Jackson50 said:
PATRIOT7ME said:
Jackson50 said:
PATRIOT7ME said:
Jackson50 said:
Experience is an overrated attribute. If we are voting based solely on experience, then I am voting for Robert Byrd. |
another liberal lie. If you think being a president so damn easy. Why don't you run? Maybe you learn something through that bonehead of yours. ALso you can do some studing on Jimmy Carter. Find out why experience matters.
|
I am under the age of thirty five, so I am constitutionally prohibited from being elected president. Anyways, experience is not an important attribute. Some of our more capable presidents had "little experience." Grover Cleveland had only two years experience as a governor and he was a more than capable president. Lincoln's experience consisted of one term in the House before he was elected president, and he is considered-I should note, I do not consider him this-one of the greatest president in our nation's history. I think it is you, my misinformed friend, who needs to be educated
|
if you were smart you would know that a governor can be much more experienced than a Senator. Obama doesn't have any capable to handle today's issues. JImmy Carter is a pure fact why you shouldn't vote for an inexperienced person.
|
I find it ironic that Carter was a governor and that McCain was not. Anyways, even though I disagree with that sentiment, how do you explain Lincoln's success considering his lack of experience? He was neither a senator nor a governor, and many consider him to be an exceptional president. McCain's experience would not make him a better president. In fact, I am glad he has as much experience as he does. We now know that he would be an unmitigated disaster.
|
Mccain never wanted to be a governor that's why. Things were much different in Licnoln's time. Recent presidents matters more than for today's issues than. I find it funny you find you can say Mccain is a disaster but you refuse to say obama is with his tax plans.
