Media revolt brewing?

[The Dad Fisherman]

Well, 1st of all he was a State legislator for 7 years....not a State Senator

2nd, he's been a senator since 2005....its 2008 that only works out to 3 years as a senator....and considering he spent most of 2008 as a presidential candidate i doubt if he hit those 3 years.

and he didn't even serve a year on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions; Homeland Security and Government Affairs committees. (joined them in 2007 and as stated before....been campaigning hard all 2008)

and its Hypocritical to spend the 1st part of the year saying that its not the experience of Obama, its that he represents "Change" and then as soon as somebody shows up w/ less experience start pointing that out as a fault.

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

How is it hypocritical? Palin has 2 years experience as a state (disassociated from the continental US) governor. No experience in a national aspect.

Obama was a State Senator for 7 years, US senator for 4 years, sat on the committee of Foreign Affairs; Health, Education, Labor and Pensions; Homeland Security and Government Affairs. He has made trips to the Middle East (before his presidential run) for the Foreign Affairs committee.

I certainly don't see how saying Palin has zero foreign affairs or national issues experience makes me look hypocritical.

If she were a war veteran, then it would be hypocritical of me?

[JohnnyD]

1st of all, he succeeded Alice Palmer as State Senator of the Illinois 13th district. State Senate is part of the legislative branch. Just like how Senator McCain is a federal legislator.

2nd of all:
2005
2006
2007
2008
4 years. 2008 isn't finished. So 3.5. If you want to argue semantics.

3rd, I think there is a massive difference between not having nearly as much experience as the dinosaur McCain, and having absolutely no experience at all. While not much when you consider McCain has 25 years (since we aren't including 2008), it's still significantly more than someone who has none at all.

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Well, 1st of all he was a State legislator for 7 years....not a State Senator

2nd, he's been a senator since 2005....its 2008 that only works out to 3 years as a senator....and considering he spent most of 2008 as a presidential candidate i doubt if he hit those 3 years.

and he didn't even serve a year on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions; Homeland Security and Government Affairs committees. (joined them in 2007 and as stated before....been campaigning hard all 2008)

and its Hypocritical to spend the 1st part of the year saying that its not the experience of Obama, its that he represents "Change" and then as soon as somebody shows up w/ less experience start pointing that out as a fault.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

2nd of all:
2005
2006
2007
2008
4 years. 2008 isn't finished. So 3.5. If you want to argue semantics.

2005
2006
2007 february declared his candidacy for president....pretty sure he didn't spend much time doing his "Senatorial Duties" much after that.

Thats pretty much 2 years (ok 2 Years and 1 month if you want to argue Symantics)

and my issue isn't with his experience.....my issue is How can an Obama supporter us the "Inexperienced Card" on Palin after they spent months claiming that it shouldn't be an issue in Obama's case.


There's plenty of other things that can come into play about Palin and her politics without trying to throw that around.

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

2005
2006
2007 february declared his candidacy for president....pretty sure he didn't spend much time doing his "Senatorial Duties" much after that.

Thats pretty much 2 years (ok 2 Years and 1 month if you want to argue Symantics)

and my issue is with his experience.....my issue is How can an Obama supporter us the "Inexperienced Card" on Palin after they spent months claiming that it shouldn't be an issue in Obama's case.


There's plenty of other things that can come into play about Palin and her politics without trying to throw that around.

Obama has been in the National spotlight for the past four years, and has won a tough Dem primary including many debates with some of the best the party has to offer.

Now that alone is a sign of maturity and that people have trust in his leadership based on a good sample of his ability and judgement.

This isn't to say he's perfect, but it's a long way from where Sarah Palin is at this moment. Yes, she has some immediate voter approval...because she's pretty, has attitude and appeals to the litmus tests. She'll have to show a lot of substance to make it stick with the mainstream though.

-spence

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

and my issue isn't with his experience.....my issue is How can an Obama supporter us the "Inexperienced Card" on Palin after they spent months claiming that it shouldn't be an issue in Obama's case.

There's plenty of other things that can come into play about Palin and her politics without trying to throw that around.

I think I have addressed this in at least 2 posts. To fully sum up my position on the "Inexperienced Card," it comes down to 'not nearly as much experience' (Obama to McCain) and 'has absolutely no experience' (Palin). When I say no experience, I mean in the issues that are an immediate concern to Americans at this time - economy, high unemployment rate, decreased education spending, foreign policy.

It's also no coincidence that since Palin was selected, McCain nor his campaign have mentioned Obama's 'inexperience'.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

It's also no coincidence that since Palin was selected, McCain nor his campaign have mentioned Obama's 'inexperience'.

Well, yeah....That's because they realize that the inexperience thing has become moot (for both sides).....which is what I've been trying to say.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Well, yeah....That's because they realize that the inexperience thing has become moot (for both sides).....which is what I've been trying to say.

I certainly see where you're coming from and think it's a valid point. I think it is just a matter of perception. Thus why my opinion on it is a bit different.