Obama is Not Qualified and Has No Accomplishments as a Senator

[footballfanatic]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfUmrBeO_Xohttp://youtube.com/watch?v=5V9HkbN9xvc

Barack Hussein Obama has no accomplishments as a senator....but he "inspires." What a joke! My pet dog inspires but I don't want him to be President.

This is actually a funny video and shows the shallowness of the Obama bid for the presidency. He is an empty novelty of pie-in-the-sky promises and has no qualifications to be President except for his rock star status among liberals.

If he were just a white senator in his very first term we would have never heard of him.

 

[invisible trousers]

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Barack_Obama

Try again next time!

 

[footballfanatic]

What are you talking about? That is just his biography on Wikipedia and is actually simply more proof that he has no accomplishments in HIS ONLY YEAR in the senate or qualifications to be President. It lists many proposals and ideas, but no accomplishments. That's THE POINT!

 

[jayem]

When has long government experience ever been a qualification for President? Did anyone vote for JFK because of what he accomplished in one term in the Senate? Obama's charisma IS his qualification. Really, the main job of the President these days is to be a leader who can rally the people behind him/her. He/She hires advisors to deal with specifics of policies and the nuts-and-bolts of government. The common characteristic of many of our most admired Presidents--like Theodore Roosevelt, FDR, and Ronald Reagan--is that ability to communicate and inspire people. It maybe cynical, but--more than anything else--that's what a President needs. And Obama has it in spades. (OK, that was horrible....sooo sorry...I'll go to my room now.)

 

[Jacey]

Barack Hussein Obama

No need to read any further.

By the way, our current president is one of our least qualified.........so please keep calling Obama inexperienced, it's great for a laugh and to let someone show ignorance

 

[NPH]

Barack Hussein Obama has no accomplishments as a senator....but he "inspires."

Eisenhower had no accomplishments as a senator previous to his Presidency. Or as a representative, state governor, mayor, state congressman, city councilman, dog catcher ... but he was an "inspirational" war hero (who never saw the front line, only came under fire once by plane while inspecting troops).

If he were just a white senator in his very first term we would have never heard of him.

If Eisenhower had been just a black soldier we would have never heard of him.

 

[kiwimac]

I suspect the use of Obama's middle name is to tie in to the whole "he's a Muslim in disguise" thing.

 

[Verv]

Also, go look at Obama's voting record on Vote Smart. You will note that for the majority of things he did not even vote. Probably so as to not leave much of a record of where he actually stands.

The only things he voted on were generally non-military issues and of those most were for liberal causes.

Who knows what a Senator is up to if he shows up, barely ever votes and then runs for President.

 

[Texas Lynn]

No Presidential candidate this year could be as poorly qualified as Ronald Wilson Reagan was.

A Presidency is not an effort of an individual; he's like the Captain of a ship who's only as good as his crew.

Better somebody like Obama who utters platitudes than a naif like Reagan who believes in a Disney version of the world.

 

[MachZer0]

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Barack_Obama

Try again next time!

From your link

On December 27, 2005 Obama and Senator Sam Brownback (R-Kansas) penned an op-ed...

If that doesn't convince folks to vote for Obama, what will it take?

 

[Texas Lynn]

so please keep calling Obama inexperienced...

It's not helping New York's favorite adopted daughter especially since that's what people want.

 

[MachZer0]

Eisenhower had no accomplishments as a senator previous to his Presidency. Or as a representative, state governor, mayor, state congressman, city councilman, dog catcher ... but he was an "inspirational" war hero (who never saw the front line, only came under fire once by plane while inspecting troops).

If Eisenhower had been just a black soldier we would have never heard of him.

No but he had some serious leadership experience and an impressive list of accomplishments. Neither of which Obama can claim

 

[Conspiracy Theory]

No Presidential candidate this year could be as poorly qualified as Ronald Wilson Reagan was.

So, then you think Barack Obama must be really poorly qualified, because Reagan served in the military and as the governor of California.

 

[ImmortalTechnique]

amazing the lies that people will tell, even when they SHOULD realize that the lies don't work. Hillary not only ran into the wall of the realization that people aren't looking for conventional Washington experience- its how Bush has failed us so badly, but also ran into the high brick wall of Obama's substantial and impressive accomplishments.
He's been a more effective Senator than she has already- and its hard to imagine what sitting in the Senate for several decades actually does to make someone a better President. Keep trying the lies, smears, and tactics that failed for Hillary Clinton. It seems to be the best you've got, but it hardly seems a winning strategy.

 

[NPH]

No but he had some serious leadership experience and an impressive list of accomplishments. Neither of which Obama can claim

Did the OP make any claim about Obama's leadership experience? Nope, sure didn't.

It did, however, make a claim regarding his accomplishments in the senate. We can make an even more damaging claim against Eisenhower's accomplishments in the senate (since he never served) or even about his accomplishments as an elected official (which he never was until President).

Eisenhower was a great military strategist and had many accomplishments in that regard. But what in that experience made him qualified to make determinations in matters of economics, human rights, crime and punishment, public education, agriculture, public transportiation, energy policies etc ad nauseum.

And yet, Eisenhower was still a decent President. Better by far than what we've had for the last eight years.

The point is, a lack of any particular type of experience or accomplishments does not make anyone unfit for the Presidency. Every individual who seeks the position brings their own unique experiences and accomplishments to the job. Beyond that though, a Senatorship and the Presidency are quite different jobs with very different responsibilities. Success or failure in one does not mean someone is not capable of performing the other.

Looking at it from a military point of view an individual might make a great sergeant, a great officer, both or neither. But if someone fails as either it doesn't mean they can't excel at the other. Different jobs

 

[MachZer0]

Did the OP make any claim about Obama's leadership experience? Nope, sure didn't.

Let's see. The OP says

Obama is Not Qualified...

That encompasses more than just his accomplishments and certainly leadership experience falls into that category of him not being qualified

 

[NPH]

Let's see. The OP says
That encompasses more than just his accomplishments and certainly leadership experience falls into that category of him not being qualified

Can you please address the points that were made and not change the topic? The OP was about his accomplishments as a senator specifically, not any other qualifications.

Your response is actually confirming the point I am making against the OP which is that the qualifications for the presidency encompasses more than just "accomplishments as a senator".

So show us that Obama has absolutely no qualifications whatsoever for the presidency. None, not a single one.

I'll give you one qualification right now, that can't be disputed:

People are voting for him to be President.

Take a look at the constitution. Beyond certain requirements of age and nationality, that's the only requirement that makes any matter of difference.

 

[MachZer0]

Can you please address the points that were made and not change the topic? The OP was about his accomplishments as a senator specifically, not any other qualifications.

Your response is actually confirming the point I am making against the OP which is that the qualifications for the presidency encompasses more than just "accomplishments as a senator".

So you want me to prove a negative?

I'll give you one qualification right now, that can't be disputed:

People are voting for him to be President.

Take a look at the constitution. Beyond certain requirements of age and nationality, that's the only requirement that makes any matter of difference.

The discussion, as I see it, is about his practical qualifications, not his legal qualifications. Everyone knows he's qualified legally, that doesn't make him qualified practically. And as I said before, i suspect a lot of his votes will be to soothe the pain of white guilt, having nothing to do with his qualifications

 

[ImmortalTechnique]

the truly sad thing about this all is that if people TRULY believe that this man, who has served as a legislator for over a decade, who has years of community service as an organizer, is a Constitutional scholar, onetime President of the Harvard Law Review, civil rights lawyer, who worked grassroots democracy doing voter registration drives, and who has inspired a candidacy that is helping bring record turnout, and is receiving a record number of donations mostly from small individual donors, who has an extremely impressive record as a state legislator bringing reform to an entrenched political machine, and a singularly impressive legislative record as a one term junior Senator-

if THAT man isn't qualified to be President, despite meeting all the Constitutional requirements, then there truly is no government for the people of the people and by the people. Those who think that this man is not qualified to be President do not believe in this country. Power is to be held, apparently, by only those with the connections forged by spending decades in Washington. It is a sad thing for patriotic Americans to see, when some denigrate the possibilities in this nation so horrendously that they would claim that, in this nation where children are taught that anyone can be President, that someone as accomplished and involved in the lives of the American people as Senator Barack Obama aren't "experienced" enough.

 

[joebudda]

So show us that Obama has absolutely no qualifications whatsoever for the presidency. None, not a single one.

Well he does have a nice smile... for a smoker.