Biden hits Obama with experience card: "Look at (Bush) -– he had no experience."

[DeepModem Mom]

CNN: October 20, 2007
Biden hits Obama with experience card

DES MOINES, Iowa (CNN) – Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden said Friday that whoever moves in to the White House in 2009 will be left with so many problems that he or she will be left "with no margin for error."

The senator from Delaware singled out one Democratic opponent –- Illinois senator Barack Obama -– in particular. "One of the candidates says experience doesn't matter (and to) look at Cheney and Rumsfeld and the rest," Biden said. "Well I say look at the president -– he had no experience."

Obama has often said in stump speeches that Vice President Dick Cheney and former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had two of the biggest resumes in Washington and it "hasn't worked out so well."

Biden added that the next chief executive will have to end the war in Iraq immediately, keep Iran from erupting into a war, and re-establish the good will and reputation of the United States. "It's not going to be able to be something that they're going to have time to contemplate. They better pretty well know exactly what they want to do before they take the office."...

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/10/20/biden-hits-obama-with-experience-card/

[youthere]

1. One of the reasons I'm looking closely at Biden is his experience...

with foreign policy. He's no slouch on domestic issues either.

[Nedsdag]

2. It's about time that Biden is bringing up....

the experience factor although he should be using it against Hillary as well.

He trumps both of them in regard to experience.

[BeyondGeography]

10. But that could cost him that Cabinet position he's after

while slamming Obama only improves his chances with Her Majesty.

[dansolo]

20. Wasn't Biden a backer of the Iraq war?

What pisses me off about Biden (and Edwards) is how they act like we don't remember that they voted against the Levin amendment prior to the IWR. How are we supposed to trust their judgment now? In my mind, Biden's "experience" is a negative.

[Think82]

44. I wouldn't call him a "backer"

He reluctantly voted yes after Bush looked him in the eye and told him he would get the inspectors in. Also, after the authorization, he held hearings and warned we would be committing to a decade if we toppled Saddam, unlike in 91. He explains it quite well in his meet the press interview.

More importantly, he has the only plan that can work right now. He has been a leader on trying to get us out. If you look into it more deeply besides the "yes or no" authorization vote five years ago, I think you will come to a different conclusion.

[ginchinchili]

33. He's the smartest choice available to Democrates and Republicans alike

Because he's an intelligent, well-informed, experienced American at a time when we could be in very serious trouble. The dynamics in Iraq and Iran could easily spill over into a regional conflict, if not a world war. Though the threat has been politically abused, terrorism really does exist and must be seriously dealt with while still protecting our rights and liberties. We have to heal international wounds and restore our credibility in the world. Our economy is on very shaky ground and a drastic downturn would leave millions of Americans in financially dire straights at a time when our nation's coffers are trillions of dollars in debt, i.e., not in a position to help. Education has serious problems. Healthcare has serious problem. Our aging infrastructure has serious problems. We need someone who won't need on the job training, and who is capable and pragmatic so that we can quit fucking around and turn this ship around. Joe Biden is the most qualified to do this. I like the other candidates, but Biden is the best candidate for this job at this point in time. He's the one I trust best to do what needs to be done.

[jefferson_dem]

3. "no margin for error"...

Lots of good so-called experience did us here, with Biden signing onto the war plans with a YEA ---

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00237

[Froward69]

8. If you were there

with the lies told you along with the emotions clouding judgment. you too would vote yea. Biden at least has publicly said that vote was a mistake. unlike Hillary.

[nevergiveup]

17. What do you mean

"if you were there"? 23 United States Senators were there, did not fall for the lies and had the courage to vote against the resolution. With all of Joe Biden's foreign relations experience he should have been the last senator to vote for this war.

[Froward69]

19. His Vote tells me Biden is not

a pansy and will resort to military force if necessary. most of those nay votes would vote no on the use of ANY military force any time. we can agree bushy boy/darth cheney misled everyone. and were looking for a reason to invade Iraq Before 9-11. granted that vote was enabling. however I believe bush would have gone in without passage anyway.

[Think82]

79. watch this!:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1op8vwF5UA

[ginchinchili]

96. That is a video that all open-minded people should see.

[trumad]

4. experience is overrated.....

[jefferson_dem]

7. Robert Byrd for President...Because Experience Matters

Nobody has more ---

[ginchinchili]

25. That's a disturbingly unwise statement.

Remember, Bush went into office with little experience, especially in foreign policy. He's made a disaster of things. If you were just sent to Iraq and your commanding officer ordered you on a mission that took you through some very dangerous territory and told you that you could take one of two soldiers with you, would you choose the soldier who hadn't been there long but had a good spiel on being a great soldier or would you choose a guy that had been there for a long time, obviously survived, and who knows the ropes? Personally, I'd take the soldier with experience. I'd have better odds of keeping my ass intact.

[mark414]

30. our disaster in chief is not a result of no experience, it's a result of rigid ideology

[ginchinchili]

40. It's a result of both.

Though the damage to our nation is incomparable to Bush's fate, this has been disastrous to him as well. What he attempted to do was the result of his ideology. His poor execution of those attempts, and his willingness to try what couldn't be achieved, reflect on his inexperience. He will go down in history as our worst president. We can't afford to take any more chances with a new president who lacks experience. We need someone who knows how to clean up this mess.

[rucky]

109. It's one of many factors.

But to hear the top three frontrunners argue about who's more "ready-to-lead," it makes you wonder what Biden, Dodd & Richardson are thinking.

[Vickers]

5. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Gates, Ashcroft, Chertoff...

...all very experienced men.

No thanks.

[Think82]

45. Biden has a great TRACK RECORD... not just experience.

And he has the only plan that will work. 75 Senators recently voted "yes" on his plan. Can Obama or Hillary or Edwards say that? There is no contest, imo, who the best candiodate is. BIDEN

[Windy]

6. Kennedy....

[BeyondGeography]

9. Not sure if that will resonate

After all, most people understand that Obama is not socially and mentally retarded, which is what probably held Bush back a little more than his relative lack of political experience.

[Honeycombe8]

11. Actually, * had been a governor of one of the largest and most populous states.

It's factually incorrect that * had NO experience.

The experience, and what one learns from it, depends on the person. We all know that * could have 20 years of "experience," and he'd still be a disaster. It's his character, integrity, work ethic, bravery/cowardice, and inquisitiveness that are lacking.

By contrast, someone could literally have no experience and still be a great President because of character, integrity, work ethic, bravery, and inquisitiveness.

I like Biden, but is dead wrong on this point.

[trumad]

12. No it's not....

the gov in texas is most ceremony.

[loudsue]

32. Well, so much for ceremony: He PRIVATIZED Texas' oil fields...

oil fiels whose income had, for a couple of hundred years, been used for the benefit of the citizens of Texas (and kept us from having to pay state taxes, remember? ) . Now, Texas has to pay a couple of hundred million a year to some CEO's that manage those oil wells....money that COULD and SHOULD go to the hospitals, universities, water, and infrastructure.

He also managed to make sure all of the environmental protections were trashed so that his oil buddies could pollute the state without recourse. Texas became the NUMBER ONE IN THE NATION on pollution under bush.

He didn't just wear the crown for ceremonies; he wielded the baton.

:kick:

[Honeycombe8]

67. No, it's not. Sign me....a Texan. n/t

[PatSeg]

13. Obviously a candidate could have little experience

and still be a good president, depending who his/her judgment and the kind of advisers he/she chooses, but it is still a big gamble with the current state of our country. At a different time, I might be willing to take that chance, but not now. There is too much at stake.

[madrchsod]

14. lincoln and obama had roughly the same amount of experience

how did that lincoln fellow work out?

[Tellurian]

22. Lincoln wasn't a rock star... but he was presidential material..

I doubt he would have been elected if Rock Star was his only claim to fame.

[madrchsod]

24. i`d did`t know he was a "rock star"

i thought he was my senator from my state...well if that`s the case i wonder who the other guy is besides durbin?

yup lincoln was a "rail splitter"

[Tellurian]

34. Obama is a "hair-splitter" ...I fail to see the similarity..

[demommom]

Well I wonder how he would make out today.

That is really a silly comparison.

[TwilightGardener]

15. Well, if Obama makes it as nominee, Biden won't be his Sec of State--so there!

[Think82]

46. If Obama knows whats good for him,

he would select Biden. Obama has basically been stealing Biden's original ideas and presenting them as his own. Also, How do you reconcile Obama's "no" vote to defund the troops, then turn around and say we can't guarantee tobe out by 2013? Or his Pakistan remarks from this summer that, as Biden pointed out, was ALREADY US policy that Biden wrote. But by announcing it, Obama inflamed Pakistan.

[ginchinchili]

98. Sounds like lack of experience to me.

[jillan]

48. Remember how mean Kerry was to Edwards during this time in 2003?

It's all talk right now. They are all fighting to win.

[PatSeg]

69. Biden wouldn't take Sec of State position

He has made that quite clear and I don't think he'll change his mind.

[Adelante]

16. There's a tendency to think legislative experience is everything

Obama has plenty of that and also was a community organizer and taught constitutional law. It adds up to sufficient political experience to me.

[Think82]

47. forget experience. Biden has a track record that is second to none.

[PatSeg]

70. With the current situation in the Mideast

a candidate needs extensive foreign policy experience though. No one in congress comes close to Senator Biden right now. It took decades to get to the place where he is now and I don't think it is something that someone can learn without years of hands on experience.

[Auntie Bush]

89. NO other candidate has as much foreign policy experience as Biden.

That's the whole ball of wax! I can't understand why he isn't doing better in the polls. Maybe if he talked more about health care, balancing the budget, education and help for the middle class and poor he's do better...and beat Edwards. But he doesn't give those riveting, emotional, rock star quality speeches that Obama does. I just hope he doesn't run out of money and drop out before people get to know him better.

[PatSeg]

90. He seems to talk about all the issues, but

he doesn't get the media coverage. I think Iowa will make a big difference though.

Obama is a very inspirational speaker, but right now I need a little more substance. It is too important that we get a competent, experienced person in the White House.

[Auntie Bush]

92. "he doesn't get the media coverage"

That's true and it reminds me of Clark's problem in 2004. I don't know why the Media can't be fair and give everyone equal coverage and let us make up our own minds.

[PatSeg]

93. They tend to cover our politicians the same way they

cover Brittney and Paris. Everything is entertainment.

[geek tragedy]

18. Obama got Iraq right, Biden got it wrong. Nice judgment, Joe.

Joe also accuses Democrats who refuse to give Bush his blank check of 'not supporting the troops.'

[Think82]

49. Biden has the plan to get us out now. he brought 75 senators around to it. No one else has a plan.

Voting "yes" on authorizing the use of force is not the same as being responsible for the last 5 years. Please move beyond the force resolution 5 years ago and look at the complexity of foreign relations. I think you'll find Biden is the best by far on foreign policy.

[geek tragedy]

61. Biden has a plan to leave US troops there. n/t

[Think82]

84. uh... no. Not combat troops. And he sys no permanent bases.

Obama also could not guarantee we'd be out by 2013, yet he voted to defund the war. Wtf?

[Colobo]

21. Bush was Texas governor, Joe.

[AtomicKitten]

23. Experience didn't get in the way of Biden voting yes on the IWR.

[Dawgs]

26. I have no use for anyone that uses experience to attack.

If experience was so important why did Biden, Dodd, Kerry, and others vote for the Iraq war?

If experience was so important why did the "inexperienced" Obama get it right about the Iraq war?

I'll take judgement over experience any day. It's too bad that many voters still don't understand this.

[ginchinchili]

27. It was an easy position to take with nothing on the line, which was Obama's case, and besides...

Obama himself admitted that he wasn't sure how he would have voted. However, all of the candidates deserve the criticism except Kuncinich, and Obama gets a pass on a technicality, though he's a pretty safe politician and I don't see him with the crowd that voted against the authorization.

Unfortunately, we don't really have the luxury of voting only among candidates who voted against giving Bush authorization unless you're voting for Kucinich, and he won't win, though he deserves our praise and respect. So that leaves candidates who voted for authorization and the one with the least experience who didn't vote one way or the other but claims he doesn't know how he would have voted. I think you'd have a better argument if you focused on Obama's honesty and courage in stating that he's unsure of how he would have voted.

It's fair to factor in the authorization vote when weighing the pros and cons of the candidates, but it shouldn't be a deal breaker. Keep in mind that a majority of the Republican candidates can make the same claim that you're making about Obama.

[maximusveritas]

36. Not true

Other than Ron Paul, none of the Republicans came close to calling this war a "stupid war" as Obama did prior to the vote taking place. None of them said they would vote against it as Obama did.
Obama only said he wasn't sure how he would have voted when he was trying to protect Kerry/Edwards and later Clinton for their war votes. Other than that, he's always said he would have voted against it.
For people like yourself to hold it against him just because he stood up for his fellow Democrats is frankly contemptible.

[ginchinchili]

41. Perhaps you should read my post more carefully before commenting on it

I didn't say the Republicans were against the war. I said a majority of the Republican candidates can make the same claim that you're making for Obama, that they didn't vote to give Bush authorization. Point being, you can't give the man credit for something he didn't have to face. And, yes, I don't believe one should go around taking one position when it's convenient then another when it is not, even if it is to "protect" other politicians. In this case, it makes Obama a hypocrite to claim that his statement on not being sure how he'd have voted to protect certain politicians, then turn around and criticize them for it later. You call it contemptible, I call it integrity.

[Dawgs]

56. Why do you keep saying it was safe for him to be against the war?

He was running for the Senate at the time. It's just plain stupid to claim that it was easy for him to be against the war, when it wasn't.

I do agree that Obama shouldn't have answered the question the way he did, but it doesn't change the fact that he would have voted against the war. It also doesn't make Bidens, Dodds, Clintons, and Edwards vote any less wrong. You're mushing up the facts to make other candidates look better, and that's just as wrong as anything you claim Obama is doing.

[ginchinchili]

63. No, I'm being very clear about my position.

I agree that the other candidates deserve criticism for voting in favor of giving authorization to Bush. They should have known better, but they didn't. I just don't think you can make the claim that Obama would have voted against the war when he wasn't faced with having to make that decision, he was not privy to all the intelligence that those in Congress saw, nor was he faced with the public pressure to counter punch after 9/11 what was being defined as "the enemy" by Bush and the Republicans while they publicly accused any senator or congressman of being unpatriotic for even questioning the wisdom or legitimacy of invading Iraq. And Bush had the vast majority of the public on his side. 6 months into the war over 70% of the public believed that Saddam was behind 9/11, thanks to Bush. Yes, they were wrong and you are right to point this out. What I'm arguing is that given Obama's ambitions and his carefully crafted navigation toward realizing those ambitions it's highly unlikely that a Sen. Obama would have taken the risky and scarcely occupied position of voting against giving Bush authority to invade Iraq, especially since he, himself, admitted that he's not sure how he would have voted. If he wasn't sure, how can you be?

[PatSeg]

73. It is easy to say you were "against the war" from the start

if you weren't in congress and had to vote at a time when fear gripped the country.

[FlaxieB]

28. Biden is wrong Obama has the experience and right to Judgment. Biden voted

for funding this ill war. His experience should have told him not to vote to fun the war and to bring the troops home. So much for experience. He also voted for this war. With that type of experience we do not need.

[ginchinchili]

29. He's also the only candidate with a viable plan for getting us out.

Obama stated that he isn't sure how he would have voted, and because he's an ambitious and strategically cautious politician, he probably would have voted in favor of the war authorization. Remember, we were all sold a bill of goods by a corrupt and dishonest administration, though I never thought an invasion of Iraq was a good idea and I wish our elected officials were at least as smart as me, preferably smarter.

You can argue that experience shouldn't be the only factor in making up one's mind on which candidate to support, but to pretend that it doesn't matter shows a lack of experience in your own judgment. For example, I question Obama's judgment in running in this election at a time when our country is at war when he has no experience in foreign policy. It's either a lack of sound judgment, which should give one pause in supporting him, or he's just doing it to make his name known so he'll be better positioned for the next election, in which case we shouldn't be supporting him for the nomination anyway. Either way, he's simply not ready to tackle the international and national crises we're facing today. He's young. Let him get more experience and then run, at which time you'll be espousing Sen. Obama great experience, and so will I.

[Think82]

51. I agree! Biden is the leader now. Check this vid out:

from last march. If there is any doubt to Biden's integrity on the issue, this should put it to bed:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1op8vwF5UA

[Ethelk2044]

66. Biden is not the leader now. If he was the support would be there fore him.

[Think82]

75. 75 Senators just voted "yes" on Biden's federalism plan two weeks ago (Barack did not vote).

I'd say that's tremendous leadership on Biden's part and political maneuvering by Obama.

[PatSeg]

76. Me too

I think Obama has a LOT of potential that hasn't been tapped yet, but he needs more time in the senate, serving on committees like the senior senators who've paid their dues. I'm afraid some political operatives took a look at him and thought he was a commodity they could sell. It is hard to get your message out there when you have all these PR people pushing and pulling you.

[jillan]

31. Hey everybody - calm down. Biden is just trying to break into the top tier.

He is trying to sell himself as a better candidate than Obama.

Just like Obama tells his audiences why he is better than Hillary.

Like Edwards told the audience on Bill Maher last nite why he is better than Hillary.

It's just politics. The end game.

Polls show that Biden is most peoples #2 choice. He is just trying to break out.

I really like Obama. And I have alot of respect for most of his supporters. Understand what Biden is trying to do - okay?

[Cameron27]

50. I agree with you

it's a political move and not nearly as harsh as some of the others.

[PatSeg]

78. Yes, bringing up experience is a viable concept

and it comes up in every presidential election. It certainly isn't a character assassination.

[killbotfactory]

35. It must be embarrassing to be duped by an imbecile president

into supporting a dumbass war. What with all that experience and Bush's lack of it. Of course, everyone knew it a shit vote, but they were political cowards and voted for it anyway to save their asses in the next election.

Important differences between Bush and Obama
1. Obama knows what he's doing.
2. Obama hasn't failed at nearly everything he's tried in life.
3. Obama is a constitutional scholar, Bush thinks the constitution is a legal abstraction to be ignored.

[IndianaGreen]

37. Biden has the entire "top tier" beat in terms of experience, in quantity and quality

Biden will get us out of Iraq by 2009, while Hillary, Obama, and even Edwards will have differing troop levels by the end of their first term.

[PatSeg]

80. And because Biden has dealt with the military, the generals,

most foreign leaders, and congressional leaders from both sides of the aisle. He knows how to handle powerful people and THEY know how far they can go with him. This is not a minor point.

[maximusveritas]

38. Biden needs to take a lesson in logic

You can't just point to one example and pretend that makes a rule.
You can however provide a counterexample to prove a rule incorrect, as Obama did.
The bottom line is that experience matters a small amount, but judgement and other factors matter so much more.

[Think82]

53. Biden is responding to Obama's blanket accusation

that "experience" lead us to war. and that "experience" is a bad thing. Biden's finally calling Obama out, that's all.

[ginchinchili]

55. Another point. If Obama is going around criticizing experience...

...what do you think an Obama administration would look like? We'd have a bunch of neophytes trying to run the country and untangle the very complicated mess we have in Iraq. No thanks. I'll go with experience.

[maximusveritas]

58. Obama is not "criticizng experience". That's not true at all

I'd challenge you to provide a direct quote that in any way backs up your claim.

He has some very experienced people on his team. The difference between them and Biden is that they have better judgement.

[jillan]

101. He criticizes Washington experience alot.***

"Conventional thinking in Washington lined up for war. The pundits judged the political winds to be blowing in the direction of the president. Despite -- or perhaps because of how much experience they had in Washington, too many politicians feared looking weak and failed to ask hard questions"
http://democratsagainsthillary.blogspot.com/2007/09/obama-on-hillarys-supposed-experience.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
September 5, 2007--One of the democrats running for president, says his lack of experience in Washington is a strength against other candidates. Barack Obama, spoke before about 250 people inside the Waukee Fire Department Tuesday.

Obama admits other candidates have more experience in office in Washington, but he told the crowd, experience hasn't always been the best thing. "I don't know if you remember but there are a couple of guys named Cheney and Rumsfeld who have two of the longest resumes in Washington. And they led us into the worst foreign policy disaster in a generation. So...time served doesn't guarantee good judgment," said Obama.
http://www.whotv.com/global/story.asp?s=7028677

--------------------------------------------------------

"I might not have the experience Washington likes, but I believe I have the experience America needs right now,"

http://weblogs.newsday.com/news/politics/blog/2007/09/obama_kickoff_end_washington_g.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------

***and it is working for him.

[maximusveritas]

107. But he's not saying Biden has too much Washington experience to be President

That would be the only circumstance under which Biden's attack would make sense.

Instead, what he's saying is that "time served doesn't guarantee good judgment". That's the absolute truth and Biden has no answer for it.

[maximusveritas]

57. That's just not true

Obama is the one who was defending himself against the argument that he's too inexperienced to lead. He never said experience was a bad thing, just that it meant very little without the judgment to go along with it. If Biden is calling him out for something he didn't say, he's just being dishonest.

[demommom]

112. Exactly ,Think82!

Is it Obamba supporters position, that their candidate can make statements like this and not expect it to be countered by those he is speaking about?

[Inuca]

60. Actually....

both experience AND judgment matter. The same logic argument that you applied to Biden's statement can be applied to Obama's statements about Cheney et al., the fact that he gives a couple of counter examples instead of just one does not really matter. The fact that Cheney did have experience that did not translate into good judgment does not imply that experience does not matter. And since experience is something, for lack of a better term, more quantifiable than judgment, I tend to agree with Biden.

[PatSeg]

81. Thanks, that is what I wanted to say

but couldn't find the words. Well said.

[slipslidingaway]

39. I agree with Biden when he says there is "no margin for error"

so I am supporting the candidate with the least amount of errors :)

[Bullet1987]

42. Saying Bush had no experience is an asinine thing to say from Biden...

Bush was Govenor, plus his father was President. He also grew up in a highly political family. If he can say Bush had no experience, then the same can be said about Hillary.

[ginchinchili]

43. Bush had no foreign policy experience.

And you're right. Hillary's experience is limited, but more than Bush had.

[Bullet1987]

52. His father was head of the CIA for crying out loud...no way can Clinton

claim more foreign political experience than Bush.

[ginchinchili]

54. My dad was an engineer, and I don't know squat about being an engineer.

Just because someone in your family has experience in an area doesn't give you the right to claim the same experience for yourself, especially when we're talking about the CIA and George W. Bush. CIA employees can't discuss their jobs with anyone, including family. Even if they could, you certainly can't assume that Dubya was paying attention. Yes, I think it's fair to say that Hillary has more knowledge about foreign affairs than Bush did when he entered the White House. What the hell's your point?

[Inuca]

59. For crying out loud: so what?? n/t

[PatSeg]

82. Before he became president, Bush was clueless about the

world outside of Texas. He never got involved in his father's administration except during elections. He disliked travel and lacked diversity. Hillary had more exposure to world events and foreign leaders, plus she is really smart.

[slipslidingaway]

62. Please go back and read which part I specifically agreed with...

I agree with Biden when he says there is "no margin for error" so I am supporting the candidate with the least amount of errors

[Think82]

74. I assume that's ...

Barack? He's also made the fewest decisions in the Senate, so there are bound to be fewer "errors"

[PatSeg]

83. The shorter one's national political career, the shorter one's

record. Anyone who has served in the senate for a long time will have an extensive record which can be used for or against that person. You can't cite fewer errors if there are fewer accomplishments.

[Think82]

72. and the least mount of decisions?

Obama - did not vote on Biden's Iraq plan.
- did not vote on the Kyl-lieberman amendment.

[PatSeg]

85. That was a real disappointment for me

Only two senators didn't show that day, McCain and Obama, and there was important legislation on the floor.

[dugggy]

64. The decider in chief had no foreign policy experience and

look what that has gotten us into. No thanks Barack!
Biden is my 1st choice, but if he is unlikely to win
the nomination based on up-to-date polls then I am
going with the Clintons.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

68. Hillary Clinton has little to no foreign policy experience

And you're not voting for "the Clintons", you're voting for her. Bill Clinton could drop dead of a heart attack the day after the Inauguration.

[dugggy]

94. Even if he did, the cadre of Clinton advisors will be there

with 8 years of first hand executive experience, which no other
democrat can boast about.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

108. So now you're voting for her advisors

Basically, you're admitting that you think she is unqualified on her own.

[PatSeg]

86. Of course Obama is smarter (who isn't) and more

worldly than Bush. Also think he is capable of better judgment, but right now experience does matter too.

[dugggy]

95. Are we talking the same Obama who would attack Pakistan

unilaterally, based on actually what Obama said in a speech
recently??? If this the same Obama then it shows complete lack
of geo-political knowledge. Might as well go with Kucinich.
Atleast you will get instant stop to Iraq war.

[PatSeg]

104. I said "more worldly than Bush"

That doesn't mean I think he is worldly enough to be president at this time. Possibly in the future though.

[dugggy]

106. Heck my barber is smarter than Bush.

That is such a low bar, it is meaningless.

[Cha]

65. That's fucking rotten apples and

Bright Sunshiny Oranges! Stupid.

[illinoisprogressive]

71. what exactly is the right experience needed to be president? A college course?

Nothing is actually the right experience for president. It is all based on intellect, good judgment, temperment and the ability to have good advisors to help you. nothing really prepares one for the presidency.

[Think82]

77. That's ridiculous

Of course there is no "course" to be President but don't say experience doesn't matter. Biden is the chairman of the foreign relations committe. His experience at the Dayton Accords and years of work at the federal level also enabled him to develop his Federalism plan for Iraq, which everyone is coming around to right now (got 75 votes three weeks ago... Barack did not vote on it). He has gotten through the Crime Bill and Violence against Women act as well, and knows how to get Republicans to come around to his legislation.

[PatSeg]

87. I'm afraid I have to disagree

Admittedly no one can be completely prepared for being president, but there are many experiences that can contribute to the success of a president.

[jillan]

88. It's just politics.

He's been going after Richardson. And has gone after Hillary.
Now he's setting his sights on a bigger fish.

Obama opened an office here in Tempe, Az. I am so impressed. Kerry didn't even come here in 2004.
This is the first time Az is being taken serious. Obama has won big points with me.

[dugggy]

97. And Obama demonstrated his lack of geo-political knowledge

by saying he would attack Pakistan unilaterally to find Osama.
That statement alone disqualifies him totally & unequivocally.
OTOH the Clintons have demonstrated experience in diplomacy,
keeping peace, and fostering prosperity for individuals and
corporations.

Although Biden is the most knowledgeable in foreign policy
matters. I would vote for him if he has any chance of winning
the nomination. If not then I am voting against novices like
Obama and Edwards and voting for the Clintons. The world is
far too dangerous to trust a novice.

[maximusveritas]

100. Ah I see. You think it's smart to invade a country unilaterally to find nonexistant weapons

but you don't think it's ok to even enter a country in order to find and capture the man responsible for 9-11.
That makes plenty of sense.
And don't tell me Clinton was just voting for diplomacy with her IWR vote. She was voting for and supporting the war.

[dugggy]

102. What? Where did you see me say it was ok to invade Iraq?

Please don't put words in my mouth. I make enough
blunders of my own without taking on false accusations.

If you are referring to Hillary's vote on IWR, can you
name me which credible intelligence agency did not
suspect Saddam having WMD's? If I recall it was almost
unanimously believed that Saddam either had WMD's or
was developing them. So the IWR votes have some justification
at the time it was voted on. Hillary has made it abundently
clear that if she had the information which we have now,
she sould have never voted for IWR.

[maximusveritas]

111. You're obviously saying it was ok for Hillary to vote to invade Iraq

That doesn't disqualify her even though Obama's comments do?
Sorry, but that doesn't make sense.
Maybe if Clinton had read the intelligence reports, she would have come to the same conclusion that Senator Graham did when he read them.
In any case, it wasn't just about whether Iraq had weapons, but whether they were a threat to our country that rose to the level of requiring a military invasion. By supporting that endeavor, Clinton showed her lack of judgement. Still, I'm not dumb enough to say it disqualified her.

[dugggy]

113. Correct, Hillary can NOT be disqualified based on IWR vote

but Obama is disqualified based on his statement to
initiate a unilateral attack on Pakistan. I don't have the
exact numbers in my head, but I recall a good majority of democratic
senators voted for IWR? I could be wrong on that count, since I don't
have the exact number.

[Think82]

116. but she can be criticized for her IRAN vote. it shows she's learned nothing

about trusting Bush

[dugggy]

118. With 1 big difference.....Iran war has NOT started....yet

and I hope it never starts. Bush should be impeached and
removed from office pronto if he starts Iran war.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

110. Please tell me what foreign policy experience Hillary Clinton has

Not "the Clintons", Hillary.

[dugggy]

114. Hillary has the benefit of THE SAME ADVISORS who gained

experience during 8 years of Bill. Obama & Edwards have no
such advantage. And her husband in person!

[mrreowwr_kittty]

119. Okay, so you're voting for Bill and his advisors.

Funny how whenever I think of Hillary Clinton I hear the chorus of "Evita!" in my head.

[dugggy]

120. With one major difference! Hillary can't sing worth a shyt!!

And I love that musical, EVITA!! The material girl was
a terrific Evita!

[kad7777]

91. JOE BIDEN is the best America has

In these troubled and dire time we live in, Joe Biden, to me, encompasses all that we desperately need for our nation.

1) Intelligence
2) Experience in ALL phases of government
3) Strength
4) Respect from world leaders
5) Diplomacy
6) Command of issues
7) Solutions to problems that face our nation
8) Honesty
9) Integrity
10) Respect and trust from his peers
11) Respect and trust from the people who follow him

Joe Biden certainly meets ALL of the criteria above.

I pray and hope every day that Mr. & Mrs. America, the people of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina know in their hearts, that if we lose Joe Biden, we'll have lost one of the best Presidents our nation will ever have.

Please watch a video I produced to show my support for Senator Biden. If you support him, please send the link below to family and friends, and ask them to do the same.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=OtGCaqOdIJ4

[ginchinchili]

99. For a good video clip, see the post above this one!

Thanks, cad.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

103. Biden And The Other Candidates Should Focus On Their Own Strengths And Weaknesses And Not Their

Opponent's Strengths And Weaknesses...

[jillan]

105. I'm afraid it's only just begun. We're in the playoff season now.

But it means nothing. Think about how Kerry trashed Edwards - then picked him for a running mate.

It's just politics.

[Think82]

115. Are you paid by the Hillary campaign, demsincebirth?

Because you sound just like one of these robotic talking head advisors that come on political commentary shows with scripted answers so that your candidate does not have to answer any tough questions.

[ginchinchili]

117. What parellel universal are you coming from?

Seriously, that was not a smart thing to post. I agree in tact, but to avoid comment on other candidates? I know from experience that you don't follow your own advice.