You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Republican Rivals Share One Bond: All Losers
- Thread starter ZZZzzzzzzz
- Start date
Acknowledging your existence.
Quote from hapaboy:
Yes, within one minute after I had posted!! Jesus Christ, ZZzzchild, you obviously sit there feverishly pressing the refresh button on your browser or waiting for the chime of an e-mail message stating someone has responded to the thread!!
Good grief, Troll, get out of the cave once in a while! Take a walk, get some fresh air, go on a date (the kind you don't pay for)....make that New Year's Resolution of actually speaking to a living breathing female a reality!!
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:
Pavlov had a dog, all you had to do was ring the bell, over, and over, and over again to see the same slobbering animal behaving in the same slobbering way...
lol... hmmm, now who's the slobbering animal in this case?
I guess that would be the member who responds in an identical way every time!! The response is predictable in its animal simplicity.
You're slipping, Troll. In the old days you wouldn't have left the door wide open like that.
By the way, Z, why were you banned twice from this site? I personally have never been banned.
Just to put thinks into proper perspective, DEMOCRATIC RIVALS SHARE ONE BOND TOO, THEY HAVE NO LEADERSHIP EXPERIENCE
A Democratic Field Without an Executive
By David Broder
WASHINGTON -- It was fascinating to watch the three top contenders for the Democratic nomination discuss their concept of the presidency during Tuesday night's MSNBC debate in Las Vegas. But it was also stunning to realize that the three current and former senators who have survived the shakeout process -- Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards -- have not a day of chief executive experience behind them.
By contrast, the Republican field is loaded with people who are accustomed to being in charge of large organizations. Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee were governors of their home states of Massachusetts and Arkansas, Rudy Giuliani served as the mayor of New York City, and John McCain, as he likes to remind audiences, commanded the largest squadron in the Navy air wing.
In the past, voters have preferred to entrust the White House to those with executive credentials. John Kennedy was the last sitting senator to be elevated into the presidency. Since then, the former governors of Georgia, California, Arkansas and Texas have dominated the list of successful candidates.
...
All of this places an unusually heavy burden on the three Senate Democrats to show they can do more than talk a good game of leadership -- and actually lead.
The burden of proof of readiness to be president is heaviest on those who have never borne executive responsibility. And that is something voters will have to weigh, whichever of the Democrats is the nominee.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/01/dems_lack_the_executive_experi.html
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:
REPUBLICAN RIVALS SHARE ONE BOND: ALL LOSERS
A Democratic Field Without an Executive
By David Broder
WASHINGTON -- It was fascinating to watch the three top contenders for the Democratic nomination discuss their concept of the presidency during Tuesday night's MSNBC debate in Las Vegas. But it was also stunning to realize that the three current and former senators who have survived the shakeout process -- Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards -- have not a day of chief executive experience behind them.
By contrast, the Republican field is loaded with people who are accustomed to being in charge of large organizations. Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee were governors of their home states of Massachusetts and Arkansas, Rudy Giuliani served as the mayor of New York City, and John McCain, as he likes to remind audiences, commanded the largest squadron in the Navy air wing.
In the past, voters have preferred to entrust the White House to those with executive credentials. John Kennedy was the last sitting senator to be elevated into the presidency. Since then, the former governors of Georgia, California, Arkansas and Texas have dominated the list of successful candidates.
...
All of this places an unusually heavy burden on the three Senate Democrats to show they can do more than talk a good game of leadership -- and actually lead.
The burden of proof of readiness to be president is heaviest on those who have never borne executive responsibility. And that is something voters will have to weigh, whichever of the Democrats is the nominee.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/01/dems_lack_the_executive_experi.html
Bush Jr. was a governor of a very large state, and we have all seen how much damage he has done...
However, your strawman response to the initial article in this thread is duly noted...
However, your strawman response to the initial article in this thread is duly noted...
Quote from dddooo:
Just to put thinks into proper perspective, DEMOCRATIC RIVALS SHARE ONE BOND TOO, THEY HAVE NO LEADERSHIP EXPERIENCE
A Democratic Field Without an Executive
By David Broder
WASHINGTON -- It was fascinating to watch the three top contenders for the Democratic nomination discuss their concept of the presidency during Tuesday night's MSNBC debate in Las Vegas. But it was also stunning to realize that the three current and former senators who have survived the shakeout process -- Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards -- have not a day of chief executive experience behind them.
By contrast, the Republican field is loaded with people who are accustomed to being in charge of large organizations. Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee were governors of their home states of Massachusetts and Arkansas, Rudy Giuliani served as the mayor of New York City, and John McCain, as he likes to remind audiences, commanded the largest squadron in the Navy air wing.
In the past, voters have preferred to entrust the White House to those with executive credentials. John Kennedy was the last sitting senator to be elevated into the presidency. Since then, the former governors of Georgia, California, Arkansas and Texas have dominated the list of successful candidates.
...
All of this places an unusually heavy burden on the three Senate Democrats to show they can do more than talk a good game of leadership -- and actually lead.
The burden of proof of readiness to be president is heaviest on those who have never borne executive responsibility. And that is something voters will have to weigh, whichever of the Democrats is the nominee.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/01/dems_lack_the_executive_experi.html
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:
Bush Jr. was a governor of a very large state, and we have all seen how much damage he has done...
However, your strawman response to the initial article in this thread is duly noted...
yeah... and your choice, "Obamillary" is going to save the day? they are both CFR backed and will do what they are told.