<p>I felt the same way when I read “The Audacity of Hope.” He’s smart, cerebral, and as you say, willing to learn. How refreshing! Go, Obama!</p>
<p>I put “Audacity of Hope” on my birthday list, so I may be reading it soon. :)</p>
<p>Weird. I posted my second post after reading Hindoo’s post, but now my post is before hers!</p>
<p>If I’m looking to hire someone - which I am w/ my vote, I would look at his/her resume. I would look at experience, accomplishments, record. I would try to determine how prepared s/he would be to take over the responsibilities of the job. I might even consider the person’s attitudes and groups or persons with which the applicant has been associated in the past. I would try to get some sense of the person’s character. I would think about how well that person would work with the other people with whom s/he would be in contact. What kind of leadership roles has this person had? What kind of problem-solving or critical thinking skills has the person developed? How has s/he distinguished him/herself in previous/current positions? What challenges has s/he overcome in his/her life?</p>
<p>All things considered, I would be EXTREMELY pleased to offer the job to McCain. I would tell Obama to go out & get some more experience then come back and see me in about ten years or so.</p>
<p>No contest.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That happens sometimes, and it IS weird.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, I would look at that, too. However, I would also factor in vision, intelligence, temperament, ability to motivate, ability to work with people of many different views, confidence to build the best team possible regardless of people outshining him/her, and especially patience to listen to all sides of a debate but the wisdom to know when listening time is over and action is necessary. Because the office of President is symbolic as well as practical, I weigh “soft skills” such as those as much as I do, possibly more, than experience, past accomplishments or record.</p>
<p>Oh, and add to my above list: the ability to articulate a position.</p>
<p>momof2 - all those things you mention still favor McCain, particularly because he is much more of a “known”. McCain has SHOWN he has those skills.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[Retracing</a> John McCain’s Bipartisan Roots : NPR](<a href=“Retracing John McCain's Bipartisan Roots : NPR”>Retracing John McCain's Bipartisan Roots : NPR)</p>
<p>A vote for Obama would be for what you THINK he MIGHT do.<br>
A vote for McCain would be based on what you’ve SEEN him do.</p>
<p>Obama will have my vote. We need a breath of fresh air. Need to change the regime and McCain is not the one. He flip flops on a lot of issues it is well documented on all accounts. I agree with experience, but I also believe a new perspective can be very effective. We have lost so much respect from those around the world and McCain will be seen as a continuation of the same politics of Bush. I thought Hiliary was the BEST candidate, but I will take Obama over McCain. To me he is the better option, not the Best.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Got some examples to post?</p>
<p>McCain would certainly NOT be like Bush in any way, shape or form.</p>
<p>I don’t blame people for wanting to try out the new “flavor of the month” but just remember, there might be unexpected & unwanted side effects. In the long run, it’s best to stick w/ the “tried and true”.</p>
<p>TRIED & TRUE - now there’s a slogan for McCain!</p>
<p>Well, there are indications that McCain’s election team is in disarray:</p>
<p>[washingtonpost.com[/url</a>] </p>
<p>[url=<a href=“http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MCCAINS_MISSTEPS?SITE=ILROR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT]Rockford”>http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MCCAINS_MISSTEPS?SITE=ILROR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT]Rockford</a> Register Star - Rockford, IL - Rockford Register Star](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/21/AR2008062101570.html]washingtonpost.com[/url”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/21/AR2008062101570.html)</p>
<p>while Obama’s campaign (from unknown underdog to presumptive nominee) is starting to be thought of as one of the most successful in modern history. He doesn’t just talk about change, he embraces it, as evidenced by his use of technology.</p>
<p>[The</a> Associated Press: Obama’s political team out-organized Clinton](<a href=“http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iYXS7gLdbJi5wlOJIrk29wsNRSoAD90S3K980]The”>http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iYXS7gLdbJi5wlOJIrk29wsNRSoAD90S3K980)</p>
<p>And as far as articulation and temperament go, I prefer Obama’s communication skills and calm demeanor. McCain is hot-headed and impatient.</p>
<p>Choice: McCain.</p>
<p>Criteria:
- Who will increase federal spending the least? McCain.</p>
<p>2) Who will implement the least amount of new programs? McCain.</p>
<p>Conclusion:
I feel Obama will be LBJ if he gets elected. I believe McCain will be like WJC (fighting against a hostile democrat party, no less). LBJ’s legacy is that of more government. He created welface, public housing, medicare, & medicaid. His cumulative effect on our national budget is massive.</p>
<p>Sorry, your wrong, Obama is not the flavor of the month.
Examples?
[youtube link removed by moderators]</p>
<p>What is “tried amd true” about McCain?
Got some examples to post?</p>
<p>Mr. Payne - Are you related to Thomas Paine who said, “That government is best which governs least”? (A quote often attributed to Th. Jefferson as well). :)</p>
<p>I like your criteria - those are some of my considerations also.</p>
<p>bz2010, no relation within 10 generations. Don’t have records farther back than that.</p>
<p>Well after over 20 yrs in the Legislature he has quite a lot to cite as “tried and true”.</p>
<p>First of all, there are several examples demonstrating that he is a true statesman, such as:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>When he & 13 other bi-partisan senators (aka “gang of 14”) got together to work out a COMPROMISE regarding the appointment of Supreme Court justices.</p>
<ul>
<li>He has introduced bi-partisan bills, such as McCain-Feingold and McCain-Kennedy where he was one of only a couple of brave senators willing to TRY to come up with solutions to some of the problems facing our country.</li>
</ul></li>
<li><p>He stood up to Bush and called for the firing of Rumsfeld long before anyone else did. </p></li>
<li><p>I would say taking an oath at the age of 17 to defend the constitution of the United States gives him a pretty long history of having his priorities in order.</p></li>
<li><p>Showed incredible courage and leadership during 5 1/2 yrs as a POW, especially when he wouldn’t take early release & knew he’d be beaten for refusing.</p></li>
<li><p>Commanded the largest squadron in the Navy - pretty solid leadership experience there.</p></li>
<li><p>Served for several years as the Navy Liason on Capital Hill - during which time he gained valuable knowledge in the goings on in the Middle East.</p></li>
<li><p>From the outset, he regularly voiced his concerns about the strategy in Iraq, standing up to his own party leadership in the process. (And he was correct in his assessment).</p></li>
<li><p>Long history of fighting irrational spending, abuse of power and pork projects in Washington. This shows that he truly has what is best for our country as his top concern.</p></li>
<li><p>He has visited Iraq numerous times (8 or 9?), gathering knowledge & forming his own educated opinions about the situation - not relying on others to tell him about it.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Yes, McCain is “Tried and True” - he’s been faced with lots of challenges in his life, and each time he has come through them without surrendering his principles or ideals. He’s still the same man he’s always been - a straight shooter. You might not like everything he says, but he tells the truth. I respect that - and I think he’s the first “politician” who exhibits that quality since Reagan.</p>
<ul>
<li>Bet I could come up w/ even more reasons why McCain is 'tried and true", but it’s pretty late & I’m getting tired. I think I’ve proven the case tho, don’t you?</li>
</ul>
<p>haha! Mr. Payne - obviously the spelling isn’t the same, but I thought the quote reflected your philosphy (judging from your candidate criteria). :)</p>
<p>:) Yeah, I do consider myself a classical liberal.</p>
<p>Ha! Judging from the criteria you mentioned, I thought you were a conservative!</p>
<p>Taking an oath at 17… says nothing about good priorities, tons of people sign up for the military- no points there. Telling the truth… doesn’t mean better qualified. I think we need some fresh thinking, get away from the tired old ways. I think it will be very important to see what each party does at their respective conventions- no president works in a vacuum. I’m worried about the Republicans ability to put together a good team from their ranks- seeing Bush recycle so many of the old regime… Can the Democrats get their act together? At least in this election I’ll get to vote FOR someone instead of against the other guy. <em>&%$#</em>&% liberal (conservative only works if you are a have, not a have not, not if you care about others) independent here, vote with my conscience, not my pocketbook- the winner has to be a Democrat for the good of the majority of the population. A good president has to consider all of the people, not just those who agree with him and his religion, private/personal beliefs can’t be used to dictate policy.</p>