"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JimH" wrote in message
...
On Aug 29, 6:34 pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
"hk" wrote in message

. ..



wrote:
On Aug 29, 2:29 pm, wrote:
On Aug 29, 1:44 pm, hk wrote:

wrote:
More drool from andy..
You might have started out in your usual stupid way, saying "McCain
didn't say that
McCain is right though, Obama has NEVER run anything successfully. He
has NO executive experience at all. Palin is at least Governor and
has that experience.

Actually, Palin has more executive experience than Biden and Obama
combined. Obama bringing this up only shows his inexperience and lack
of knowledge.

She is totally completely uniquely unprepared to fill McCain's shoes in
an
instant if he is disabled or dies suddenly.

My feelings exactly. What the hell was he thinking?

Eisboch


Dem ticket - POTUS candidate has less than 200 days in the Senate with
no executive decision making experience and limited foreign policy
experience.

Rep ticket - POTUS candidate has over 25 years US Congress experience
with a running mate with 2 years executive experience as governor of
Alaska.

You think the Dem ticket is stronger?

Please explain.



To understand my opinion, you have to at least understand my personal
criteria for qualifications, right or wrong.

Repeating myself (my opinion) ..... the office of POTUS is primarily
responsible for national security, defense and issues of common interest
or affect on the union of 50 states. Simple as that.

Obama is weak in national security issue experience. He filled that void
with his choice of Biden. Otherwise, Obama has excellent qualities of
inspirational leadership, a trait very important in the melding of
divisive priorities and chaotic world events.

McCain is (arguably to some) strong in national security issues and has
years of experience in working the "system".
But, he is 72 years old. He should have picked a much more experienced,
seasoned VP, ready to take over in the event McCain becomes unable to
serve. Instead, he picked a very nice, interesting, newbie to politics
with absolutely no experience in dealing with high level, international
issues.

It's really a matter of common sense, to me, and has absolutely nothing to
do with being liberal or conservative.

Eisboch


I like the pick. May not have been the best, but was a very good pick. We
have had too many of the lots of government experience over the last 40
years. Look what it has got us. More of the same, and excess debt. At
least Palin is a fiscal conservative. May be a social conservative, but did
sign the bill for equal benefits for domestic partners in AK. So she has
common sense. The fact that the people of AK love her, says a lot. Large
state, small population that takes politics very seriously. Look at the
POTUS who have done fairly well over the last 60 years. Truman. Ran a
failed haberdashery. Ike. Was a General. but generals are very
politically savvy. Kennedy did not accomplish much as he let a short
career, but did get us going to space and probably would not have had Viet
Nam enlarged like LBJ did. Clinton was lucky, as he had a huge increase in
Revenue from the dod.bomb, but did not cause as much trouble as an
inexperienced POTUS would do under your reasoning. And he surrounded
himself with some crab advisors. Got us into the Balkans. Bad decision,
and killed a bunch of soldiers in Somalia from lack of experience and
support. Palin seems to be a fast learner and has common sense which is
very lacking in DC. Romy might have been a better pick for experience, but
did not enhance the ticket.