In article > ,
"Gregory Morrow" > wrote:

> Michael "Dog3" wrote:
>
> > enigma > news:Xns9B0AD98E5633Eenigmaempirenet@
> > 199.125.85.9: in rec.food.cooking
> >
> > > blake murphy > wrote in
> > > :
> > >
> > >> On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 08:40:39 -0400, Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> "Stan Horwitz" > wrote in message
> > >>>> No way. If Obama picked Hillary, it would have been a
> > >>>> huge sign of weakness on his part because he would have
> > >>>> caved into the Clintons.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> I wonder if Hillary would have run if McCain picked her.
> > >>> Both are desperate enough to win to do something like
> > >>> that.
> > >>
> > >> are you nuts? whatever else you want to say, hillary is a
> > >> democrat to the bone.
> > >
> > > um, no, she's not. she was originally a die hard Republican.
> > > she still sounds like a Republican if you listen.
> > > lee
> >
> > I think she sounds savvy and is very seasoned in Washington politics. Of
> > all the candidates she's my choice. Since she did not get the nomination
> > I've gone to the Obama camp. I sure as hell don't want 4 more years of
> > the same crap we've had in the past 8.
>
>
>
> I'd dearly love to vote for him, but I increasingly think he simply does not
> have the experience and thus the chops to be POTUS...

Did Clinton (Bill) have the experience when he started his first term?
What about Reagan, Carter, or the current president? The only two
presidents since JFK who had any semblance of prior experience are Nixon
and th first President Bush. Do you feel that Bush 41 and Nixon were
good presidents? Both of them have a lot to be desired.

Look at the four years of experience our current president had when he
was re-elected in 2004. What good did Bush's first four years of
experience in the White House get us in his second four years? Nothing,
except if you are fabulously wealthy.

There is no job on this planet like job of POTUS, so no one can begin a
first term without undergoing a huge learning curve. The idea that Obama
doesn't have enough experience to be president is silly because neither
does McCain. What's more, McCain's experience in the Senate has simply
been doing everything Bush asked him to do, except on the issue of stem
cell research. McCain's military experience consists of graduating third
from the bottom of his class, crashing multiple times, and spending five
years as a POW, none of which is applicable toward being our Commander
in Chief or CEO.

> I'm also not real impressed with some of the louche characters he's chosen
> to consort with (Rezko, the black preacher, etc.). Shows very poor
> judgement IMNSHO, he should have known better...

Yawn. Take a look at McCain's cast of characters sometime.

> The last times I voted for "new" and "change" I get Jimmy Carter, Illinois
> Senator Carole Mosely - Braun and Bill Clinton. All terrible disasters, all
> terribly disappointing...

On Bill Clinton, I disagree. The facts speak for themselves. Under
Clinton, we had huge prosperity, record low federal deficits, and record
low violent crime, all of which have been reversed under Bush and all of
Bush's economic policies have been firmly embraced by McCain. As far as
Carter's concerned, I agree totally that he was a lousy president.

> It's fun to get caught up in the "Obama wave", but it's a ruch similar to
> being at a rock concert or other "feel - good" event. When we have to go
> toe - to - toe with forces for evil such as the Russians or Islamists all
> that counts for nothing...
>
> I don't like McCain either, so I'm kinda stuck...heck, mebbe I'll write in
> Pauly Shore or somebody, lol.

Mickey Mouse.