishments would have rated him as one of our greatest presidents.”
Other than that, how did you enjoy the play, Mrs. Lincoln?
August 6th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
Obama is such a fucking phony. God help us if this country is so ignorant to elect this piece of shit!